Social Security Works shared a post.

Read About The Tarbaby Story under the Category: About the Tarbaby Blog

“The Westmoreland project presented the state with a long list of possible pollution sources, including countywide shale gas drilling and fracking operations and a Penn Township landfill that has accepted thousands of tons of radioactive drill cuttings from gas well sites. The project’s report also makes a case for how pollution exposure could lead to Ewing sarcoma.”

One of Iowa’s largest community supported agriculture farms, which is built around numerous conservation practices, fights for survival amidst economic and climate pressures.
By Susan Futrell, Farmer Profiles March 27, 2019

On a quiet day in early March, Andy and Melissa Dunham’s farm, just north of I-80 in east-central Iowa, is a place of unlikely intersections. A steamy greenhouse full of newly planted seed beds is half buried in ice and snow. An old-fashioned red barn looks out over a newly maturing grove of hardy kiwi vines and chestnuts. And in a few months, the couple’s rows of carrots, beets, and kale will be surrounded by vast corn and soybean fields that stretch to the horizon.
Grinnell Heritage Farm (GHF) once looked like the fields that surround it, which dominate most of Iowa’s landscape. But today, it’s home to one of the largest community supported agriculture (CSA) farms in the state. The Dunhams grow 40 to 60 types of certified organic vegetables, herbs, and flowers for their members and 10 to 12 wholesale crops including kale, cabbage, onions, carrots, parsnips, and beets. They pack up to 250 CSA boxes a week in summer, fall, and winter. And a small herd of 15 cows, which they keep mostly to support soil fertility, also provides meat and feeder calves in the fall.
Steve Moen, a longtime customer and produce buyer for New Pioneer Coop, which has several stores throughout the state, raves about the quality of GHF root vegetables and cooking greens. “They set a high bar for quality, and they do everything right,” he says. “They are great to work with.”
In providing for their devoted customers, the Dunhams employ an impressive array of soil-building, conservation, pollinator, and ecosystem practices—and, set in the middle of Big Ag country, they demonstrate how agriculture can benefit the land and the community. Organic certification gives them a way to talk with customers about their farming practices, but their philosophy extends well beyond the requirements.
“If you can name a conservation practice, we’re probably doing it,” says Andy, ticking off a list of just some of their efforts: no-till and minimal-till farming, pollinator habitat, hedgerows, rotational grazing, and more.
Even though the Dunhams have spent a lot of time building a resilient, environmentally focused operation, recent weather extremes and changes to the retail environment have put their farm (like many others) in a vulnerable place financially. While Grinnell Heritage Farm escaped the recent devastating floods that drowned fields and towns along both sides of the Missouri River in western Iowa and eastern Nebraska, a number of other climate- and industry-related challenges remain.
The Light-Bulb Moment
Grinnell Heritage Farm, in Andy’s family for five generations, started back in 1857. Like most farms in Iowa, it began as a diversified operation, with livestock, forage, fruit trees, vegetables, and grain, and over time it was converted to corn and soy. By the time Andy’s grandparents were ready for someone to take over, their 80 acres of commodity crops had become less and less profitable.
Andy grew up in the small town of Hopkinton in northeast Iowa, riding along on farm calls with his dad, a large animal veterinarian. Despite his family history, farming wasn’t something he considered doing until joining the Peace Corps as an agricultural extension officer in Tanzania. Soil fertility was a huge limitation for farmers there—people spent half of their yearly income on fertilizer. With an acre to tend, he began learning soil building, composting, and organic methods.
“I put a shovel in the ground, and a light bulb came on,” he says. “I realized this is what I wanted to do.”
After a year on an organic farm back in the States, he came home to his grandparents’ farm in 2006. He started growing vegetables on three acres, expanding production over time to 20 acres, with the rest in pasture, hay, fruit trees, and wildlife habitat.
Andy and Melissa, who both turn 40 this year, married in 2007. With her creative energy and background in accounting and his farming knowledge and experience, the farm is now their full-time livelihood; they’ve invested in a greenhouse, packing shed, loading dock, barns, and drip irrigation. They value the flexibility of the work and the time it grants them with their three children, Collin, 20, Emma, 10, and Leonora, 7.
Planting tomatoes and lettuce in the hoop house. (Photo courtesy of Grinnell Farm.)
