Archive for the ‘Hillary Clinton’ Category

Biden’s Putin obsession batters global growth – The Sunday Guardian Live – The Sunday Guardian

An early conclusion to the Ukraine war may seem unjust. Yet that sacrifice is needed to prevent global turmoil.

Poll numbers are helping President Joe Biden to slowly comprehend the reality. Which is that it is his transformational $2 trillion Societal Stimulus package getting passed that ought to be the White House priority. Instead, this year he has been acting as Sir Joe, riding forth to avenge the electoral defeat of Lady Hillary in 2016. According to the Clintonistas (including those now masquerading as Bidenistas), the defeat of Hillary Clinton at the hands of Don Trump was due to the machinations of Vladimir Putin. Much of the election-related received wisdom in the ranks of the Democratic Party is clearly the content of nursery tales or morality fables rather than fact. To seriously claim that the current occupant of the Kremlin has the capability to overturn a presidential election in the US implies that todays Russia (at least under Putin) is way more powerful than the USSR was in its heyday. The Clinton fable that Russia stole the 2016 election created the momentum required for the next nursery tale, which was the Trumpian view that Biden somehow stole the 2020 election although it was Trump who was the President. There were indeed US presidential elections that were unusual in the causes of the final outcome, as for example the victory of George W. Bush over Al Gore in 2000, which was decided not by the voters or the electors but by that faithful associate of the Republican Party, the US Supreme Court. Loser Al Gore accepted the verdict of the court with grace, while President Bush went on to rescue Al Qaeda and their ISI friends through the Kunduz airlift in Afghanistan. Not to mention rewarding Iran by ensuring that Iraq moved into Tehrans sphere of influence in two years later, whereas the former regime had been virulently against Iran since the Khomeinist takeover in 1979. Joe Biden would have been able to defeat Trump in 2016, but his innate generosity of spirit towards the Clintons made the then Vice-President step aside and allow Hillary to be the Democratic nominee.From the moment Hillary became her partys candidate, Donald Trump had the edge, and he retained it by promising change, which was in a way delivered. Tossing aside the Lincoln dictum, the Trump White House was of, for and run by billionaires, no questions asked. As President Biden reminded voters some days ago, billionaires in the US each pay less than 10% of their incomes as federal taxes. What was Biden doing about such a scandalous state of affairs during his tenure as a Senator, or has done since heading the executive branch of the US? Biden soon lost interest in taxing billionaires fairly or in getting passed his Social Stimulus plan, focussing instead on getting bipartisan support for his mission of punishing Putin for what he believed was responsibility for the defeat of Hillary Clinton at the hands of Trump, the (in the restrained and measured language typical of her) a puppet of Putin. President Biden was joined by Boris Johnson and other European leaders in what they advertised as a Righteous War against Putin-led Russia. Four months on, even cheerleaders of the war such as CNN and BBC are having difficulties in claiming that Saint Volodymyr and his no-longer-merry men are having the advantage over the Russian military. The US-UK-EU stream of economic sanctions against the Russian Federation have not prevented Ukraine from losing more territory to the Russians. Instead, they have created global supply and logistics difficulties that are pulling the world into a recession that will develop into a depression unless the war in Ukraine is swiftly brought to a close. Bidens shift of focus from domestic priorities to the Russia-Ukraine war are on track to ensure the wipe-out of the Democratic Party in the November midterms. Such a catastrophe would thereby render President Biden not a lame duck but a legless duck during the balance of his Presidential term.President Zelenskyy is undergoing the pain of watching his country slowly drown in a morass of blood and treasure as a consequence of his lack of understanding of the imperative of good relations with Moscow in creating stability in Ukraine. Being a maestro in comedy may not always be the best training for a grasp of the realities of realpolitik. Even as Ukraine sinks, Zelenskyy is calling out for and getting more weapons, so that a conflict. The effect of this would be to ensure a catastrophic global impact. What is needed is not to continue the war but Ukraine cutting its losses and ending hostilities with its much stronger foe. Across both sides of the Atlantic, disregarding their own and their countries interests, the message is the same: the war must go on, no matter what the price, including to countries that have zero role in the escalating fiasco. Still fixated on vanquishing Putin rather than fending off the Republican challenge to the Democrats in the midterms so as to get passed his $2 trillion stimulus package, President Biden is leading the NATO charge against Russia. The 2020 election was won by Biden on his promise to focus on a domestic agenda designed to rectify several of the injustices that have long plagued US society. Getting passed by the US Congress his $2 trillion social justice stimulus is essential for the US President to achieve this. That priority appears to have been forgotten in the White House obsession with Putin. The USSR-US Cold War 1.0 may have ended in 1991 but its ghosts still haunt much of the thinking in Washington. Wall Streeter and economist Larry Summers ignores the havoc the Ukraine war is causing and repeats that the need is to double down on prolonging the conflict. This despite the fact that the war is causing the very inflation that Summers incessantly warns about. Meanwhile, NSA Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Antony Blinken are busying themselves in trying to win over Beijing. Defense Secretary Llyod Austin in contrast talks about standing up to China in a way his own colleagues fail to do. Commander-in-Chief Biden is seeking a personal meeting with Xi Jinping in the belief that the latter will help the White House rein in Putin from prosecuting a war that is boosting the strategic interests of the PRC. What is obvious to those not in thrall to nursery tales and fables is that Biden needs to ensure that the war in Ukraine ends soonest, which is what Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been seeking for over three months and counting. What is lost by Ukraine is lost, and the longer the war carries on, the more will be lost to Russia, the more will be the cost to the globe. An early conclusion to the war, by removal of the life support provided by NATO to Ukraine may seem unjust. Yet that sacrifice is needed to prevent the world from going in for economic and societal turmoil that would be inevitable should the conflict continue. An end to the war and the attendant US-UK-EU sanctions would immediately send oil and gas prices down, damp down inflation and boost economic prospects as well as food security. In a choice between evils, such an option is the lesser evil. If done in time, its effects may even ensure that the US House and Senate after the 2022 midterms is such as to pass the legislation on the $ 2 trillion stimulus that is essential for stability in the US. Getting that passed after his party wins in the midterms ought to be President Bidens obsession rather than his quixotic quest for securing the defeat of Russia in Ukraine, and the removal from the Kremlin of Vladimir Putin.

