Blitzanalyse zu den Landtagswahlen – Das Ampelsignal für die Republik

Für die CDU sind die Wahlen im Südwesten ein Desaster, die SPD sendet ein Lebenszeichen. Und: Ein bisher wenig beachtetes Dreierbündnis könnte nun auch im Bund gefragt sein. Fünf Lehren. Im Wahlkampfendspurt versuchte es Christian Baldauf noch einmal mit einem einfachen Spruch: »30 Jahre SPD sind genug«, lautete der Slogan des CDU-Spitzenkandidaten in Rheinland-Pfalz. Ein bisschen verzweifelt wirkte das. Als wollten ausgerechnet die bundesweit schwer angeschlagenen Christdemokraten eine Wechselstimmung herbeireden, die es gar nicht gibt. (…) Die Ergebnisse dieser beiden Wahlen dürften auch die Bundespolitik erschüttern, mitprägen. Sie treffen gerade die CDU ins Mark und lenken obendrein den Fokus auf ein Koalitionsmodell, dem bislang wenig Beachtung geschenkt wurde. Fünf Lehren aus den Landtagswahlen: 1. Die Ampel wird zum Modell. Seit 2016 regiert in Rheinland-Pfalz eine Koalition aus SPD, Grünen und FDP – und die Chancen stehen zumindest gut, dass es auch in Zukunft dabei bleibt. Allein das wäre schon historisch: Die Neuauflage einer Ampel – das gab es in Deutschland bislang noch nie. Bundesweit aber galt Rot-Grün-Gelb bislang allenfalls als Außenseitermodell. Das könnte sich nun ändern. Denn auch in Baden-Württemberg scheint die Ampel nun möglich. Auch wenn Ministerpräsident Kretschmann zuletzt noch einmal auf Schmusekurs zu seinem aktuellen Koalitionspartner, der CDU, gegangen war: An der Grünenbasis dürfte der Druck schnell groß werden, die Christdemokraten aus der Regierung zu werfen.

via spiegel: Blitzanalyse zu den Landtagswahlen – Das Ampelsignal für die Republik

#PARLER BLOCKED BY #APPLE AGAIN BECAUSE IT CAN’T STOP USERS POSTING #NAZI SYMBOLS, #MISOGYNY, AND #HOMOPHOBIA

‘Derogatory terms regarding race, religion and sexual orientation, as well as Nazi symbols’ were reportedly found on the platform. Right-wing social media app Parler has reportedly been blocked from rejoining Apple’s App Store by the smartphone company, due to racism, misogyny, and homophobia on the platform. Apple had requested that Parler change its moderation practices, but Bloomberg reports that Parler users were still active with profile images that included swastikas, white nationalist imagery, and a litany of hateful posts. “Simple searches reveal highly objectionable content, including easily identified offensive uses of derogatory terms regarding race, religion and sexual orientation, as well as Nazi symbols,” Apple reportedly wrote to Parler. “For these reasons your app cannot be returned to the App Store for distribution until it complies with the guidelines.” Parler’s community guidelines were reportedly written by Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff. “Developers are required to implement robust moderation capabilities to proactively identify, prevent and filter this objectionable content to protect the health and safety of users,” Apple also wrote in its letter. “After having reviewed the new information, we do not believe these changes are sufficient to comply with App Store Review guidelines” the company reportedly told Peikoff. “There is no place for hateful, racist, discriminatory content on the App Store.” Parler reportedly terminated its contracts with its three remaining iOS developers, and four other contractors who worked on Parler TV and quality assurance, according to Bloomberg.

via independent: PARLER BLOCKED BY APPLE AGAIN BECAUSE IT CAN’T STOP USERS POSTING NAZI SYMBOLS, MISOGYNY, AND HOMOPHOBIA

Tech & Terrorism: Tech Companies That Algorithmically Amplify Terrorist Content Should Not Receive Section 230 Immunity