In addition to Andy’s aunt Janet, the farm employs four people full-time, year-round, as well as two to three seasonal workers. Unfortunately, affording health insurance and providing for employees is difficult given that wages rise faster than produce prices, and Andy and Melissa are finding it increasingly hard to find help.
From ‘Moonscape’ to a Conservation-Focused Operation
Nevertheless, the Dunhams are continually learning and expanding their efforts to build soil and make the farm ecosystem more resilient. They grow cover crops on 85 percent of their acres, waiting as long as practical to maximize nutrients before plowing them in. They use a no-till drill for planting in some areas and minimal till elsewhere to avoid soil damage. In areas without good drainage, they use raised beds. Over 10 years, they say, their soil organic matter has more than tripled.
On a cold March day, the Dunham’s cattle and calves munch hay next to the barn. Andy estimates they’re standing atop a four-foot layer of manure and compost that will become fertilizer once the weather thaws and the cows move onto pasture.
“We started with basically a moonscape,” Andy notes. “Now we’re seeing that former prairies like this have unique potential to lock up carbon in the soil.”
They also devote a lot of energy to creating a habitat friendly to pollinators. “Beetle banks” are among the practices they’ve adopted as part of a collaboration with Bee Better Certification from Xerces Society of Invertebrate Conservation. The raised earthen berms, planted with native grasses and flowers, attract pollinators, and also provide habitat for nocturnal ground beetles that feed on potato beetles. Hedgerows provide shelter for bees and buffers against pesticide drift from neighboring cornfields.
Grinnell Heritage Farm carrots for sale at New Pioneer Coop, Iowa City. (Photo courtesy of Grinnell Heritage Farm)
CSA memberships and wholesale accounts are their primary source of income. Their most important wholesale buyer is FarmTable, a food hub based several hours west in Harlan, Iowa. The local food aggregator, which deals in fruits, vegetables, dairy, meat, eggs, honey, and other local products, picks up and distributes GHF produce to retail stores and restaurants in Omaha, Lincoln, Des Moines, and other urban markets.
FarmTable Owner and General Manager Ellen Walsh-Rosmann, a fellow farmer, says the Dunhams are one of the hub’s largest vegetable suppliers. Buying from GHF gives her a good variety of products and a long season, she says, and it’s especially important for stores that want organic produce.
In addition to the food hub, Whole Foods Market buys from GHF for their west Des Moines store and their regional distribution center, and GHF delivers directly to other accounts, including a dozen CSA drop sites across eastern Iowa.
Weathering the Challenges
Last year was a rough. A cold spring and hot, dry summer were followed by two months of drenching rain, flooding, and an early freeze.
After coaxing a good crop through the heat, two-thirds of an acre of carrots rotted in the field just before harvest, and they lost $150,000 in overall sales. Wholesale deliveries that usually last well into February ended in November. And for the first time ever, GHF cancelled one week’s CSA shares.
The losses forced the Dunhams to borrow more than usual to pay for seeds and other costs ahead of the 2019 season. In addition, they’re shifting their planting schedule to finish earlier in the season to reduce risk, and they asked CSA members to purchase 2019 shares early to help with up front costs.
Shoppers at New Pioneer missed the carrots, but Moen says many are aware of the devastating weather and are already looking forward to this year’s crop. The store found other suppliers to fill the gap, but local produce is a key distinction for the 35-year community-owned store. FarmTable sales were also hurt, according to Walsh-Rosmann; without the beets and carrots from GHF, some customers dropped orders for other local products as well.
In addition to climate-related issues, changes in the grocery industry are another concern, even when the weather cooperates. Long-time customers like New Pioneer and other regional grocers have lost sales to national chains like Aldi, Costco, and Trader Joe’s. The larger chains don’t carry local produce, so the lower sales affect not only the stores but also their local suppliers. One major chain, which used to allow individual stores flexibility to buy and set prices with local growers, now caps prices in a central buying office, cutting out most local farms.
“I think most people aren’t aware, or don’t think about the fact that none of the produce at those chains is local,” says Andy. “They don’t realize how much difference it makes to us.”
An Uncertain Future
The Dunhams are thoughtful and deliberate about the choices they’ve made for their land. Their mission is “to farm our land in a way that will leave it better for the next generation, giving our children, grandchildren, and beyond the opportunity to harvest the bounty we see on the farm today.” To share those values with their community, they’ve started holding regular gatherings, dubbed “HaPIZZAness,” that bring neighbors and families to the farm for wood-fired pizza, music, and wagon rides, creating connections that are about more than vegetables.