Originally posted here:
Biden's Putin obsession batters global growth - The Sunday Guardian Live - The Sunday Guardian

Why a Rhodes Scholars Ambition Led Her to a Job at Starbucks – The New York Times

Most weekend mornings, Jaz Brisack gets up around 5, wills her semiconscious body into a Toyota Prius and winds her way through Buffalo, to the Starbucks on Elmwood Avenue. After a supervisor unlocks the door, she clocks in, checks herself for Covid symptoms and helps get the store ready for customers.

Im almost always on bar if I open, said Ms. Brisack, who has a thrift-store aesthetic and long reddish-brown hair that she parts down the middle. I like steaming milk, pouring lattes.

The Starbucks door is not the only one that has been opened for her. As a University of Mississippi senior in 2018, Ms. Brisack was one of 32 Americans who won Rhodes scholarships, which fund study in Oxford, England.

Many students seek the scholarship because it can pave the way to a career in the top ranks of law, academia, government or business. They are motivated by a mix of ambition and idealism.

Ms. Brisack became a barista for similar reasons: She believed it was simply the most urgent claim on her time and her many talents.

When she joined Starbucks in late 2020, not a single one of the companys 9,000 U.S. locations had a union. Ms. Brisack hoped to change that by helping to unionize its stores in Buffalo.

Improbably, she and her co-workers have far exceeded their goal. Since December, when her store became the only corporate-owned Starbucks in the United States with a certified union, more than 150 other stores have voted to unionize, and more than 275 have filed paperwork to hold elections. Their actions come amid an increase in public support for unions, which last year reached its highest point since the mid-1960s, and a growing consensus among center-left experts that rising union membership could move millions of workers into the middle class.

