Firm with $297 Million Government Contract to Boost Border Patrol Hires Only 15 Agents

In a fleecing of American taxpayers, a company with a $297 million government contract to hire Border Patrol agents has only managed to enlist 15. No joke. A year ago, the Trump administration contracted the Arlington, Virginia-based firm, Accenture Federal Service, to recruit 7,500 new agents to help fortify the famously porous border. A year — and millions of dollars later — the company has fallen shamelessly short of fulfilling the terms of the deal. Apparently, 33 additional candidates have accepted job offers but they haven’t officially started working for the agency.


The embarrassing figures were provided by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) this week to an online news site that covers the federal government. Penned last November, the government’s five-year contract with Accenture calls for bringing 5,000 Border Patrol agents, 2,000 CBP officers, and 500 air & marine officers. So far, the agency has doled out $43 million and the cash will keep flowing until it reaches the contract’s nearly $300 million limit unless the government terminates the agreement. Those who bother doing the math will discover that under the deal it will cost Uncle Sam around $40,000 for each new hire, a figure that’s roughly equal to a Border Patrol agent’s starting annual salary.


The online news article that exposed this travesty quotes several unnamed sources at the Homeland Security agency, including a genderless CBP “spokesperson” who said Accenture has 3,700 additional candidates in the hiring process and that the company expects a “gradual increase of candidates.” Another CBP source trashed the Accenture deal, saying the following in the story: “This really has been a huge waste of money since Accenture received a large up-front amount, regardless of if they hired anyone,” said the person who called the deal “flawed from the beginning.” The reporter reached out to Accenture but a spokeswoman declined to comment and referred all inquiries to the government.


Earlier this year a senator, who is a ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, questioned the controversial multi-million-dollar Accenture contract. In a letter to CBP’s acting commissioner, Senator Claire McCaskill points out that the agency will still pick up the bill for the most expensive of the hiring costs. This includes medical exams, physical fitness tests, background questionnaires and investigations, interviews, polygraphs, and drug tests. “This means that CBP’s own hiring components may need additional resources to accommodate the increase in personnel,” McCaskill writes, not imagining that only 15 new agents were hired in a year. At the time the agency employed 19,437 Border Patrol agents, 947 Air and Marine interdiction agents, and 23,079 CBP officers.


CBP has long been plagued with corruption and many worry a hiring frenzy could make things worse because the agency will lower standards to meet President Donald Trump’s executive order mandating thousands of new border agents. In the last two years, more than 3,000 CBP employees were disciplined, reprimanded, suspended, or terminated, according to agency records. In 2016, 251 CBP employees were arrested, the records show, and in 2017, the agency reveals that 245 were arrested. In the records, CBP writes that “49 percent of all employee arrests were attributable to criminal conduct.” The stats are processed through the agency’s Joint Intake Center (JIC), a central clearinghouse for receiving, processing and tracking allegations of misconduct involving personnel and contractors employed by CBP. In 2016, JIC saw a 34% increase in misconduct cases over 2015 and a 46% increase in 2017 over the previous year.

SOURCE
https://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2018/11/firm-with-297-mil-govt-contract-to-boost-border-patrol-hires-only-15-agents/

Why big media is addicted to fake news: a lesson from the opioid crisis

MSM Is Like Big Pharma: The Rewards Of Malpractice Outweigh The Penalties






"As part of the plea bargain, Purdue agreed to pay the federal government $600 million and 27 states $20 million. The three executives agreed to $34.5 million in fines but avoided jail-time. By contrast, Purdue has earned an estimated $31 billion in total revenues from extended-release oxycodone since its launch. Rather than deterring fraudulent marketing, the penalties simply became a cost of doing business."

A cost of doing business. The preceding is an excerpt from a Harvard study published last year titled "The Opioid Epidemic: Fixing a Broken Pharmaceutical Market". It describes the illicit marketing practices advanced by Purdue’s executives for its wildly profitable opioid Oxycontin, and how the criminal and civil cases brought against the company for those practices weren’t consequential enough to prevent those practices from remaining highly profitable.

Big pharma has the highest profit margins of any industry in the United States and is also the number one lobbying industry in the United States, a correlation which won’t surprise anyone who knows anything worth knowing about politics in capitalist societies. One of the many, many ways that the US government has collaborated with these massive pharmaceutical corporations to increase their profit margins has been to put into place laws which make them obscenely difficult to sue, therefore rendering the cost of the few lawsuit settlements which get through a mere drop in the bucket of profits made by unethical marketing practices. Even fines for downright illegal practices can be chalked up to mere overhead, with the largest fine ever levied against a drug company being $3 billion against GlaxoSmithKline, which sounds like a lot if you don’t know that Glaxo raked in $27.5 billion just that year.

Which, if you think about it, is kind of like the business practices we’re seeing implemented by corporate media with the establishment-authorized Russiagate conspiracy theory.

If you haven’t heard already, the Guardian has published an article titled "Manafort held secret talks with Assange in Ecuadorian embassy". The story went insanely viral and dominated the trending topics on Twitter yesterday, despite the fact that it contains zero proof for its central claim that Paul Manafort met multiple times with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, despite the fact that the story defies all logic since there’s no reason there wouldn’t be public record of those meetings, and despite the fact that the story’s central figures are aggressively denying its claims. Both Manafort and WikiLeaks have stated that they are interested in taking legal action against the Guardian, with the WikiLeaks Twitter account also going so far as to bet the news outlet "a million dollars and its editor’s head that Manafort never met Assange."

The accusations in the article will never be proven true. Definitive proof that Paul Manafort met with Julian Assange will never surface. There are far too many gaping plot holes in the narrative, far too aggressive a denial from the accused parties, a ridiculous absence of anything resembling proof, as well as the fact that the Guardian has already walked back its headline with the addition of "sources say" and softened some language in the article, and the fact that the article’s author, Luke Harding, is a sniveling establishment sycophant with no interest in truth and an already established history of lying about Assange. The Guardian cannot prove the article’s central claims, and it won’t.