Still, the challenges of climate change and economics weigh heavily. As the arid/humid boundary at the 100th Meridian continues moving east, expanding the drier parts of the country, shifts in weather patterns and planting zones, as well as drought, flooding, and extreme weather events, are all predicted to increase. Crop damage and pest and disease pressures will be especially harsh in certain parts of the Midwest, and windows for planting and harvest in the region will grow shorter, according to reports from USDA, Ag business leaders, and climate scientists.
Additionally, a 2018 Cornell University-led study predicts that a 1-degree Celsius increase in summer temperatures could quadruple the frequency of crop losses and points out that with so much reliance on just two crops, corn and soybeans, the Midwest is especially vulnerable.
“We were at a farmer meeting on climate change [co-sponsored by Iowa Interfaith Power and Light] last week, and even the big conventional farmers with 5,000 acres or more say they feel trapped,” Andy said. “A lot of them would try different practices if they could afford it. With the right incentives and policies, they could change in one season.” But the current system doesn’t encourage farms to take risks and invest in practices to be more resilient; instead, Andy thinks, “we are rewarding the wrong players.”
For Walsh-Rosmann, the evidence of a changing climate is already here as the Midwest deals with the recent historic floods. The farms that supply her are all safe, but she’s been delivering relief supplies to nearby communities, and the destruction is heartbreaking. “Do we weather the storm and hope the local food system is more resilient than the rest of conventional ag?” she wonders.
The Dunhams worry that another year of weather extremes could force them to scale back or take on more debt than they are comfortable with. The web of community and economic support—grocery stores, small distributors, food processors, and restaurants—is interdependent, and farms like theirs are at risk across the U.S.
“If we can’t make a go of it, on some of the best soil in the world, with a pretty competent farmer, the lights are going to go out for a lot of people,” Melissa says.
“My life is what I make of it, and I can’t complain unless I do something about it,” adds Andy. “But at some point, just being a good example won’t be enough.”

After almost two years, the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller has come to an end. Instead of getting to read Mueller’s findings, we received a letter from Attorney General Bill Barr that summarizes what Barr called Mueller’s “principal conclusions.”
Yet in one notable instance where Mueller reached no conclusion after years of investigation—about whether the president obstructed justice—Barr rushed to reach a conclusion in just two days. Barr’s decision to reach his own conclusion on this matter was poor judgment and ensures that Congress will fight tooth and nail to gain access to Mueller’s full report and the evidence underlying it.
Mueller did reach a conclusion regarding what is commonly called “collusion,” if Barr’s letter is accurate. He quoted Mueller as stating that the investigation “did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
If true, that means that Mueller lacked sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump campaign officials conspired with the Russian government. This is not altogether surprising, given that there was not sufficient public evidence to establish a conspiracy. Even former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s delivery of internal polling data, while shady, is not itself a crime.
Mueller’s inability to prove conspiracy does not mean, however, that he failed to uncover evidence that would be troubling to many Americans. When I declined to pursue charges as a federal prosecutor, I often did so in the face of very incriminating evidence, due to an inability to prove a key element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The public may be shocked by Mueller’s evidence but should respect his investigation and the conclusions he reached after interviewing 500 people and issuing over 2,800 subpoenas.
But on one important question, obstruction of justice, Mueller did not reach any conclusion. According to Barr, Mueller “ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment” regarding obstruction and “did not draw a conclusion—one way or the other” regarding obstruction. Mueller stated, according to Barr, that his report does not conclude that Trump “committed a crime” but “also does not exonerate him.”
That is a very unusual decision by Mueller. Federal prosecutors are expected to reach a conclusion, one way or the other, regarding whether an individual should be charged. I always did so when I was a prosecutor, and that is what prosecutors do on a regular basis. Perhaps the greatest question raised by Barr’s letter is why Mueller declined to do so here.
It appears that Mueller approached his role with an admirable sense of humility and caution, with the understanding that whatever conclusion he reached would have an immense impact on the nation. While he essentially punted on the issue, I understand why Mueller may have felt the obstruction of justice decision was one for the American people and their elected representatives to make.
What I don’t understand is why Barr decided to take it upon himself to make a decision hastily based on “discussions with certain [DOJ] officials” when Mueller, after spending almost two years interviewing countless witnesses and reviewing many thousands of documents, had amassed evidence on both sides.