Ms. Brisacks weekend shift represents all these trends, as well as one more: a change in the views of the most privileged Americans. According to Gallup, approval of unions among college graduates grew from 55 percent in the late 1990s to 70 percent last year.

I have seen this first hand in more than seven years of reporting on unions, as a growing interest among white-collar workers has coincided with a broader enthusiasm for the labor movement.

In talking with Ms. Brisack and her fellow Rhodes scholars, it became clear that the change had even reached that rarefied group. The American Rhodes scholars I encountered from a generation earlier typically said that, while at Oxford, they had been middle-of-the-road types who believed in a modest role for government. They did not spend much time thinking about unions as students, and what they did think was likely to be skeptical.

I was a child of the 1980s and 1990s, steeped in the centrist politics of the era, wrote Jake Sullivan, a 1998 Rhodes scholar who is President Bidens national security adviser and was a top aide to Hillary Clinton.

By contrast, many of Ms. Brisacks Rhodes classmates express reservations about the market-oriented policies of the 80s and 90s and strong support for unions. Several told me that they were enthusiastic about Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, who made reviving the labor movement a priority of their 2020 presidential campaigns.

Even more so than other indicators, such a shift could foretell a comeback for unions, whose membership in the United States stands at its lowest percentage in roughly a century. Thats because the kinds of people who win prestigious scholarships are the kinds who later hold positions of power who make decisions about whether to fight unions or negotiate with them, about whether the law should make it easier or harder for workers to organize.

As the recent union campaigns at companies like Starbucks, Amazon and Apple show, the terms of the fight are still largely set by corporate leaders. If these people are increasingly sympathetic to labor, then some of the key obstacles to unions may be dissolving.

Then again, Jaz Brisack isnt waiting to find out.

Ms. Brisack moved to Buffalo after Oxford for another job, as an organizer with the union Workers United, where a mentor she had met in college also worked. Once there, she decided to take a second gig at Starbucks.

Her philosophy was get on the job and organize. She wanted to learn the industry, said Gary Bonadonna Jr., the top Workers United official in upstate New York. I said, OK.

In its pushback against the campaign, Starbucks has often blamed outside union forces intent on harming the company, as its chief executive, Howard Schultz, suggested in April. The company has identified Ms. Brisack as one of these interlopers, noting that she draws a salary from Workers United. (Mr. Bonadonna said she was the only Starbucks employee on the unions payroll.)

But the impression that Ms. Brisack and her fellow employee-organizers give off is one of fondness for the company. Even as they point out flaws understaffing, insufficient training, low seniority pay, all of which they want to improve they embrace Starbucks and its distinctive culture.

They talk up their sense of camaraderie and community many count regular customers among their friends and delight in their coffee expertise. On mornings when Ms. Brisacks store isnt busy, employees often hold tastings.

A Starbucks spokesman said that Mr. Schultz believes employees dont need a union if they have faith in him and his motives, and the company has said that seniority-based pay increases will take effect this summer.

One Friday in late February, Ms. Brisack and another barista, Casey Moore, met at the two-bedroom rental that Ms. Brisack shares with three cats, to talk union strategy over breakfast. Naturally, the conversation turned to coffee.

Jaz has a very barista drink, Ms. Moore said.

Ms. Brisack elaborated: Its four blonde ristretto shots thats a lighter roast of espresso with oat milk. Its basically an iced latte with oat milk. If we had sugar-cookie syrup, I would get that. Now that thats no more, its usually plain.

That afternoon, Ms. Brisack held a Zoom call from her living room with a group of Starbucks employees who were interested in unionizing. It is an exercise that she and other organizers in Buffalo have repeated hundreds of times since last fall, as workers around the country sought to follow their lead. But in almost every case, the Starbucks workers outside Buffalo have reached out to the organizers, rather than vice versa.

This particular group of workers, in Ms. Brisacks college town of Oxford, Miss., seemed to require even less of a hard sell than most. When Ms. Brisack said she, too, had attended the University of Mississippi, one of the workers waved her off, as if her celebrity preceded her. Oh, yeah, we know Jaz, the worker gushed.

