Categories Government
7 days
30 days
All time
Recent
Popular
So, just before Christmas, Government what it called a "response" to this New York Times account of cronyism in pandemic spending.
And I said, when that "response" - which you can read here https://t.co/gLEJzuqoAx - was published that every single notional rebuttal by Government of a claim made by the New York Times was false, misleading or both.
And it's time for me to make good.
Here's the first "rebuttal" by Government to the New York Times' claim that: "The government handed out thousands of contracts to fight the virus, some of them in a secretive V.I.P. lane."
A number of points might be made.
(1) Government cannot say the NYT got it wrong. (2) the NAO found the VIP lane (later renamed the high-priority lane) "sat alongside" the normal lane. And I have shown elsewhere VIP contracts were handled by different teams all the way through.
(3) Although Govt says "offers of support raised by Opposition MPs were dealt with expeditiously" the NAO report does not record any referrals made by an Opposition MP leading to a contract - and the Government response telling does not say any did.
And I said, when that "response" - which you can read here https://t.co/gLEJzuqoAx - was published that every single notional rebuttal by Government of a claim made by the New York Times was false, misleading or both.
And it's time for me to make good.
Here's the first "rebuttal" by Government to the New York Times' claim that: "The government handed out thousands of contracts to fight the virus, some of them in a secretive V.I.P. lane."

A number of points might be made.
(1) Government cannot say the NYT got it wrong. (2) the NAO found the VIP lane (later renamed the high-priority lane) "sat alongside" the normal lane. And I have shown elsewhere VIP contracts were handled by different teams all the way through.

(3) Although Govt says "offers of support raised by Opposition MPs were dealt with expeditiously" the NAO report does not record any referrals made by an Opposition MP leading to a contract - and the Government response telling does not say any did.
Pleased to learn that a federal criminal grand jury's subpoena to Twitter to get my personal info was quashed by the judge, despite my association with sketchy accounts like @Popehat and @associatesmind, whom the court refused to do any favors.
(Thread ...)
This started in 2017 with a Twitter thread about the interesting case of John Rivello, who was indicted for assault with "a deadly weapon, to-wit: a Tweet", where the tweet contained an allegedly seizure-inducing GIF and was sent to a known epileptic, @kurteichenwald.
Someone replied to the thread with a sarcastic dig at an FBI agent involved in the case (Nathan Hopp), and then someone else replied to that with a smiley-face emoji.
https://t.co/RcOphROvOP
https://t.co/X48C4ORZsI
Because that last, single-emoji reply was by someone the FBI was investigating (in a matter completely unrelated to Rivello), the feds reacted by demanding Twitter hand over all its information on everyone in the thread (for the suspicious act of being replied to by randos).
Twitter, through @PerkinsCoieLLP partner John K. Roche, admirably fought this subpoena on behalf of its users, three times: before a USMJ, then a USDJ, then the MJ again. The result was this sealed 35-page opinion (now
(Thread ...)

This started in 2017 with a Twitter thread about the interesting case of John Rivello, who was indicted for assault with "a deadly weapon, to-wit: a Tweet", where the tweet contained an allegedly seizure-inducing GIF and was sent to a known epileptic, @kurteichenwald.

Someone replied to the thread with a sarcastic dig at an FBI agent involved in the case (Nathan Hopp), and then someone else replied to that with a smiley-face emoji.
https://t.co/RcOphROvOP
https://t.co/X48C4ORZsI

Nathan Hopp is the least busy FBI agent of all time.
— Mike Honcho (@dawg8u) March 20, 2017
Because that last, single-emoji reply was by someone the FBI was investigating (in a matter completely unrelated to Rivello), the feds reacted by demanding Twitter hand over all its information on everyone in the thread (for the suspicious act of being replied to by randos).

Twitter, through @PerkinsCoieLLP partner John K. Roche, admirably fought this subpoena on behalf of its users, three times: before a USMJ, then a USDJ, then the MJ again. The result was this sealed 35-page opinion (now
Austin, Texas:
Connecting the Dots
On Dec 15, I created a thread which showed that the City of Austin did in fact have a contract w Solarwinds which was procured through Insight Public Sector. SolarWinds hack linked toRussian group — APT29 aka Cozy
Connecting the Dots
On Dec 15, I created a thread which showed that the City of Austin did in fact have a contract w Solarwinds which was procured through Insight Public Sector. SolarWinds hack linked toRussian group — APT29 aka Cozy
1. CITY of AUSTIN :
— Blue Canaries (@CanariesBlue) December 15, 2020
You've been HACKED!
In Apr. 2019, the Austin City Council approved a contract w Insight Public Sector., a procurement company, in order to indirectly hire SolarWinds. pic.twitter.com/2v9cGgkr0F
1. BREAKING
3 major corporations say they'll suspend donations to the Republican Attorneys General Association, which helped drive participation in last Wed's events
@Facebook
@Lyft
@DoorDash
Follow along for more on these 3 plus 60 other
@lyft @DoorDash 2. University of Phoenix (@UOPX) is taking things a step further.
The for-profit university, which donated $50,400 to RAGA last year, is demanding its money back
"We have asked RAGA to return our contribution to us as soon as
3. @Lyft tells https://t.co/Gl6evXRDcZ that it "not be renewing our membership in RAGA for 2021"
@Facebook says it was "surprised and appalled" by the RAGA's conduct
4. @DoorDash says that "Any individual or organization that encouraged or facilitated this horrific behavior must be held accountable."
All this is a wakeup call for the Republican Attorneys General Association, which has accepted NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS INVOLVEMENT
5. More details coming in this thread. But if you value this kind of work, please subscribe to our newsletter, Popular Information.
It's free to sign up.
The newsletter, not this Twitter account, is what makes this work
3 major corporations say they'll suspend donations to the Republican Attorneys General Association, which helped drive participation in last Wed's events
@Lyft
@DoorDash
Follow along for more on these 3 plus 60 other
@lyft @DoorDash 2. University of Phoenix (@UOPX) is taking things a step further.
The for-profit university, which donated $50,400 to RAGA last year, is demanding its money back
"We have asked RAGA to return our contribution to us as soon as
3. @Lyft tells https://t.co/Gl6evXRDcZ that it "not be renewing our membership in RAGA for 2021"
@Facebook says it was "surprised and appalled" by the RAGA's conduct
4. @DoorDash says that "Any individual or organization that encouraged or facilitated this horrific behavior must be held accountable."
All this is a wakeup call for the Republican Attorneys General Association, which has accepted NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS INVOLVEMENT
5. More details coming in this thread. But if you value this kind of work, please subscribe to our newsletter, Popular Information.
It's free to sign up.
The newsletter, not this Twitter account, is what makes this work
I don't normally do threads like this but I did want to provide some deeper thoughts on the below and why having a video game based on a real world war crime from the same people that received CIA funding isn't the best idea.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
I couldn't possibly guess why Six Days in Fallujah is being revived at a time when US army recruitment is at an all time low.
— Daniel Ahmad (@ZhugeEX) February 11, 2021
This reboot is from the same people that worked with the FBI and CIA on training systems and is basing its game on excusing US war crimes. pic.twitter.com/5H8vVqKh9s
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