As calls for reform to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act continue, lawmakers in Congress have begun shifting their approach from attempting major reform to tailoring it to individual types of content. For instance, one proposal would amend Section 230 to remove liability immunity for a platform if its algorithms amplify, recommend, or promote hateful and terrorist content. Last June, Counter Extremism Project (CEP) Senior Advisor Dr. Hany Farid testified before Congress on the issue of content amplification. He explained that the tech industry’s business model is based on increasing engagement among its userbase and that divisive content, whether conspiratorial or terrorist in nature, does just that. “The point is not about truth or falsehood, but about algorithmic amplification. The point is that social media decides every day what is relevant by recommending it to their billions of users. The point is that social media has learned that outrageous, divisive, and conspiratorial content increases engagement … The vast majority of delivered content is actively promoted by content providers based on their algorithms that are designed in large part to maximize engagement and revenue.” The role algorithmic amplification plays in content consumption is an issue that must be confronted. Last March, Dr. Farid co-authored a report analyzing YouTube’s policies and efforts toward curbing its algorithm’s tendency to spread conspiracy theories. After reviewing eight million recommendations over 15 months, researchers determined the progress YouTube claimed in June 2019 to have reduced the amount of time its users watched recommended videos including conspiracies by 50 percent—and in December 2019 by 70 percent—did not make the “problem of radicalization on YouTube obsolete nor fictional.” The study, A Longitudinal Analysis Of YouTube’s Promotion Of Conspiracy Videos, found that a more complete analysis of YouTube’s algorithmic recommendations showed the proportion of conspiratorial recommendations is “now only 40 percent less common than when the YouTube’s measures were first announced.”

via counterextremism: Tech & Terrorism: Tech Companies That Algorithmically Amplify Terrorist Content Should Not Receive Section 230 Immunity

This New Trump Call Tape Makes His Legal Trouble in Georgia Even Worse

Experts say this new recording could help prosecutors overcome one of their biggest challenges: proving Trump’s state of mind. Former President Trump’s legal trouble in Georgia just got worse.  A brand-new audiotape of Trump urging a Georgia election official to find the “right answer” while checking ballots for irregularities could help prosecutors build a case against him, legal experts said.  The six-minute tape from December follows the infamous hourlong call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, which helped launch a criminal investigation into Trump, led by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, over potential election fraud. Experts say this new recording could help prosecutors overcome one of the biggest challenges they face: proving Trump’s state of mind.  In late December, when Georgia was conducting an audit of ballot signatures from the November election, Trump placed a call to the lead investigator, Frances Watson, who reacted with surprise that the president of the United States would take time to reach out to a mid-level state election official. At the time, Georgia was among a handful of key battleground states Trump needed in his column in order to flip his 2020 defeat into a victory—and the margin was razor-thin. “Something bad happened,” Trump told Watson, according to a recording obtained by VICE News. “When the right answer comes out, you’ll be praised.”  (…) Trump was more succinct and restrained on this six-minute call than he was in a subsequent, hour-long, taped call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. In that previously-released conversation, on January 2, Trump urged Raffensperger to help him “find” exactly enough votes to let him win the state, and switched tones between flattering, cajoling, and threatening.  This new call doesn’t appear to contain any outright criminal behavior, legal experts said. But the context still matters. 

via vice: This New Trump Call Tape Makes His Legal Trouble in Georgia Even Worse 

Trump Official Charged in Capitol Riots Had a Rap Sheet and Still Got Top-Secret Clearance

Federico “Freddie” Klein, a Trump State Department official and campaign staffer, was charged with assault and theft in 2013, according to charging documents obtained by VICE News. The former State Department official accused of brawling with Capitol Police during the Jan. 6 riot had a number of previous run-ins with the law—including a 2013 assault charge. Less than four years before he joined the State Department as a Trump administration political appointee, Federico “Freddie” Klein allegedly assaulted a woman, stealing two items from her car after wrestling her out of the way during an altercation. According to charging documents obtained by VICE News from the Baltimore County circuit court, a woman named Carol Anderson who volunteered with the anti-abortion group American Life League told police that she had an argument with Klein on July 25, 2013, that turned physical. (…) “Umm, I think I’ll take this, too,” then reached in and, to taunt her, stole a mask she wore during the protests. He then hopped into the car of another pro-life protester she claimed had previously threatened her to stay away from a protest.  Klein was initially charged with second-degree assault, robbery, and theft under $1,000. The charges were reduced to second-degree assault and theft under $100 in 2014, and then the case was basically put on ice. It was classified as “stet,” which attorneys say is essentially an agreement between the prosecution and defense to put the trial on indefinite hold, and often used as a way to avoid trying it unless the defendant winds up in further legal trouble.