Barr’s speedy decision that Trump did not obstruct justice perhaps is not surprising. Barr wrote a 19-page single-spaced memorandum to the Deputy Attorney General and Trump’s attorneys explaining why Trump did not obstruct justice long before he become Attorney General.
As a practicing lawyer, it would take me dozens of hours to create a 19-page single-spaced memorandum containing nuanced legal analysis on any subject. I would not do so for free unless I felt very strongly about the issue. Although Barr claims otherwise in his letter, it is hard to escape the conclusion that he prejudged the matter and let his strong feelings about the subject influence his judgment.
Barr’s poor reasoning in the four-page summary will reinforce the conclusion that he prejudged the matter. For example, he claimed that because Mueller was unable to establish that Trump was “involved in an underlying crime,” that suggested that he lacked the intent to obstruct justice. That will come as a surprise to Martha Stewart and many other defendants who were convicted of obstruction of justice but not of any underlying crime. Simply put, that is a fragile reed upon which to support a finding that there was no obstruction.
Barr’s poor judgment means that Congress will have to take steps to find out what is in Mueller’s report and what underlying evidence Mueller found. While many have suggested that the full report be made public, that is likely not possible under existing law unless Congress and the President take action. But there is no reason why House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler cannot see the full report, or why his committee could not subpoena Barr or even Mueller.
There can be no serious question that obstruction of justice is an impeachable offense. Bill Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice, and Richard Nixon would have been if he had not resigned. The stakes are high, and regardless of the outcome, the American people deserve to know what Mueller found without Barr’s unwise interference.
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez has some wise words of advice as we wait for the report to be handed to Congress…

March 25, 2019
Today marks the 108th anniversary of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire. 104 years ago, 146 people died in the fire because of unsafe working conditions. Today we stay steadfast in our fight against the race to the bottom in the United States and around the world.
104 years ago, 146 people died in the #TriangleShirtwaist fire because of unsafe working conditions. Today we stay steadfast in our fight against the race to the bottom in the United States and around the world. #USWWorks
Posted by United Steelworkers on Wednesday, March 25, 2015
RUSSIA INVESTIGATION
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team has told its story of an aggressive Russian campaign to upend the 2016 U.S. presidential election in a series of indictments and court documents.
Even before the release of any final report on his investigation, those documents detailed allegations of a highly coordinated Russian effort and outlined Moscow’s intersection with several figures in then-candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. Moscow has denied interference, and Mr. Trump has denied any collusion with Russia. The special counsel didn’t establish that anyone associated with the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts, Attorney General William Barr told Congress.
Here is a timeline of alleged events, according to documents from the Mueller probe:
With funding from Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin, a Russian businessman and restaurateur popular with the Kremlin, Russian intelligence operatives begin “Project Lakhta,” an effort to promote divisive political messages online targeting the U.S. electorate. (Mr. Prigozhin, who has been indicted, hasn’t entered a plea. He has previously denied ties to the effort.)
Russians with Project Lakhta begin spending thousands of dollars a month to buy ads on social-media sites promoting group pages they have set up on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. The pages address issues such as immigration, race and religion. Many grew to have hundreds of thousands of followers.

Donald Trump declares his candidacy for president.
Russians with Project Lakhta use stolen Social-Security numbers to open PayPal accounts, obtain false identification and post on social-media accounts using the victims’ identities.
Michael Cohen, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, emails Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top press official asking for help with efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. (Mr. Cohen has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about efforts during the campaign to pursue the Moscow project.)
Mr. Cohen again emails the press secretary’s office.
Mr. Cohen speaks by phone to the press secretary’s assistant, outlining the proposed project and asking for help to move forward.
Felix Sater, a Trump associate who worked on the Russian real-estate project, asks Mr. Cohen to call him and says, “It’s about [Putin,] they called today.” (Mr. Sater hasn’t been accused of wrongdoing. He didn’t respond to requests for comment.)
Russians with Project Lakhta circulate a list of themes for content to post on social-media accounts they have set up. Instructions include “use any opportunity to criticize [Democratic candidate] Hillary [Clinton] and the rest (except [Democratic candidate Bernie] Sanders and Trump–we support them).”
George Papadopoulos, joining the Trump campaign as a foreign-policy adviser, talks to a “campaign supervisor” and recognizes “that a principal foreign policy focus of the Campaign was an improved U.S. relationship with Russia.”