So why publish it? There are a number of possible reasons to consider, but former Guardian employee Glenn Greenwald published an article for The Intercept about the latest Luke Harding debacle in which he brings up one reason that’s probably worth poking at.

"The Guardian does not bother to question, interrogate or explain any of this," Greenwald writes. "It just tosses the word ‘Russians’ into its article in connection with Manafort’s alleged visits to Assange, knowing full well that motivated readers will draw the most inflammatory conclusions possible, thus helping to spread the Guardian’s article all over the internet and generate profit for the newspaper, without bothering to do any of the journalistic work to justify the obvious inference they wanted to create with this sloppy, vague and highly manipulative paragraph."

"In sum," Greenwald adds, "the Guardian published a story today that it knew would explode into all sorts of viral benefits for the paper and its reporters even though there are gaping holes and highly sketchy aspects to the story."

Generate profit, worry about facts and consequences later. The Guardian committed journalistic malpractice to advance a popular conspiracy theory for viral views and profit, and if it’s forced to print a retraction or settle a lawsuit out of court it will be a drop in the bucket of the profits made. A cost of doing business.

In that same article Greenwald writes that apart from its seething institutional hatred of Assange, the Guardian is "an otherwise solid and reliable paper," which I would say is a very charitable view for anyone to take today. In the last few years this outlet has been aggressively trafficking in the Russiagate conspiracy theory to sometimes absurd degrees, like the time it claimed people who are demonstrably real were Russian "bots". It has been viciously and deliberately undermining Jeremy Corbyn with a despicable smear campaign, and has become what is surely the single most virulent promulgator of imperialist war propaganda against Syria on the entire planet. Legendary Australian journalist John Pilger said in an interview earlier this year that anti-imperialist writers like himself had been de-platformed by the paper in a "purge" some three years prior.

"But my written journalism is no longer welcome — probably its last home was The Guardian, which three years ago got rid of people like me and others in pretty much a purge of those who were saying what The Guardian no longer says anymore," Pilger said on the Flashpoint radio show.

At least up until the time of its decision to publish Harding’s deceitful screed, the Guardian has managed to maintain a somewhat respected image as a mainstream outlet which markets itself to the political left. I would say that its doing so is exactly as legitimate as a pharmaceutical company which markets oxycodone as a non-addictive painkiller or markets antidepressants to children despite knowing the disastrous side effects it can give them. The Guardian, at this point, serves no agenda other than those of the intelligence and defense agencies of the western empire, as do the rest of the mass media outlets whose plutocratic owners have a vested interest in manipulating the public into supporting the status quo.

UPDATE: The Guardian has issued an unsurprisingly pathetic statement: "This story relied on a number of sources. We put these allegations to both Paul Manafort and Julian Assange’s representatives prior to publication. Neither responded to deny the visits taking place. We have since updated the story to reflect their denials."

WikiLeaks has responded to this statement by saying that it did indeed deny the claim hours before publication, publicly on its Twitter account. The statement is essentially a suggestion that the Guardian has a right to publish any libelous fabrication it wants about anyone if they don’t quickly send a denial to the proper email address. This may be the closest we’ll ever get to a retraction of this story by this toxic outlet.

SOURCE
  https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/msm-is-like-big-pharma-the-rewards-of-malpractice-outweigh-the-penalties-339836f24558


https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1068143494806626304

At U.S. Supreme Court Argument, Indiana Claims It Can Forfeit Cars For Speeding, Minor Drug Crimes

 

Arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, Indiana’s solicitor general was already trying to defend confiscating a $42,000 Land Rover taken from Tyson Timbs, who sold less than $400 worth of drugs. Before the day was through though, Solicitor General Thomas Fisher found himself arguing that the Constitution would let him forfeit luxury cars caught going five miles over the speed limit.

Both scenarios involved civil forfeiture, which allows law enforcement agencies to seize and keep property, even over the most tenuous links to wrongdoing, as well as the Eighth Amendment’s ban on excessive fines. During Wednesday’s oral argument, Fisher claimed that the latter didn’t apply to the former.

Incredulous of Fisher’s position, Justice Stephen Breyer asked him, “So what is to happen if a state needing revenue says anyone who speeds has to forfeit the Bugatti, Mercedes, or a special Ferrari or even jalopy?”

Fisher responded that “there is no excessive fines issue” for in rem civil forfeitures, and were completely outside the protection of this constitutional safeguard. So a speeding Bugatti would be “forfeitable,” adding that in rem forfeitures “have always been harsh.”


The argument was literally laughable: Breyer and Fisher’s exchange earned some of the biggest laughs that day in court.  But Justice Sonia Sotomayor quickly rebuked Fisher, and reminded him that “up to a certain point in our history, we didn’t apply the Bill of Rights to the states,” which “did things that under incorporation were unconstitutional.”

Initially, the Supreme Court held that the Bill of Rights only limited the power of the federal government. But following the Civil War and the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the High Court began applying, or “incorporating,” those rights against the states. Today, most of the Bill of Rights has been explicitly incorporated, including the rest of the Eighth Amendment (i.e. its bans on cruel and unusual punishment and excessive bail). Yet the Excessive Fines Clause, along with a handful of other rights, like the Third Amendment’s bar on quartering soldiers, hasn’t been fully incorporated.

The last incorporation case the court decided was back in 2010, when it ruled that the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms for self-defense applies to the states. As Justice Samuel Alito explained in McDonald v. Chicago, incorporation hinges on “whether a particular Bill of Rights guarantee is fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty and system of justice.”


In the Timbs oral argument on Wednesday, Justice Neil Gorsuch pointed out that the ban on excessive fines has a “pretty deep history,” with “guarantees against them go[ing] back to Magna Carta and 1225, the English Bill of Rights, the Virginia Declaration of Rights.”