A few hours later, Ms. Brisack, Ms. Moore and Michelle Eisen, a longtime Starbucks employee also involved in the organizing, gathered with two union lawyers at the union office in a onetime auto plant. The National Labor Relations Board was counting ballots for an election at a Starbucks in Mesa, Ariz. the first real test of whether the campaign was taking root nationally, and not just in a union stronghold like New York. The room was tense as the first results trickled in.

Can you feel my heart beating? Ms. Moore asked her colleagues.

Within a few minutes, however, it became clear that the union would win in a rout the final count was 25 to 3. Everyone turned slightly punchy, as if they had all suddenly entered a dream world where unions were far more popular than they had ever imagined. One of the lawyers let out an expletive before musing, Whoever organized down there

Ms. Brisack seemed to capture the mood when she read a text from a co-worker to the group: Im so happy Im crying and eating a week-old ice cream cake.

Ms. Brisack once appeared to be on a different path. As a child, she idolized Lyndon Johnson and imagined running for office. At the University of Mississippi, she was elected president of the college Democrats.

She had developed an interest in labor history as a teenager, when money was sometimes tight, but it was largely an academic interest. She had read Eugene Debs, said Tim Dolan, the universitys national scholarship adviser at the time. It was like, Oh, gosh. Wow.

When Richard Bensinger, a former organizing director with the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and the United Automobile Workers, came to speak on campus, she realized that union organizing was more than a historical curiosity. She talked her way into an internship on a union campaign he was involved with at a nearby Nissan plant. It did not go well. The union accused the company of running a racially divisive campaign, and Ms. Brisack was disillusioned by the loss.

Nissan never paid a consequence for what it did, she said. (In response to charges of scare tactics, the company said at the time that it had sought to provide information to workers and clear up misperceptions.)

Mr. Dolan noticed that she was becoming jaded about mainstream politics. There were times between her sophomore and junior year when Id steer her toward something and shed say, Oh, theyre way too conservative. Id send her a New York Times article and shed say, Neoliberalism is dead.

In England, where she arrived during the fall of 2019 at age 22, Ms. Brisack was a regular at a solidarity film club that screened movies about labor struggles worldwide, and wore a sweatshirt that featured a head shot of Karl Marx. She liberally reinterpreted the term black tie at an annual Rhodes dinner, wearing a black dress-coat over a black antifa T-shirt.

I went and got gowns and everything I wanted to fit in, said a friend and fellow Rhodes scholar, Leah Crowder. I always loved how she never tried to fit into Oxford.

But Ms. Brisacks politics didnt stand out the way her formal wear did. In talking with eight other American Rhodes scholars from her year, I got the sense that progressive politics were generally in the ether. Almost all expressed some skepticism of markets and agreed that workers should have more power. The only one who questioned aspects of collective bargaining told me that few of his classmates would have agreed, and that he might have been loudly jeered for expressing reservations.

Some in the group even said they had incorporated pro-labor views into their career aspirations.

Claire Wang has focused on helping fossil fuel workers find family-sustaining jobs as the world transitions to green energy. Unions are a critical partner in this work, she told me. Rayan Semery-Palumbo, who is finishing a dissertation on inequality and meritocracy while working for a climate technology start-up, lamented that workers had too little leverage. Labor unions may be the most effective way of implementing change going forward for a lot of people, including myself, he told me. I might find myself in labor organizing work.

This is not what talking to Rhodes scholars used to sound like. At least not in my experience.

I was a Rhodes scholar in 1998, when centrist politicians like Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were ascendant, and before neoliberalism became such a dirty word. Though we were dimly aware of a time, decades earlier, when radicalism and pro-labor views were more common among American elites and when, not coincidentally, the U.S. labor movement was much more powerful those views were far less in evidence by the time I got to Oxford.