Mr. Papadopoulos meets in Italy with an “overseas professor” (identified by Mr. Papadopoulos as Joseph Mifsud) whom Mr. Papadopoulos “understood to have substantial connections to Russian government officials.” (Mr. Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about his contacts with Mr. Mifsud. Mr. Mifsud hasn’t been charged and has denied any wrongdoing.)
Russian hackers send spear-phishing email to John Podesta, the chairman of Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, with fake security instructions. Hackers succeed in stealing more than 50,000 of his emails.
Mr. Papadopoulos meets with Mr. Mifsud and a Russian woman introduced as a relative of Mr. Putin, although Mr. Papadopoulos later learns she isn’t. Mr. Papadopoulos then emails the campaign supervisor (identified by The Wall Street Journal as Sam Clovis) that he has just met with his “good friend” the professor, who introduced him to “Putin’s niece,” and that they discussed arranging “a meeting between us and the Russian leadership to discuss U.S.-Russia ties under President Trump.” Mr. Clovis responds that he would “work it through the campaign” but that no commitments should be made. (Mr. Clovis hasn’t been accused of wrongdoing. His lawyer has said his responses to Mr. Papadopoulos were expressions of courtesy.)
At a meeting with Mr. Trump and campaign foreign-policy advisers, Mr. Papadopoulos says he has the connections to arrange a Trump-Putin meeting.
Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks, false online personas set up by Russians, use overlapping computer infrastructure and financing to tap the same pool of bitcoin funds to purchase a VPN account and lease a server in Malaysia. The same server is used to register malicious domains used to hack Democratic organizations.
Russians with Project Lakhta start posting online ads advocating for the election of Mr. Trump or opposing Mrs. Clinton. For example, an ad posted April 6 says, “You know, a great number of black people support us saying that #HillaryClintonIsNotMyPresident.” Similar ads are posted through November.
Mr. Papadopoulos emails “Putin’s niece” about arranging a meeting between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
“Putin’s niece” writes back saying she “would be very pleased to support your initiatives between our two countries.” Mr. Papadopoulos responds to ask about setting up “a potential foreign-policy trip to Russia.” “Putin’s niece” says, “I have already alerted my personal links to our conversation and your request. … As mentioned we are all very excited by the possibility of a good relationship with Mr. Trump. The Russian Federation would love to welcome him once his candidature would be officially announced.”
After gaining access to a computer at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, hackers search for terms such as “hillary,” “cruz” and “trump,” and copy folders including “Benghazi Investigations.”
Mr. Mifsud introduces Mr. Papadopoulos to “an individual in Moscow” who tells Mr. Papadopoulos he has connections to Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Mr. Papadopoulos and the Russian MFA connection have “multiple conversations over Skype and email about setting ‘the groundwork’ for a ‘potential’ meeting.”
The Russian MFA connection emails Mr. Papadopoulos thanking him “for an extensive talk” and proposing “to meet in London or in Moscow.”
Mr. Papadopoulos emails the senior Trump policy adviser: “The Russian government has an open invitation by Putin for Mr. Trump to meet him when he is ready.”
Mr. Mifsud tells Mr. Papadopoulos at a London hotel breakfast that the Russians have “dirt” on Mrs. Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.” Mr. Papadopoulos understands that the professor has just met with Russian officials in Moscow.
Mr. Papadopoulos emails the senior Trump policy adviser: “Have some interesting messages coming in from Moscow about a trip when the time is right.” He also emails a high-ranking campaign official “to discuss Russia’s interest in hosting Mr. Trump.”
The Russian MFA connection emails Mr. Papadopoulos and the professor, saying “I have just talked to my colleagues from the MFA. The[y] are open for cooperation. One of the options is to make a meeting for you at the North America Desk, if you are in Moscow.” Mr. Papadopoulos forwards the email to “a high-ranking campaign official,” asking, “Is this something we want to move forward with?”
Mr. Sater writes to Mr. Cohen about a possible trip by Mr. Trump to Moscow to discuss the Trump Tower project: “I had a chat with Moscow. ASSUMING the trip does happen the question is before or after the convention.”
Mr. Sater writes to Mr. Cohen that a Russian official wants to invite Mr. Cohen to Russia in June, and possibly introduce him to Mr. Putin. Over an unspecified period of time, Mr. Cohen discusses the status of the project with Mr. Trump on more than three occasions, and briefs Trump family members.