He also seemed bemused that there was even up for debate. “We all agree that the Excessive Fines Clause is incorporated against the states,” Gorsuch said to Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher. “Most of the incorporation cases took place in like the 1940s. And here we are in 2018, still litigating incorporation of the Bill of Rights. Really? Come on, General.”


In a similar vein, Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Fisher, “Isn’t it just too late in the day to argue that any of the Bill of Rights is not incorporated?”

Strong Supreme Court precedent presented another obstacle to Indiana’s arguments. More than 25 years ago, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Austin v. United States that civil forfeitures could be considered fines under the Excessive Fines Clause, if they served, at least in part, as punishment.

As an amicus brief filed by multiple Eighth Amendment scholars noted, “the terms ‘fines’ and ‘forfeitures’ were used interchangeably” in colonial laws and during the Founding era. And in the Timbs case, the state even conceded that the forfeiture statute used was partly punitive.


Little surprise then that Wesley Hottot, the Institute for Justice senior attorney who argued on behalf of Timbs, called the case “constitutional housekeeping” with a “straightforward answer.”

MORE:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2018/11/29/at-u-s-supreme-court-argument-indiana-claims-it-can-forfeit-cars-for-speeding-minor-drug-crimes/#27445eeb2406

Chris Farrell: How the State Dept. Outsources YOUR Tax Dollars to George Soros Front Groups

 

Judicial Watch https://www.judicialwatch.org/t/images/judicial_watch-logo_schema.jpg https://www.judicialwatch.org

Judicial Watch

https://www.judicialwatch.org/t/images/judicial_watch-logo_schema.jpg

 

November 29, 2018- JW Director of Investigations and Research Chris Farrell appeared on “No Spin News” on billoreilly.com to discuss the caravan and its potential source of funding.


View Article
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/in-the-news/chris-farrell-how-the-state-dept-outsources-your-tax-dollars-to-george-soros-front-groups/

 

Jeff Flake’s Sad Exit

He blocks judicial nominees in a futile anti-Trump gesture.



Usually when Congress cancels a committee meeting the country misses nothing more than grandstanding. But this week the Senate Judiciary Committee had to halt progress on confirming talented judges thanks to GOP Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona.

The committee was scheduled to meet Thursday to move some 20 judicial nominees. But Mr. Flake has said he will block all judicial nominees until he receives a vote on a bill that would insulate Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation from normal political accountability. The GOP’s one-seat majority on Judiciary means the party can’t report judges out of committee with a favorable recommendation without Mr. Flake’s vote.

Mr. Flake tried to bring up the Mueller bill on Wednesday but Republicans objected. Then he voted against a procedural motion to move forward on district judge nominee Thomas Farr, which meant Vice President Mike Pence had to break the 50-50 tie on the Senate floor. Judiciary canceled the committee meeting on Wednesday evening.

The judges who won’t move out of committee include six circuit nominees, not least Bridget Bade for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. She’s from Arizona. Ms. Bade was nominated in August, but now she may have to wait until January for the committee’s blessing. She probably isn’t feeling the hometown camaraderie from Mr. Flake.

Mr. Flake’s stunt will have zero effect on President Trump or Mr. Mueller, and he’s compromising a substantive principle to make a futile political gesture. Mr. Flake is hurting the cause of confirming conservative judges who would enforce the Constitution in the name of a bill that is unconstitutional.

The legislation violates the Constitution because it would prevent the special counsel from being fired except by a Senate-confirmed Justice Department official for "good cause." But Article II allows the President to fire inferior officers of the executive branch at will.

Defenders point to the Supreme Court’s 1988 Morrison v. Olson ruling that upheld the late and unlamented independent counsel statute. But Congress let that law expire because it had become a constitutional travesty, as Antonin Scalia so memorably wrote in dissent ("this wolf comes as a wolf"). Justice Brett Kavanaugh said in 2016 that he thought Morrison should be overturned.

Even worse is a provision that would let Mr. Mueller appeal his dismissal to a federal judge. Making Article III judges arbiters of the President’s appointment power undermines the separation of powers and dilutes political accountability. There is no such judicial power in the Constitution unless a President acts unlawfully, and firing Mr. Mueller would be a political mistake but it wouldn’t be unlawful.

Perhaps Mr. Flake, who didn’t run for re-election, is making a political statement in advance of the primary run he says he may make against Mr. Trump in 2020 in New Hampshire. But Republicans are likely to notice that he put his personal feelings about Mr. Trump above confirming judges that any GOP President would be proud to nominate.

Recall that John McCain scuttled the Republican effort to repeal ObamaCare, in part because of his personal distaste for the President. But in the long run he will have harmed the institution he spent his career trying to protect: the military, which is squeezed by unreformed health-care entitlements. Mr. Flake’s self-indulgence is another example of how hostility to Mr. Trump has caused so many people to lose their own political bearings.

SOURCE
  https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-flakes-sad-exit-1543534198

Commercial almond milk exposed as fake beverage thickened with carrageenan instead of almonds

NaturalNews) Commercial almond milk has been exposed as a fake beverage that is thickened with carrageenan instead of almonds

Almond milk is a healthy beverage that is touted by many health advisers for its nutritional benefits. Known since the Middle Ages, almond milk has enjoyed increased popularity in recent years as it has become more widely available. Almond milk is traditionally made from almonds and water. However, many commercially available forms of almond milk contain a substance called carrageenan. Carrageenan is made from red seaweed and is added to the almond milk to thicken and to stabilize the liquid.

What is almond milk?