Some of my classmates were interested in issues like race and poverty, as they reminded me in interviews for this article. A few had nuanced views of labor they had worked a blue-collar job, or had parents who belonged to a union, or had studied their Marx. Still, most of my classmates would have regarded people who talked at length about unions and class the way they would have regarded religious fundamentalists: probably earnest but slightly preachy, and clearly stuck in the past.

Kris Abrams, one of the few U.S. Rhodes Scholars in our cohort who thought a lot about the working class and labor organizing, told me recently that she felt isolated at Oxford, at least among other Americans. Honestly, I didnt feel like there was much room for discussion, Ms. Abrams said.

By contrast, it was common within our cohort to revere business and markets and globalization. As an undergraduate, my friend and Rhodes classmate Roy Bahat led a large public-service organization that periodically worked with unions. But as the new economy boomed in 1999, he interned at a large corporation. It dawned on him that a career in business might be more desirable a way to make a larger impact on the world.

There was a major shift in my own mentality, Roy told me. I became more open to business. It didnt hurt that the pay was good, too.

Roy would go on to work for McKinsey & Company, the City of New York and the executive ranks of News Corp, then start a venture capital fund focused on technologies that change how business operates. More recently, in a sign of the times, his investment portfolio has included companies that make it easier for workers to organize.

On some level, Roy Bahat and Jaz Brisack are not so different: Both are chronic overachievers; both are ambitious about changing society for the better; both are sympathetic to the underdog by way of intellect and disposition. But the world was telling Roy in the late 1990s to go into business if he wanted to influence events. The world was telling Ms. Brisack in 2020 to move to Buffalo and organize workers.

The first time I met Ms. Brisack was in October, at a Starbucks near the Buffalo airport.

I was there to cover the union election. She was there, unsolicited, to brief me. I dont think we can lose, she said of the vote at her store. At the time, not a single corporate-owned Starbucks in the country was unionized. The union would go on to win there by more than a two-to-one ratio.

Its hard to overstate the challenge of unionizing a major corporation that doesnt want to be unionized. Employers are allowed to inundate workers with anti-union messaging, whereas unions have no protected access to workers on the job. And while it is officially illegal to threaten, discipline or fire workers who seek to unionize, the consequences for doing so are typically minor and long in coming.

At Starbucks, the National Labor Relations Board has issued complaints finding merit in such accusations. Yet the union continues to win elections over 80 percent of the more than 175 votes in which the board has declared a winner. (Starbucks denies that it has broken the law, and a federal judge recently rejected a request to reinstate pro-union workers whom the labor board said Starbucks had forced out illegally.)

Though Ms. Brisack was one of dozens of early leaders of the union campaign, the imprint of her personality is visible. In store after store around the country, workers who support the union give no ground in meetings with company officials.

Even prospective allies are not spared. In May, after Time ran a favorable piece, Ms. Brisacks response on Twitter was: We appreciate TIME magazines coverage of our union campaign. TIME should make sure theyre giving the same union rights and protections that were fighting for to the amazing journalists, photographers, and staff who make this coverage possible!

The tweet reminded me of a story that Mr. Dolan, her scholarship adviser, had told about a reception that the University of Mississippi held in her honor in 2018. Ms. Brisack had just won a Truman scholarship, another prestigious award. She took the opportunity to urge the universitys chancellor to remove a Confederate monument from campus. The chancellor looked pained, according to several attendees.

My boss was like, Wow, you couldnt have talked her out of doing that? Mr. Dolan said. I was like, Thats what made her win. If she wasnt that person, you all wouldnt have a Truman now.

(Mr. Dolans boss at the time did not recall this conversation, and the former chancellor did not recall any drama at the event.)

The challenge for Ms. Brisack and her colleagues is that while younger people, even younger elites, are increasingly pro-union, the shift has not yet reached many of the countrys most powerful leaders. Or, more to the point, the shift has not yet reached Mr. Schultz, the 68-year-old now in his third tour as Starbuckss chief executive.