Mr. Mifsud emails Mr. Papadopoulos with an update, saying, “We will continue to liaise through you with the Russia counterparts in terms of what is needed for a high level meeting of Mr. Trump with the Russian Federation.”
Mr. Papadopoulos emails the high-ranking campaign official to say the “Russian government…relayed to me that they are interested in hosting Mr. Trump.”
Russians working with Project Lakhta, posing as Americans, begin communicating with an American activist in Texas who advises they focus their activities on “purple states like Colorado, Virginia & Florida.” The Russians thereafter commonly refer to targeting purple states.
Russians begin staging and releasing tens of thousands of stolen emails and documents using fictitious online personas, including DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0
Around this time, Roger Stone, an informal political adviser to Mr. Trump, tells “senior Trump Campaign officials” that WikiLeaks has documents damaging to Mrs. Clinton. (Mr. Stone has been charged with lying to Congress about his efforts to obtain information on WikiLeaks’ plans. He has denied wrongdoing and says he never had advance knowledge of the organization’s plans.)
Mr. Cohen tells Mr. Sater he won’t be travelling to Russia at that time.
The Democratic National Committee announces its computer systems have been breached by hackers linked to the Russian government.
Mr. Papadopoulos emails the high-ranking campaign official about a “New message from Russia,” saying if Mr. Trump is unable to make it to Russia, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs asks if a campaign rep–“me or someone else”–can go instead.
WikiLeaks sends a private message to Guccifer 2.0, asking Guccifer 2.0 to send “any new material [stolen from the DNC] here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing.” (WikiLeaks has denied Russian involvement in its release of Democratic materials during the election.)
Russians with Project Lakhta, through social-media accounts including “Being Patriotic” and @March_for_Trump, host a rally in New York called “March for Trump.” Through the summer they organize other rallies, such as “Support Hillary. Save American Muslims,” “Down with Hillary,” and “Florida Goes Trump.”
Guccifer 2.0 sends WikiLeaks an encrypted file that it says contains instructions on how to access an online archive of stolen DNC documents. WikiLeaks confirms receipt four days later and says it will start releasing documents “this week.”

Republican convention formally nominates Donald Trump as the party’s candidate for president.
WikiLeaks releases documents stolen from the Democratic National Committee.
After WikiLeaks releases the DNC documents, a “senior Trump Campaign official” is directed to contact Mr. Stone about additional releases. Mr. Stone then tells the Trump campaign about potential future damaging releases.
Mr. Stone emails Jerome Corsi, an author and conspiracy theorist: “Get to [WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange]” and “get the pending [Wikileaks] emails…they deal with Foundation, allegedly.” (Mr. Corsi hasn’t been charged. He says he rejected a plea deal and never intentionally lied to prosecutors. WikiLeaks and Mr. Assange have said they never communicated with Mr. Stone.)
Mr. Trump, speaking to reporters, refers to emails from Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. “Russia–if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he says.
Later that day, Russian military intelligence officers try for the first time to spear-phish email accounts used by Mrs. Clinton’s personal office.
Mr. Stone tells Mr. Corsi that his associate in the U.K. should go see Mr. Assange, who is living in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
Mr. Corsi emails Mr. Stone and says: “Word is friend in embassy plans 2 more dumps. … Impact planned to be very damaging.”
Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy Richard Gates meet at New York’s Havana Club with Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime business associate of theirs in Kiev whom the FBI believes has a relationship with Russian intelligence. (Mr. Manafort was convicted and pleaded guilty on charges related to work he did for the Ukrainian government. Mr. Gates pleaded guilty on similar charges. Mr. Kilimnik was charged with obstruction of justice; he hasn’t responded to the charges but has denied ties to Russian intelligence.)
Russians with Project Lakhta purchase ads promoting a Facebook post that alleges, “Hillary Clinton has already committed voter fraud during the Democrat Iowa Caucus.” The group in ensuing months posts other allegations of voter fraud by Democrats on its social-media accounts and buys ads to promote the posts.
Mr. Stone says at a public event that he has communicated with WikiLeaks’ Mr. Assange. He repeats similar statements throughout August.
WikiLeaks issues a statement denying direct communication with Mr. Stone. Mr. Stone then says his communication with WikiLeaks is through an intermediary.