Almond milk is made by blending almonds and water and then straining the mixture. Sweeteners are sometimes added. In 2014, almond milk surpassed soy milk in popularity. Almond milk contains about 90 calories per eight-ounce cup. It has no saturated fats or cholesterol and is lactose-free. Almond milk contains half of the daily requirement of vitamin E and a good dose of vitamin D, but it contains very little protein. With its creamy, nut-like taste, almond milk is a good alternative to milk in coffee and cereal. Its low calorie content makes it a good food for dieters and those who are lactose intolerant. People who regularly drink almond milk are advised to ensure that they get adequate protein from other plant or animal sources.

Problems with commercial almond milk

With sales exceeding $854 million in 2014, almond milk is becoming a standard milk replacement. One of the problems with commercial almond milk is that it contains only 2 percent almonds. In fact, some of the labels on the commercial varieties list more sweeteners than almonds in the mixture. The labeling laws currently allow companies to use additives instead of the nutritious almonds that consumers expect. For a half-gallon of almond milk, about 144 to 192 almonds are needed; however, only 38 to 50 almonds are used per half-gallon by both Blue Diamond and Silk almond milk. Instead of almonds, the product is thickened with carrageenan, which is void of nutrients. Recently, WhiteWave and Blue Diamond stated they would be removing carrageenan from their products.

Harmful health effects of carrageenan

Carrageenan has been shown to cause numerous health problems, especially in the gastrointestinal tract. Research has shown that exposure to carrageenan could cause ulcers in the colon and possibly even contribute to GI cancers. In 1972, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considered a restriction on dietary carrageenan, but no regulation was put into effect, which means that manufacturers are free to use this product at their discretion.

First used as a food additive in the 1930s, carrageenan is also used as a laxative, a treatment for peptic ulcers, and in toothpaste, room deodorizers, pesticides, cosmetics, and pharmaceutical drugs. In 1959, carrageenan was granted GRAS (generally regarded as safe) status. It easily combines with milk proteins and has been used as a substitute for fats in food. It can be found in cottage cheese, whipped cream, ice cream, infant formulas and processed meats.

Nutritional benefits of almond milk

Almond milk is a dairy-free and lactose-free beverage that serves as a healthy alternative to cow's milk. It contains the same health benefits as almonds, containing nutrients such as vitamin E, riboflavin, protein and fiber. Almonds also help with heart health because they contain monounsaturated fats, which are good for the heart. Research has shown a 45 percent reduction in the risk of heart disease by replacing dairy sources of saturated fats with nuts.

About the author:
Melanie Grimes, CCH, is a writer, health educator and homeopath. She has taught at Bastyr University and lectured internationally. Follow her blog at MelanieGrimes.com.

Sources include:

NDB.NAL.USDA.gov

FoxBusiness.com

SeattleTimes.com

TIME.com

https://www.naturalnews.com/051296_almond_milk_carrageenan_alternative_beverages.html

---

BREAKING: Yellow Vest protests spread to Brussels as working class Europeans rise up

Scenes of barricaded and water cannon being used against demonstrators in central Paris has unnerved France after the country experienced some of the worst street violence in the tourist-oriented districts of the capital since the iconic 1968 anti-Capitalist, leftist protests left much of Paris looking like a war zone.

 

 

Known as the ” Yellow Vest Movement”, the demonstrations started out to reaction fuel taxes attached to President Emmanuel Macron‘s wide-ranging green policy. Protesters want the taxes scrapped as they have cut into the middle and working classes’ shrinking purchasing power.

 

 

The Yellow Vests, who may be backed by both the far-left and far-right – each of whom have a deeply antagonistic view of Macron and his centrist politics – gathered for an unauthorised march in Paris on November 24. The protest gathered more than 100,000 people and turned violent after the crowd made their way to the famed Champs-Élysées were they came into conflict with Parisian police lines.

 

 

At least 24 people were injured and more than 100 arrests were made after the melee. Shopkeepers had windows smashed and their buildings tagged with graffiti after the demonstration by the gilets jaunes (Yellow Vests) grew increasingly more belligerent.

Officials said it was too early to establish the cost of the damage, but one estimated it could be up to €1.5 million

 

 

Protests also broke out in different cities as well, including an incident where the Yellow Vests attacked two journalists in the southern French city of Toulouse.


Interior Minister Christophe Castaner blamed “seditious” and “ultra-right” hooligans for hijacking the gilets jaunes protest and sparking violence, a sentiment that Paris’ Deputy Mayor Emmanuel Grégoire reiterated, “We are well aware that it’s a very small minority who for several years have attached themselves to protests each time in order to smash everything up.”


Much larger protests had broken out earlier in November, in which two people were killed in the clashes. The French authorities have reported that the Yellow Vests, which have no formal leadership structure or a known political affiliation, have called for more mass protests on December 1 as a response to the street battles that broke out on November 24.


France’s taxes represent 45% of the country’s GDP, making it one of the most highly taxed country’s in Europe. The tax burden grew by €25 billion every year between 2002 and 2017.


SOURCE
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/yellow-vest-protest-turns-violent-and-rocks-an-unsuspecting-french-public/

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201811301070274770-protest-yellow-vest-brussels/

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/breaking-yellow-vest-protests-spread-to-brussels-as-working-class-europeans-rise-up/#.XAFcULAXhgA.twitter

New York Immigration Lawyer Found Guilty of Large-Scale Asylum Fraud

NY attorney's scheme allowed dangerous criminals to win asylum in the US


A New York lawyer has been found guilty of large-scale asylum fraud after she was caught running a scheme to help immigrants who would normally be denied entry to the US, win asylum in the country.

Andreea Dumitru Parcalaboiu was running a fraudulent immigration system that would allow dangerous criminals to be granted asylum in the United States by fabricating travel history and personal narratives.

Dumitru, who was also previously investigated over a $5 million corporate tax evasion scheme, was charged with a range of crimes in association with her job as an immigration attorney.

Following a two-week trial at a federal court in Manhattan, Ms. Dumitru was found guilty of asylum fraud, making false statements to immigration authorities, and aggravated identity theft.