She recently spoke at an Aspen Institute panel on workers rights. She has even mused about using her Rhodes connections to make a personal appeal to Mr. Schultz, something that Mr. Bensinger has pooh-poohed but that other organizers believe she just may pull off.

Richard has been making fun of me for thinking of asking one of the Rhodes people to broker a meeting with Howard Schultz, Ms. Brisack said in February.

Im sure if you met Howard Schultz, hed be like, Shes so nice, responded Ms. Moore, her co-worker. Hed be like, I get it. I would want to be in a union with you, too.

More here:
Why a Rhodes Scholars Ambition Led Her to a Job at Starbucks - The New York Times

Hillary Clinton hits Trump for not accepting election loss, Twitter reminds her of 2016 defeat – Fox News

Hillary Clinton claimed that January 6 hearings are uncovering President Donald Trump's "criminal conspiracy" to win 2020 election. (MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images | Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

In a tweet from Tuesday, former U.S. Secretary of State and failed 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton pointed to testimony shown in the January 6 Committee hearings that several close advisors to former President Trump told him that he lost the 2020 election. That despite Trump's public insistence that he won the contest, and his allegations that it was stolen from him.

For Clinton, this was all part of Trumps "criminal conspiracy" to overturn the election results. Her full tweet read. "The latest January 6 hearings show that Trump knew he lost the election. His own people told him he'd lost the election. He then chose to wage a criminal conspiracy to overturn the results and prevent the peaceful transfer of power for the first time in American history."

The Washington Post was accused of bias after publishing a May 23 piece that claimed there is "no evidence" Hillary Clinton triggered the Russian probe despite her former campaign manager testifying that she approved distributing materials alleging a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russias Alfa Bank to the media. (Mike Smith/NBC/NBCU Photo Bank via Getty Images)

JAN. 6 COMMITTEE POSTPONES WEDNESDAY HEARING DUE TO 'TECHNICAL ISSUES'

Conservatives on Twitter swarmed Clintons replies, slamming her for promoting and spreading the now-debunked narrative that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election.

According to testimony from Clintons former campaign manager Robby Mook during the Michael Sussman trial last month, Clinton signed off on disseminating the unproven claims of collusion to the press.

Washington Times columnist Tim Young skewered Clinton with a reply to her tweet, writing, "Oh, like how you knew you lost the election in 2016 and went on to push the Russian Collusion lie?"

Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., makes remarks during the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Mocking an infamously premature Happy Birthday tweet Clinton posted to herself just ahead of election day 2016, political personality and author Michael Malice posted a picture of Trump with the caption, "Happy birthday to this future president." Tuesday happened to be the former presidents birthday.

Conservative Twitter user Nick V. Flor tweeted, "Alex, I'll take What is Russian Collusion for $100."

THE SAME THREAT BEHIND JAN. 6 CAPITOL RIOT 'ISN'T OVER': REP. KINZINGER

Former MLB pitcher and outspoken conservative Curt Schilling really laid into Clinton for her tweet. He wrote, "You, honestly, need to STFU and thank the Lord you are not in jail. You and your teenage groping mutant are one of the many reasons legal American citizens despise DC. You two represent ALL that is wrong with the left and with politics."

Political strategist and former Trump administration official Michael Caputo tweeted, "Im not telling her, you tell her" implying Clinton was unaware of the irony.

"The High Priestess of Projection accuses Trump of everything she did," wrote conservative podcast host Monica Crowley.

Clinton was slammed on Twitter for scolding Trump over his refusal to accept his election loss. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

And Republican congressional candidate from Maryland, Antonio Piotocco tweeted, "I'm old enough to remember when Hillary Clinton knew she lost the election in 2016 but went around the country telling everyone the election was stolen from her."

Gabriel Hays is an associate editor at Fox News. Follow him on Twitter at @gabrieljhays.

Follow this link:
Hillary Clinton hits Trump for not accepting election loss, Twitter reminds her of 2016 defeat - Fox News

No, these mass shootings weren’t a plot to protect Hillary Clinton from negative news coverage – PolitiFact

People often claim that horrific tragedies are staged to distract attention from other news stories. When doing so, its wise to check the dates first.