Posing as Guccifer 2.0, Russian operatives receive a request for stolen documents from an unnamed candidate for Congress. Operatives send the candidate “stolen documents related to the candidate’s opponent.”
Mr. Clovis tells Mr. Papadopoulos, “I would encourage you” to “make the trip…if it is feasible,” regarding an off-the-record meeting with Russian officials.
Guccifer 2.0 writes to a person “in regular contact with senior members” of the Trump campaign (identified by The Wall Street Journal as Mr. Stone), saying, “thank u for writing back … do u find anyt[h]ing interesting in the docs i posted?” Guccifer 2.0 later writes, “please tell me if i can help u anyhow … it would be a great pleasure to me.”
Russians with Project Lakhta are contacted by Trump campaign supporters at accounts the Russians have set up under false identities and are given the email addresses for three Trump campaign officials. The Russians, under false identities, email the officials about the Russians’ efforts to stage pro-Trump rallies across Florida on Aug. 20.
Mr. Assange is a guest on a radio show hosted by Randy Credico. Two days later, Mr. Credico tells Mr. Stone: “[Assange] has kryptonite on Hillary.” (Mr. Credico hasn’t been accused of wrongdoing. He has said he is willing to testify on his communications with Mr. Stone.)
Guccifer 2.0 refers to the stolen DCCC documents posted online, asking Mr. Stone, “what do u think of the info on the turnout model for the democrats entire presidential campaign.” Mr. Stone responds, “[p]retty standard.”
Mr. Stone emails Mr. Credico an article on allegations about Mrs. Clinton, saying, “Please ask [Assange] for any State or HRC e-mail from August 10 to August 30–particularly on August 20, 2011 that mention [the Libyan civil war] or confirm this narrative.”
Mr. Stone texts Mr. Credico: “Pass my message…to [Assange].” Mr. Credico responds: “I did.”
Mr. Gates is in touch with Mr. Kilimnik.
Mr. Credico texts Mr. Stone: “big news Wednesday…now pretend u don’t know me…Hillary’s campaign will die this week.” The press had previously reported Mr. Assange planned an announcement on Oct. 4.
Mr. Stone emails Mr. Credico: “WTF?” with a link to an article reporting WikiLeaks cancelled its announcement. Mr. Credico responds: “head fake.”
Mr. Stone tells a “supporter involved with the Trump campaign:” “Spoke to my friend in London last night. The payload is still coming.”
Mr. Assange holds a press conference but doesn’t announce any new Clinton materials. “A high-ranking Trump campaign official” (identified by The Wall Street Journal as Trump campaign chief executive Stephen Bannon) sends Mr. Stone a message asking about the status of future releases. Mr. Stone says Mr. Assange had a “security concern,” but that WikiLeaks would release “a load every week going forward.” The supporter involved with the Trump campaign also asks Mr. Stone about the status. Mr. Stone tells the supporter more material is coming. (Mr. Bannon hasn’t been accused of wrongdoing. His lawyer has declined to comment.)
WikiLeaks begins releasing emails from Clinton campaign chairman Podesta, minutes after the Washington Post releases a tape in which Mr. Trump is recorded making lewd comments about women, and after U.S. intelligence agencies allege publicly that the Russian government is trying to interfere in the U.S. election. The WikiLeaks releases continue through Nov. 7, 2016, and total more than 50,000 stolen documents in 33 tranches.
Shortly after the first release, a Bannon associate texts Mr. Stone: “well done.”
Russians with Project Lakhta post messages on an Instagram account they control called “Woke Blacks” decrying those planning to vote for Mrs. Clinton because they don’t like Mr. Trump. “We cannot resort to the lesser of two devils. Then we’d surely be better off without voting AT ALL,” the post says. Other posts around that time also seek to encourage minority groups not to vote or to vote for a third-party presidential candidate.

Donald Trump is elected president.
A day after Egypt submits a resolution to the U.N. Security Council on Israeli settlements, a “very senior member” of the transition team (identified by The Wall Street Journal as Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner) directs Michael Flynn, a former general who was slated to be Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, to contact officials of foreign governments, including Russia. Mr. Flynn is told to influence those governments to delay or defeat the vote on the U.N. resolution. Mr. Flynn contacts Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. (Mr. Flynn has pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about calls with the Russian ambassador. Mr. Kushner hasn’t been accused of any wrongdoing; his lawyer declined to comment.)