 READ MORE: https://neonnettle.com/news/5718-new-york-immigration-lawyer-found-guilty-of-large-scale-asylum-fraud

Wikileaks is willing to bet the Guardian a million dollars and its editor's head that Manafort never met Assange.

Remember this day when the Guardian permitted a serial fabricator to totally destroy the paper's reputation.

Wikileaks is willing to bet the Guardian a million dollars and its editor's head that Manafort never met Assange.


HERE IS THE GUARDIAN ARTICLE:


Manafort held secret talks with Assange in Ecuadorian embassy

Exclusive: Trump ally met WikiLeaks founder months before emails hacked by Russia were published

Luke Harding and Dan Collyns in Quito

Tue 27 Nov 2018 14.23 GMT

Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and visited around the time he joined Trump’s campaign, the Guardian has been told.

Sources have said Manafort went to see Assange in 2013, 2015 and in spring 2016 – during the period when he was made a key figure in Trump’s push for the White House.

It is unclear why Manafort wanted to see Assange and what was discussed. But the last meeting is likely to come under scrutiny and could interest Robert Mueller, the special prosecutor who is investigating alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

A well-placed source has told the Guardian that Manafort went to see Assange around March 2016. Months later WikiLeaks released a stash of Democratic emails stolen by Russian intelligence officers.

Manafort, 69, denies involvement in the hack and says the claim is “100% false”. His lawyers declined to answer the Guardian’s questions about the visits.

Manafort was jailed this year and was thought to have become a star cooperator in the Mueller inquiry. But on Monday Mueller said Manafort had repeatedly lied to the FBI, despite agreeing to cooperate two months ago in a plea deal. According to a court document, Manafort had committed “crimes and lies” on a “variety of subject matters”.

His defence team says he believes what he has told Mueller to be truthful and has not violated his deal.

READ MORE HERE:

https://archive.fo/pUjrj#selection-1627.0-1671.104

-------------------------------------------------

HERE IS WIKILEAK'S BET ON TWITTER:

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1067430101548027906



------------------------------------------------

The authors of the bogus Guardian story, Dan Collyns and Luke Harding, were in Ecuador 10 days ago with US-funded Villavicencio, who they have previously bylined with in bogus stories. This picture was taken last week.




https://twitter.com/AssangeLegal/status/1067435292745854995

Saudi Arabia's war on journalism. [VIDEO]

  

It's been more than a month since the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which Riyadh has admitted was a "rogue operation". But, given the ensuing geopolitical public relations disaster, one might have thought that the Saudi authorities dealing with the media would be on their best behaviour.





However, news has surfaced of another Saudi journalist, Turki bin Abdulaziz al-Jasser, who was arrested eight months ago and allegedly tortured to death while in detention. Al-Jasser ran what he thought was an anonymous account on Twitter, a platform that used to be a proxy public square for Saudis, but where an army of trolls has poisoned debate, harasses dissidents and spreads misinformation.





The mastermind of that campaign was Saud al-Qahtani, who worked behind the scenes as an enforcer for Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS).





As his boss conducted a charm offensive on the western media, al-Qahtani ensured journalists back home toed the line and critics stayed quiet. He was reportedly fired over his role in the Khashoggi killing, but the chilling effect of his work remains.





"He [Qahtani] is not only implicated in Khashoggi's murder but in the kidnapping of former Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri. He is a very powerful man, not only in terms of shaping public opinion but in executing Mohammad bin Salman's decisions," says Feras Abu Helal, editor-in-chief, Arabi21.





But besides al-Jasser, there are countless others who are missing or imprisoned for their online political activities, according to Ali al-Ahmed, director of The Institute for Gulf Affairs, and former Saudi political prisoner.





"There is a famous journalist, an opinion columnist, Turad al-Amri. He has disappeared and we don't know if he is free or not. Ali al-Dhufairi, who worked for Al Jazeera Arabic has gone silent for over two years. We don't know if he's in jail or not. Israa al-Ghomgham, they want to send her to death because she actually used social media to write about the protest in the eastern province in Qatif."

But even in the diaspora, Saudis are not "immune," points out Sahar Khamis, associate professor at the University of Maryland. "They were trying to bug Omar Abdulaziz and get into his accounts and get into his social media platforms. And that's why some of them are stopping their activism."

In Riyadh, the latest official explanation of the Khashoggi murder places the blame on five allegedly rogue operatives who, according to the foreign minister, could face the death penalty. Saud al-Qahtani faces a travel ban, but nothing more.





Meanwhile, his boss MBS - who apparently was completely unaware of the operation that killed one of his most prominent critics - can be seen on Saudi television - meeting with investors, visiting soldiers wounded in the war in Yemen and smiling for selfies with Saudi children.





As the Saudi press is "going about their business of trying to show him as the responsible leader, statesman who has Saudi interests at heart", says Chris Doyle, director of The Council for Arab-British Understanding, "I think it's questionable whether this will work right now, certainly it won't work internationally."


VIDEO:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvoF4qpBmsg

After 8 months reporters were finally granted permission to visit Julian Assange under heavy isolation and inhuman conditions in London Ecuadorian Embassy

They are destroying him slowly. They are doing it through an indefinite detention which has been going on for the last eight years with no end in sight. Julian Assange has become one of the most widely known icons of freedom of the press and the struggle against state secrecy. Recently, his detention in the Ecuadorian embassy in London has been joined by isolation, strict rules and various forms of pressure which seem to have no other purpose than to break him down. A grip meant to destroy his physical and mental ability to resist until he either breaks down or he steps out of the Ecuadorian embassy, unleashing the beginning of his own end. Because if he does step out, he will be arrested by the UK authorities, and at that point the US could request his extradition so that they can put him in jail for publishing classified US documents. Julian Assange is in extremely precarious conditions.