via vice: Trump Official Charged in Capitol Riots Had a Rap Sheet and Still Got Top-Secret Clearance

This Shop Owner Allegedly Lied About Being Threatened by #BLM. He’s Now Facing a Hate Crime

He allegedly referred to them as “savages” who hang out in “Section 8 housing”, threatened them with an air rifle— and called the cops on them. An upstate New York business owner who called the cops on BLM protesters—after he allegedly hurled racial epithets and threatened them with an air rifle—will be the first person charged under a new law that makes it a crime to weaponize police against Black people. A lawsuit filed by the state’s high-profile attorney general, Letitia James, alleges that David Elmendorf, the former owner of Bumpy Freeze in Schenectady, threatened to harm peaceful demonstrators who protested outside his ice cream shop last June during the nationwide outrage over the police killing of George Floyd. Elmendorf has been charged with a number of hate crimes related to the standoff, most notably for telling local authorities that demonstrators were armed and threatened to kill him. In reality, he was the one who allegedly threatened to shoot a group of more than 50 protestors with a .22-caliber rifle and run them over with his truck, all while hurling racist epithets, the state’s lawsuit alleges. This marks the first time the state is enforcing a law passed by the Legislature giving the AG the authority to bring charges against a person who files a false police report with the intent of getting someone in trouble on the basis of their race. The provision was introduced following the high-profile encounter between Christian Cooper, a Black birdwatcher, and Amy Cooper, a white woman, in Central Park last year. The encounter, in which Amy Cooper threatened to call the police on Christian Cooper after he asked her to keep her dog on a leash, received national attention and became a prime example of how emergency services could be weaponized against Black people.

via vice: This Shop Owner Allegedly Lied About Being Threatened by BLM. He’s Now Facing a Hate Crime.

Even #Trump’s #Defense Secretary During the #Capitol #Riot Blames Him for Inciting It – #terror

Former Acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller told VICE on Showtime he believes Trump’s speech caused the violent mob to attack the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. One of the most senior Cabinet officials in the Trump administration, Acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller, has told VICE on Showtime that he believes the speech made by former President Donald Trump on the morning of January 6 was responsible for causing the mob to violently attack the Capitol later that day. Trump installed Miller after firing his predecessor Mark Esper in the days after the election. Speaking exclusively to VICE on Showtime, Miller said, “Would anybody have marched on the Capitol, and tried to overrun the Capitol, without the president’s speech? I think it’s pretty much definitive that wouldn’t have happened.” (…) Recalling the events of that day, Miller said he wasn’t sure whether Trump was aware that his speech might have such extreme consequences, but he was certain the attack wouldn’t have happened without them. Listening to the remarks that morning, he said he found some of the comments “concerning” and that they set off alarm bells. “It seems cause-and-effect,” Miller said, referring to Trump’s speech and the violent riot that left five people dead. “The question is, did he know he was enraging people to do that? I don’t know.” As the acting defense secretary that day, Miller was ultimately in charge of the military’s response. His comments are significant in that they tie directly to the incitement of insurrection charge that former President Trump was acquitted of at his second impeachment trial in February. Miller was criticized for his part in the response to the Capitol attack, with some faulting the Department of Defense for the time it took to deploy the National Guard. Miller released a statement on January 15 announcing a DOD investigation, and Pentagon officials at the time rejected any blame for having not deployed reinforcement from the National Guard while rioters overran the Capitol Police and ransacked the Capitol building.

via vice: Even Trump’s Defense Secretary During the Capitol Riot Blames Him for Inciting It

Jake Angeli (Qanon Shamon), seen holding a Qanon sign (cropped).jpg
Von TheUnseen011101 – <a rel=”nofollow” class=”external free” href=”https://www.flickr.com/photos/191776019@N08/50818536171/”>https://www.flickr.com/photos/191776019@N08/50818536171/</a>, Gemeinfrei, Link