Mr. Kislyak tells Mr. Flynn that if the resolution comes to a vote, Russia won’t vote against it.
President Barack Obama imposes sanctions on Russia for electoral interference. Mr. Kislyak contacts Mr. Flynn.
Mr. Flynn calls “a senior official” on the transition team, who was with other senior members at Mr. Trump’s resort in Mar-a-Lago, Fla. The two discuss that transition team members at Mar-a-Lago “did not want Russia to escalate the situation.” Mr. Flynn then calls Mr. Kislyak to request “that Russia not escalate the situation and only respond to the U.S. Sanctions in a reciprocal manner.” Mr. Flynn calls the official to report the substance of his call, including the discussion of sanctions.
Russian President Putin says Russia won’t retaliate for the sanctions at that time.
Mr. Kislyak tells Mr. Flynn that Russia has chosen not to retaliate in response to Mr. Flynn’s request, and Mr. Flynn reports the conversation to “senior members” of the transition team.

Donald Trump is inaugurated as president.
March 22, 2019
The sugar industry has contributed to the demise of the Everglades for decades, using the ecosystem as a giant septic tank and blocking the natural flow of water from Lake O. To save them, and all who call them home, we must reestablish the southern flow and get clean freshwater sent to the right place at the right time.
Meet the residents of America’s Everglades
The sugar industry has contributed to the demise of the Everglades for decades, using the ecosystem as a giant septic tank and blocking the natural flow of water from Lake O. To save them, and all who call them home, we must reestablish the southern flow and get clean freshwater sent to the right place at the right time.
Posted by Everglades-Trust on Friday, March 22, 2019
“As a result of the change, an estimated 60-90 percent of U.S. waterways could lose federal protections that currently shield them from pollution and development.”

“As a result of the change, an estimated 60-90 percent of U.S. waterways could lose federal protections that currently shield them from pollution and development,” The Intercept’s Sharon Lerner reported on Friday. (Photo: wonderisland/Shutterstock)
In a move environmentalists are warning will seriously endanger drinking water and wildlife nationwide, President Donald Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reportedly gearing up to hand yet another gift to big polluters by drastically curtailing the number of waterways and wetlands protected under the Clean Water Act.
“The rollback will take us backward. And most people don’t remember just how bad that was.”
—Daniel Estrin, Waterkeeper Alliance
“As a result of the change, an estimated 60-90 percent of U.S. waterways could lose federal protections that currently shield them from pollution and development,” The Intercept‘s Sharon Lerner reported on Friday, citing an analysis by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. “The new Trump administration rule imposes the most substantial restrictions on the Clean Water Act since its passage in 1972.”
Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said if the new rule—which is expected to be unveiled on Tuesday—takes effect, corporations will be free to “dump as much crap into” rivers and streams as they want.
“For some parts of the country, it’s a complete wiping away of the Clean Water Act,” Hartl concluded.
The Obama-era Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule, which the Trump administration has long been aiming to roll back, was designed to limit pollution in most of the nation’s large bodies of water in an effort to protect drinking water from contamination.
The Trump EPA is attempting to reinterpret the WOTUS rule in a way that allows oil giants, real estate developers, and golf course owners to freely pollute rivers and streams. Critics have pointed out that Trump’s businesses may stand to profit from any weakening of the WOTUS rule.
According to E&E News, which obtained a copy of EPA talking points, the Trump administration’s rule “will erase federal protections from streams that flow only following rainfall, as well as wetlands not physically connected to larger waterways.”
“The exact number of wetlands and waterways losing federal protections won’t be known until the full, detailed proposal is released,” E&E News reported on Thursday.
Daniel Estrin, general counsel and advocacy director at Waterkeeper Alliance, argued that the success of the Clean Water Act—while far from complete—has led many to forget how contaminated and visibly polluted the nation’s water supply was before the law.
“The rollback will take us backward,” Estrin warned of the EPA’s proposed rule. “And most people don’t remember just how bad that was.”
March 24, 2019
Amazing what a country can do with long term vision and goals of caring for its citizens first, before subsidizing its industries. From what I’ve seen most of the industrial funding goes into university R&D, with industry’s having to buy into the research to get benefits from it. Works really well, with many jointly funded university chairs and labs.
Finland is the happiest country in the world
So what's their secret? 📕 Read more: https://wef.ch/2ulOGUB
Posted by World Economic Forum on Thursday, March 21, 2019