After eight months of failed attempts, la Repubblica was finally able to visit the WikiLeaks founder in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, after the current Ecuadorian president, Lenin Moreno had cut him off from all contacts last March with the exception of his lawyers. No contact with friends, stars, journalists, no phone calls, no internet access. Indeed a very heavy isolation regime for anyone, but for Julian Assange in particular, considering that he has been confined to that tiny embassy for the last six years, and also considering that for Assange the internet is not an optional like any other: it's his world.



As soon as we saw him, we realised he has lost a lot of weight. Too much. He is so skinny. Not even his winter sweater can hide his skinny shoulders. His nice-looking face, captured by photographers all around the world, is very tense. His long hair and beard make him look like a hermit, though not a nutter: as we exchange greetings, he seems very lucid and rational.

This regime of complete isolation would have broken anyone down, yet Assange is holding up: he spends his time thinking and preparing his defence against the US prosecution. But he spends too much time completely alone, with the exception of the security guards at the embassy. He is completely alone throughout the weekends. He is alone during the night, in the embassy building which has been girded with a scaffolding that makes intrusions in the middle of the night easy.

The Ecuadorian embassy is problematic for journalists as well: to be authorised to visit Julian Assange, we have been asked by the Ecuadorian authorities to provide: "Brand, model, serial number, IMEI number and telephone number (if applicable) of each of the telephone sets, computers, cameras and other electronic equipment that the applicant wants to enter with to the Embassy and keep during their interview". Such a request, unfortunately, exposes journalists to serious risks of surveillance of their communications. But in order to be able to visit Assange we provided this data, hoping we could keep our phones. As it turned out, providing that data was useless: when we entered the embassy, our phones were seized anyway.


The friendly atmosphere we had always experienced during our visits over the last six years is now gone. The Ecuadorian diplomat who had always supported the WikiLeaks founder, Fidel Narvaez, has been removed. Not even the cat is there anymore. With its funny striped tie and ambushes on the ornaments of the Christmas tree at the embassy's entrance, the cat had helped defuse tension inside the building for years. But Assange has preferred to spare the cat an isolation which has become unbearable and allow it a healthier life.


The news that surfaced last week, revealing the existence of criminal charges against Julian Assange by the US authorities, charges which were supposed to remain under seal until it was impossible for Assange to evade arrest, vindicates what Assange has feared for years. He is now waiting for the charges to be unsealed, but in the meantime he is silent: the risk that he could suddenly lose Ecuador's protection due to some public statement is not improbable these days.

Two years ago, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) established that the UK (at that time Sweden as well) is responsible for detaining Assange arbitrarily: it should free him and compensate him. London did not welcome this decision: they tried to appeal it, but lost the appeal and since then have simply ignored it.

The British media has never called on the UK authorities to comply with the UN body's decision, quite the opposite: some even lashed out against the UN body. If Julian Assange ends up in the hands of the UK authorities in the upcoming months and the US asks for his extradition, where will the British medial stand? Never before has the life of the WikiLeaks founder been so crucially in the hands of public opinion and in the hands of one of the few powers whose mission it is to reign in the worst instincts of our governments: the press.


SOURCE


https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2018/11/26/news/the_detention_and_isolation_from_the_world_of_julian_assange-212689883/?ref=RHRS-BH-I0-C6-P7-S1.6-T2&refresh_ce

Federal prosecutors fight effort to unseal criminal complaint against Julian Assange

FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA – Federal prosecutors are fighting a request to unseal an apparent criminal complaint against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.


In papers filed Monday in Alexandria, prosecutors argued that the public has no right to know whether a person has been charged until there has been an arrest.


"Any contrary rule would completely undermine the proper functioning of the criminal process at this stage: anyone could petition the Court to require the government to confirm whether the time was right to flee or evade arrest," prosecutor Gordon Kromberg wrote.


Assange has been staying in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London since 2012 under a grant of asylum and has long expressed fear of a U.S. prosecution. Recently, Ecuadorian officials have placed restrictions on Assange’s use of the embassy, including requirements that he clean up after his cat.


The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press asked a judge Nov. 16 to unseal charges against Assange after prosecutors inadvertently mentioned those charges in an unrelated case. The committee’s lawyers argue that the government no longer has any legitimate reason to keep the charges under seal now that they have mistakenly been made public.


Prosecutors acknowledge the mistake in Monday’s court filing but refuse to say whether the error is confirmation Assange has actually been charged.


The Associated Press and other news outlets have reported that Assange is indeed facing unspecified charges under seal. While the exact charges against Assange remain unclear, WikiLeaks has served as a vehicle for release of thousands of classified U.S. military and diplomatic cables. WikiLeaks’ role in releasing emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee in 2016 has also been under scrutiny as special counsel Robert Mueller has investigated Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether the Trump campaign was involved.


A hearing on the motion to unseal is scheduled for Tuesday morning in Alexandria.


SOURCE


https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/11/27/world/crime-legal-world/federal-prosecutors-fight-effort-unseal-criminal-complaint-julian-assange/#.W_zzsGeWxLN

Bank of America ATM in Texas mistakenly spits out $100 bills, customers can keep it

A faulty Bank of America ATM machine was mistakenly dispensing $100 bills instead of $10 overnight on Monday, reports said. (U.S. Currency Education Program)


Just in time for the holiday season, a malfunctioning Bank of America ATM in Texas early Monday dispensed $100 bills instead of $10 bills, causing several fights to break out and the bank eventually telling its lucky customers they can keep it.


There was a line at the bank in north Harris County when word spread about the faulty machine, Houston's ABC 13 reported. Authorities said when a customer attempted to withdraw $20 on Sunday at around 11 p.m., the machine spit out a $100 bill, Houston's KPRC-TV reported. When the man posted about it on social media, a crowd rushed to the location, deputies said.


A few fights ensued when people waited in line to make money from the ATM glitch, the station reported. The commotion occurred over a roughly two-hour period before authorities arrived, officials said. Deputies dispersed the crowd and shut down the transfer machine, ABC 13 reported.


