It's Worse Than It Appears
A few more semi-quick thoughts about the Comrade Trump indictments. First, I'm a criminal defense guy. I spent several years as a private investigator specializing in criminal defense work. So I'm in the habit of looking at criminal cases brought by the State and trying to find weaknesses. This may be the most solid indictment I've ever seen, largely because Trump is such a reckless, unthinking criminal.
Second, there's a discrepancy between the number of classified documents seized during the search of Mar-a-Lago and the number of documents listed in the indictment. There are at least a dozen documents identified as top secret that were seized but not included in the indictment. The assumption is that the information in those documents was too sensitive to even be mentioned in passing in a public trial. That suggests Trump's crimes were even worse than those included in the indictment.
Third, what isn't being discussed (or at least isn't being discussed enough) is the actual harm brought by Trump's crimes. This isn't just a matter of Trump taking classified documents he had no right to take, and lying about them, and hiding them from the FBI. It's an actual matter of national security AND of human lives.
Having seen how cavalier Trump was with highly sensitive information provided to the US by the intelligence agencies of our allies, those allies have NO reason to ever trust us with sensitive information again. That's especially true if Trump isn't held accountable for this. Our credibility in the international intelligence community has turned to shit.
Beyond that, there's the very real risk to the intelligence agents and/or assets who have risked their liberty, safety, and lives to gather and collect the information contained in those documents. We KNOW that some of the Mar-a-Lago material was classified as HCS (HUMINT Control Systems). We're talking clandestine human intelligence, serious spy stuff–the activities, capabilities, techniques, processes, and procedures spies use. If our enemies know WHAT information we have, they can start figuring out WHERE that information came from, and WHO provided it.
We also KNOW that a few months after Trump took that material to Mar-a-Lago, there was a 'covcom' breach. Covcom refers to the classified covert communications systems used by the CIA. The breach exposed a number of agency assets, especially in China and Iran. A number of informants had to be extracted; others were reportedly captured and executed. US counterintelligence officials warned every CIA station about the breach. Back in October of 2021, the London Times reported the suspicion that there was a 'super mole' in the US government betraying CIA assets. We have no way of knowing if that 'covcom' breach was a result of Trump's egregiously lackadaisical treatment of classified material. But it's possible.
The thing is, this scandal is far worse than it appears in news coverage. The actual harm to our intelligence community is severe and will be long-lasting. The damage will be even worse if Trump isn't held accountable.
Also? Why is there a fucking chandelier in that bathroom? I mean…why?
Boys Will Be Boys
IT's No Wonder…
We All Know Someone Like That
Fingers Crossed
'MURIKA!
Yes, Daddy
365 Days of UNF: Day 161
Last Time Was By Mistake…
Since Money Is Apparently the Only Thing Fascists Understand…
Remember Kids…
You Know What's Missing…
…from this Pantheon of multi-hued striped variations on a theme?
THE FUCKING LEATHER FLAG!
FURTHERMORE…from the dozens of images that were returned via an online search, only a very small percentage of them included it.
And while we're on the subject, if every variation of sexual expression wants to be included in the pride flag, why not just go for this?
It's got a full spread of colors and a nice, neutral background. Oh wait…the front color is orange which (at least in the hanky code) traditionally means "anything, anywhere, anytime." We can't have that. Some might be offended by the blatant implication of licentiousness. And oh yeah…that's a caucasian hand. Can't have that either; it will probably offend some as a symbol of white supremacy holding all others in their grip.
How about this one?
Oh wait…that one has distinct lines. Someone may feel left out and unrepresented. How about this one?
Nope, that's not gonna fly either. Doesn't include white, black, gray, or brown.
What about this one?
It's got white, black, brown and pretty much every color you can think of, with no distinct lines. You should be able to find your own, unique spot in there. But remember, the human eye can only perceive about one million colors, so don't go micromanaging your sexual identity too much otherwise there won't be a color for you.
Right?
Don't Ever Change
Stay Toxic
Who Wants Cake?
We've All Been There
Oopsie!
Triptych
#relateable
That Ex-Military UFO Whistleblower…
365 Days of UNF: Day 160
Oopsie!
When a Synthetic Parent is Better than Today's Republican
It's Been a Good Day
"What Are You Waiting For?"
365 Days of UNF: Day 159
Can You Blame Them?
From WSJ:
A New CEO Says Employees Can't Work Remotely After All, and They Revolt
After insurer Farmers Group told staff last year they would be remote, some sold cars or moved to new cities
Farmers Group Chief Executive Raul Vargas sees in-office work as a driver of collaboration, creativity and innovation. Photo: Farmers Group Inc
After insurance-industry company Farmers Group told employees last year that most of them would be remote workers, many made significant lifestyle changes in response to the policy. Some sold their cars, others expanded home offices or moved their families to new cities.
Then last month, Raul Vargas, who recently took over as chief executive, said he was reversing the approach. He would require the majority of Farmers employees to be in the office three days a week.