A June 14 Facebook post shared by conservative rocker Ted Nugent shows a screenshot implying that three separate mass shootings were timed to distract from various controversies involving former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

But a simple Google search shows that the timelines between the shootings and the stories involving Hillary Clinton dont closely match.

The post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)

Heres what the post says:

"Remember when Hillary was testifying about Benghazi? Probably not. You were too busy watching the elementary school massacre in Connecticut."

"Remember when Hillary got tattled on by Blumenthal for using illegal servers in the White House? Probably not. You were too busy watching the Charleston church shooting."

"Remember that time Hillarys campaign lawyer went to trial for lying to the FBI about Trumps-Russia collusion? Probably not. Youre too busy watching the Uvalde school shooting massacre."

Lets address the claims one by one.

Clintons Benghazi testimony and the Sandy Hook school shooting

The first reference is to Clintons testimony about the attack on Sept. 11, 2012, by Islamic militants on U.S. sites in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service officer Sean Smith, and CIA contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

Clinton testified before Congress on two separate occasions about the attack. The first was on Jan. 23, 2013, when she testified separately before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

In 2014, the House established a select committee to further investigate the attack. Clinton, a leading candidate at the time for president, again testified before Congress on Oct. 22, 2015, in a lengthy hearing that was carried live on major news networks and drew wide coverage.

The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, where gunman Adam Lanza first killed his mother, then traveled to the school to kill 20 children and six adults before killing himself, happened on Dec. 14, 2012.

Thats over a month before Clintons first Benghazi testimony and nearly three years before her 2015 testimony.

Clintons email server and the Charleston church shooting

Another claim is a reference to the news that Clinton used a private email address instead of a government account during her time as secretary of state. That news first gained widespread attention after an article in the New York Times on March 2, 2015, but according to the Washington Post, the details first came out in 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" leaked emails from Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime friend of Clinton who worked as an adviser to President Bill Clinton.

The website The Smoking Gun mentioned Clintons use of a private email address in its 2013 report about emails sent to her by Blumenthal.

The FBI opened an investigation on July 10, 2015, and news coverage of it dogged Clinton for much of her campaign, even after then-FBI Director James Comey announced on July 5, 2016, there would be no charges.

On June 17, 2015, a white supremacist named Dylann Roof killed nine Black people during a Bible study at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina. The shooting happened more than three months after news of Clintons private email address first gained widespread attention, three weeks before the FBI announced its investigation, and more than two years after Blumenthals emails were first leaked by a hacker.

The Sussmann trial and the Uvalde, Texas, School shooting

Jury selection began on May 16, 2022, for Michael Sussmann, a Democratic attorney who represented Hillary Clintons campaign. He was facing charges that he lied to the FBI by saying he was not working on behalf of a particular client when he gave the FBI information about possible ties between Donald Trumps campaign and a Russian bank.

He was acquitted on May 31 after a two-week trial.

On May 24, 2022, Salvador Ramos walked into Robb Elementary school in Uvalde and killed 19 students and two teachers. That shooting took place eight days after Sussmans trial began.

Mass shooting conspiracies are common

The recent tragedy in Uvalde prompted a flurry of misinformation online, much of which PolitiFact has already debunked.

Such theories are common after mass shootings, and people often make fantastical claims that they are false flags meant to further an agenda like gun control or to distract from another news event.

Our ruling

A Facebook post implied that three separate mass shootings Sandy Hook, Charleston and Uvalde were timed to distract from various controversies involving Hillary Clinton.

Theres no evidence to suggest any of the shootings were staged. And the timing of the shootings do not match up with the events from which they were supposedly meant to distract.

Nugent already has two Pants on Fire ratings from us. This ridiculous claim makes it three: Pants on Fire!