Bank of America issued a statement on Monday in response to the error.


"This was an incident at a single ATM in Houston caused when a vendor incorrectly loaded $100 bills in place of $10 bills. We have resolved the matter. Customers will be able to keep the additional money dispensed," the company said.


It was not immediately clear how much extra money was dispensed or how many people benefited from it.


Law enforcement said that if the bank called on the money to be returned, criminal charges could have been filed.


"There's no free lunch. If you receive money that you know it is not yours, and you refuse to give it back upon demand, you can, at the discretion of the district attorney, be charged with theft," Sgt. Joshua Nowick of the Harris County Sheriff's Office told the station.




SOURCE



https://www.foxnews.com/us/bank-of-america-atm-in-texas-spits-out-100-bills-fight-breaks-out








　

Some romaine lettuce safe to eat again, FDA says

It's now safe to eat some romaine lettuce, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) announced on Monday.


Health officials said the romaine linked to a deadly E. coli outbreak that sparked an alert last week to avoid the lettuce entirely appears to be from California's Central Coast Region. The FDA said romaine lettuce from other locations should soon be labeled with harvest dates and regions, so consumers know that it's safe to eat.


People shouldn't eat romaine that doesn't have the label information, according to the FDA. For romaine that doesn't come in packaging, grocers and retailers are being asked to post the information by the register.


The agency warned the public last Tuesday not to eat any romaine lettuce after dozens of people were reported sick -- including some who were hospitalized -- because of an E.coli outbreak connected to the food.


As of Monday, the FDA said 43 people became ill in 12 states due to the outbreak, and another 22 people were sickened in Canada.


Since romaine has a shelf life of about 21 days, health officials said last week they believed contaminated romaine could still be on the market or in people's homes. The FDA last week advised anyone who had romaine lettuce in their homes or businesses to withdraw and destroy the leafy greens.


SOURCE


https://www.foxnews.com/health/some-romaine-lettuce-safe-to-eat-again-fda-says


　


　

California Democratic Party chair takes leave of absence amid sexual misconduct investigation

California Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman, who is facing an internal investigation after multiple party staffers accused him of sexual assault or harassment, is taking a leave of absence until the probe is finished, the party announced Monday.


Party spokesperson Mike Roth said Bauman had decided to take a leave of absence "[a]fter taking the holiday weekend to consider the most constructive path forward for the work of the California Democratic Party".


"Chair Bauman believes this decision is the best way to ensure the independence and integrity of the process," Roth added. "The Party is confident that the procedures in place will allow for all parties to come forward freely and provide for a thorough and complete review."


The internal investigation was launched after party Vice-Chair Daraka Larimore-Hall called for Bauman's removal over what Larimore-Hall described as "credible, corroborated and utterly heart-breaking allegations" by "a number of party staff" who claimed Bauman harassed or assaulted them at party functions. Others including California U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna and the Orange County Young Democrats called for Bauman to step aside.


Larimore-Hall's email did not include details about either the alleged incidents or the affected staffers. The Sacramento Bee reported that Larimore-Hall spoke to two accusers and a witness before sending his email.


"I take seriously any allegation brought forward by anyone who believes they have been caused pain," Bauman said in a statement announcing the investigation Saturday. "I look forward to putting these allegations behind us and moving forward as unified Democrats."


The party's executive board could vote to remove Bauman from office. However, Larimore-Hall's call for Bauman's removal is still several steps from such a vote.


Bauman's leave comes just weeks after California Democrats made major gains in the midterm elections, winning key congressional seats in territory long held by Republicans.


A series of sexual misconduct allegations against lawmakers, lobbyists and others in politics rocked California's political world late last year, at the height of the #MeToo movement. Three Democratic men resigned as state lawmakers after investigators hired by the state legislature found they likely engaged in inappropriate behavior.


Bauman narrowly won the party chairmanship last year against Kimberly Ellis after a contentious battle between establishment Democrats and progressive activists. During that fight, Bauman said he was falsely targeted by rumors he engaged in inappropriate behavior with teenage boys. Bauman is the party's first openly gay chairman.


Bauman called the rumors "despicable lies," and Ellis denounced them.


First Vice Chair Alex Rooker is set to take over Bauman's duties while the investigation proceeds.




SOURCE



https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-democratic-party-chair-takes-leave-of-absence-amid-sexual-misconduct-investigation

Rothschild: Donald Trump is threatening to destroy the New World Order

The Rothschilds have used their globalist media mouthpiece to declare that Donald Trump is threatening to destroy the New World Order, for good.Globalism propaganda tool and Rothschild family-owned publication, The Economist has branded the US President a "present danger" to the "New World Order," and stated that the "internationalists" that formed it are "spinning in their graves."The Economist names Trump is the biggest threat to the "liberal"


New World Order above other legitimate threats such as jihadism and terrorism, Communist Chinese expansion, and North Korean hostility."



Perhaps the greatest danger at present is the incumbency of an American president who despises international norms, who disparages free trade and who continually flirts with abandoning America’s essential role in maintaining the global legal order," writes The Economist.



Infowars reports:


The globalist outlet refers to a book titled "The Internationalists," to explain the origins of the "liberal international order" as a move to "make the waging of aggressive war illegal," which is why it must be "defended like never before."


"The rules-based international order that emerged from the wreckage of the second world war was a huge improvement on any preceding era," states the article. "
Yet liberal internationalism is now under attack from many sides. Donald Trump’s America First doctrine explicitly repudiates it."The Economist describes how the Trump administration views the world stage, citing a piece written by two of Trump’s advisors in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.



"The world is not a ‘global community’ but an arena where nations, non-governmental actors, and businesses engage and compete for advantage,"



H.R. McMaster and Gary Cohn wrote. "We bring to this forum unmatched military, political, economic, cultural and moral strength. Rather than deny this elemental nature of international affairs, we embrace it."