Some workers said on the internal social network that they are prepared to quit their jobs. Others have called for unionizing.
"I was hired as a remote worker and was promised that was the company culture moving forward," a worker who specializes in medical claims posted. "This is seemingly a power move that is frankly disgusting."
Another employee in the claims division wrote: "I sold my house and moved closer to my grandkids. So sad that I made a huge financial decision based on a lie."
In an email to employees viewed by the Journal, Vargas explained his decision, saying he believed in the importance of in-office work for "collaboration, creativity and innovation."
The company will have "the opportunity to combine the best of both worlds—all that we've gained from flexible and virtual work with all the teamwork and collaboration we get when we work together in the office," Vargas said.
A Farmers spokeswoman said the new system will include about 60% of the company's U.S. workforce of about 22,000 employees. She pointed out that the announced policy wouldn't go into effect until September, giving workers three months to adjust and make arrangements.
Farmers believes that as business conditions change, "so must business approaches," the spokeswoman said. Employees said the shift is unfair because they made life decisions based on statements made by the company that the remote policy would be permanent.
The uproar at Los Angeles-based Farmers represents an emerging tension point in the return-to-office saga. New management teams are imposing stricter workplace policies on employees who counted on more-flexible work regimens being permanent. Chief executives Robert Iger at Walt Disney Co. and David Risher at Lyft also have faced pushback from some employees after recently announcing stricter office policies.
Office landlords applaud these decisions. They see the return-to-office push by new bosses as a crucial step toward reversing the slide in rent prices, occupancy levels and property values.
But the reaction by Farmers' workforce shows the determination by many employees to resist these efforts. While the pushback is most intense against companies trying to restore the five days a week in the office, hybrid workplace strategies have also triggered protests, petitions, walkouts and other harsh employee responses, say corporate recruiters and human-resources executives.
In Seattle last week, hundreds of Amazon.com workers held a lunchtime demonstration against the company's policy returning employees to the office three days a week. New York City Mayor Eric Adams also said last week that thousands of employees at city agencies would be allowed to work remotelytwice a week, departing from the previous policy requiring them to be in the office five days after workers complained.
Many employees see mandates to be in the office even three or four days a week as "a betrayal of trust," said Dan Kaplan, a senior client partner at Korn Ferry, one of the world's largest recruiting firms. "You said I wouldn't have to do that. We're just as productive," he said of the worker perspective. "Why should that have to change?"
With the job market tight, businesses are taking these reactions seriously. In an April survey by Korn Ferry, 72% of workers said they would choose a job with a lower salary if it offered flexibility to work from home, while 58% said going back to the office would have a negative impact on their mental health.
On the other hand, in some industries, most companies are adopting hybrid workplace policies, limiting the workers' ability to switch jobs to continue working from home. Insurance is one of these. In May, 52% of insurance companies had mandated hybrid arrangements, up from 34% in February, according to Scoop Technologies, a software firm that developed an index monitoring workplace strategies of close to 4,500 companies.
And what do I have to say to this?
This Was an Accident
As you know, I've been participating in Apple's Public Beta programs for years. Early on (I think it was pre-Mavericks, actually) I learned the hard way that you do NOT install a beta on your main daily driver. Since that unfortunate mishap, I haven't stopped installing betas; I've just learned how to do it safely. Namely, by either installing on an external drive, or on a wholly separate partition on the main drive. The latter has been my preferred method for the last several iterations. And even then, I don't usually jump into the fray until Beta 3 or 4.
Well imagine my surprise when I saw the new MacOS Sonoma showing up as an available update in my System Preferences today. I guess you don't even need to be a member of the cordoned-off Public Beta program any more and—if you're foolhardy enough—to delve right into the Developer Beta Universe.
Okay, I thought. Why not? I'll create a separate partition and direct the installer to go there. Beta 1 is going to be fraught with danger, but it's safely tucked away from my critical data so what's the harm?
Well, it turns out this beta (and perhaps all developer releases?) doesn't follow the normal install routine. I clicked "upgrade" and it did not offer the customary screen prompting me where I'd like to install it. It simply rebooted and started installing.
Oh shit, I thought. Thankfully, I had last night's full-disk backup so I knew if I had to go back to Ventura I could. It wouldn't be pretty, and it would take several hours to reinstall the OS over the air and then restore all my data, but at least I had that safety net.
After about 20 minutes, the Sonoma install completed and brought me to the log in screen. "So far, so good," I thought. I logged in and everything came up normally.
Except…I had no internet connectivity. It showed I was connected via WiFi to my home network, but whenever I tried to go anywhere online I got notice that "You are not connected to the internet." I tried connecting via my phone's hotspot. I tried via the Cox shared network point. Nothing.
I turned off my VPN. I turned off the firewall. I turned off my ad blockers. Still nothing. Of course, there was not much info on the web about this yet, so after screwing around with it for about a half hour, I said fuck it, rebooted, wiped the drive, and two hours later Ventura was back up and running.