The rest is here:
No, these mass shootings weren't a plot to protect Hillary Clinton from negative news coverage - PolitiFact

Madam Secretary Hillary Clinton and Other Notable Dignitaries Displayed Using ARHT Media’s Hologram Technology – GlobeNewswire

TORONTO, June 16, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- ARHT Media Inc. ("ARHT Media" or ARHT or the "Company") [TSXV:ART], the global leader in the development, production and distribution of high-quality and low-latency hologram and digital content, pre-recorded and presented Madam Secretary Hillary Clinton, at London Tech Weeks Anchor event EQL:HER to an audience of forward-thinking leaders who are addressing the under-representation of women in technology through action. Now in its seventh year, EQL:HER celebrated and highlighted the achievements of women in the tech industry for an afternoon of impactful panel discussions and presentations. Other notable individuals that were presented with ARHT Medias hologram technology include Dame Vivian Hunt, Managing Partner at Consulting Firm McKinsey & Company and Pitch President, Nicholas Mills.

Our EQL:HER anchor event was a tremendous start to London Tech Week, stated Elka Goldstein, Informa Director, who produced the event. Our distinguished audience had the pleasure to listen to, amongst others, Madam Secretary Hillary Clinton, who appeared life-like in our London venue, and the experience with our invited guests was extremely positive. To have the ability to beam distinguished speakers at our events from the comfort of their preferred surroundings opens up many more future opportunities to showcase powerful female voices with platforms that can make meaningful, positive change, concluded Ms Goldstein.

EQL:HER was an important event to showcase ARHT Medias hologram technology, stated Larry OReilly, CEO of ARHT Media. The passionate messaging around the disparity in gender-allocated technology funding was amplified by our technology and the response from the audience clearly illustrated our life-like capabilities, concluded Mr. OReilly.

About ARHT MediaARHT is a pioneer in the live hologram industry and their HoloPresenceTM technology offers a complete end-to-end solution for the Capture, Transmission and Display of live holograms for in-person, hybrid, and online events. They have a range of hologram display solutions to suit multiple use cases, including a premium online presentation solution the Virtual Global StageTM, and the largest global Holographic Telepresence network of hologram Capture and Display locations, ensuring a presenter can beam into a meeting or event as a live hologram from virtually anywhere in the world.

About EQL:HER

EQL:HER is a global network and event series which exists to re-balance gender in the technology sector to secure women an inclusive future across all businesses.

About London Tech WeekLondon Tech Week is a multi-day event to showcase how tech is transforming both business and society by driving important conversations around transformation, diversity and innovation. The event unites the global tech ecosystem to inspire impactful innovation, building a better digital world for both business and society.

Connect with ARHT MediaTwitter: http://www.twitter.com/ARHTmediaFacebook: http://www.facebook.com/ARHTmediaincLinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/company/arht-media-inc-

For more information, please visit http://www.arhtmedia.com or contact the investor relations group at info@arhtmedia.com.

ARHT Media trades under the symbol "ART" on the TSX Venture Exchange.

ARHTSalman AminARHT Mediasamin@arhtmedia.com

This press release may contain "forward-looking information" within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking information includes, but is not limited to, the intention to exercise convertible securities of the Company; disclosure related to the Company's sales funnel; the Company's technology; the potential uses for the Company's technology; the future planned events using the Company's technology; the future success of the Company; the ability of the Company to monetize the ARHT Media technology; the development of the Company's technology; and interest from parties in ARHT's products. Generally, forward-looking information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as "plans", "expects" or "does not expect", "is expected", "budget", "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates" or "does not anticipate", or "believes", or variations of such words and phrases or state that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will be taken", "occur" or "be achieved". Forward-looking information is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information, including but not limited to: general business, economic and competitive uncertainties; regulatory risks; risks inherent in technology operations; and other risks of the technology industry. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except in accordance with applicable securities laws.

NEITHER THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE NOR ITS REGULATION SERVICES PROVIDER (AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED IN THE POLICIES OF THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE) ACCEPTS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.

The rest is here:
Madam Secretary Hillary Clinton and Other Notable Dignitaries Displayed Using ARHT Media's Hologram Technology - GlobeNewswire