The Economist then makes the strange assertion that, despite being directly responsible for numerous wars and destabilizing coup attempts around the world, the New World Order is "better than any of the alternatives."



"Of course, there are still plenty of wars," it states. "




In some ways, the New World Order, which has helped make international wars so much less imaginable, has inadvertently made possible more ‘intranational’ wars."


"Fragile and fractious countries that would previously have feared being conquered by more powerful neighbors can now fall prey to civil wars or brutal insurgencies without bad actors fearing loss of the national territory they seek to control."Non-state groups, such as Islamic State (a misnomer), can take and hold, at least for a while, territory from dysfunctional governments.


"Well-meaning but ill-conceived wars to change odious regimes have sometimes gone badly wrong."The magazine concludes by saying that the NWO architects of the past "must be spinning in their graves" considering how far Trump has already come and that he must be removed from office to preserve the New World Order


The Rothschilds have used their globalist media mouthpiece to declare that Donald Trump is threatening to destroy the New World Order, for good.Globalism propaganda tool and Rothschild family-owned publication, The Economist has branded the US President a "present danger" to the "New World Order," and stated that the "internationalists" that formed it are "spinning in their graves.



"The Economist names Trump is the biggest threat to the "liberal" New World Order above other legitimate threats such as jihadism and terrorism, Communist Chinese expansion, and North Korean hostility."



Perhaps the greatest danger at present is the incumbency of an American president who despises international norms, who disparages free trade and who continually flirts with abandoning America’s essential role in maintaining the global legal order," writes The Economist.



Infowars reports: The globalist outlet refers to a book titled "The Internationalists," to explain the origins of the "liberal international order" as a move to "make the waging of aggressive war illegal," which is why it must be "defended like never before."


The Economist then makes the strange assertion that, despite being directly responsible for numerous wars and destabilizing coup attempts around the world, the New World Order is "better than any of the alternatives."

　



"Of course, there are still plenty of wars," it states. "In some ways, the New World Order, which has helped make international wars so much less imaginable, has inadvertently made possible more ‘intranational’ wars."



"Fragile and fractious countries that would previously have feared being conquered by more powerful neighbors can now fall prey to civil wars or brutal insurgencies without bad actors fearing loss of the national territory they seek to control."Non-state groups, such as Islamic State (a misnomer), can take and hold, at least for a while, territory from dysfunctional governments."Well-meaning but ill-conceived wars to change odious regimes have sometimes gone badly wrong."The magazine concludes by saying that the NWO architects of the past "must be spinning in their graves" considering how far Trump has already come and that he must be removed from office to preserve the New World Order.

SOURCE



http://usa2019news.blogspot.com/2018/10/rothschild-donald-trump-is-threatening.html








　

New UN Pact Will Make It Illegal To Criticize Open Borders

The United Nations global compact on migration will make it a criminal offense, punishable by prison, for citizens and media outlets to criticize open borders and mass immigration.

According to MEP Marcel de Graaff, Co-President of the ENF and leader of the Party for Freedom in the European Parliament, the deal represents "a coup d’etat of pro-migration liberal globalists, which will greatly benefit multinationals."

Speaking at a press conference in the European Parliament, de Graaff warned: "One basic element of this new agreement is the extension of the definition of hate speech. The agreement wants to criminalize migration speech. Criticism of migration will become a criminal offense. Media outlets that give room to criticism of migration can be shut down."

Infowars.com reports: "In fact, it will become impossible to criticize Merkel’s welcome migrants politics without being at risk to be jailed for hate speech," he added, noting, "Countries who import the third world will become the third world."


　


The MEP also pointed to the rise in rapes and violent attacks that have been recorded in numerous western countries since the mass migration of millions of people from mainly Islamic countries since 2015.


The UN’s global compact on migration is not legally binding, but governments will be under pressure to follow its dictates.


Hungary’s populist government has warned that the deal would establish a "human right to find a new place around the globe".


Australia became the latest country to publicly announce it will refuse to sign the pact, with Prime Minister Scott Morrison asserting the deal would, "undermine Australia’s strong border protection laws and practices" and encourage illegal immigration.


He added that the pact does nothing to distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants with respect to the provision of welfare and benefits.


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also said he will refuse to sign the deal. The United States pulled out of the compact last year, asserting that border powers should remain under the control of sovereign nations. The Swiss government has also indicated it will not sign up to the pact, as have Austria and Hungary.


SOURCE



https://newspunch.com/un-pact-illegal-criticize-open-borders/

South Dakotans may soon be able to carry concealed handguns without a permit

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – After years of unsuccessful attempts, supporters of legislation that would allow people to carry concealed handguns without a permit in South Dakota anticipate revived prospects once GOP Gov.-elect Kristi Noem takes office in January.


The legislation languished under retiring Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard, but Noem in her campaign offered support for a so-called constitutional carry law. GOP state Sen.-elect Lynne DiSanto, who as a member of the state House of Representatives sponsored a permitless concealed carry bill that Daugaard vetoed, said such legislation is likely in the upcoming session and she's optimistic about its prospects.


"There are a lot of Republicans that are very excited to have a conservative governor," said DiSanto. "I think under a new governor it's very likely to pass."
"There are a lot of Republicans that are very excited to have a conservative governor. I think under a new governor [concealed carry legislation is] very likely to pass."
— South Dakota state Sen.-elect Lynne DiSanto

Daugaard has said the state's current gun laws are reasonable. Right now, it's a misdemeanor for someone to carry a concealed pistol or to have one concealed in a vehicle without a permit. At the end of October, there were nearly 108,000 pistol permits in South Dakota, according to the secretary of state's office.


Daugaard vetoed DiSanto's proposal in 2017 and also rejected a similar measure in 2012; constitutional carry legislation failed during the 2018 session after he issued a veto threat. Bill supporters have argued that getting a concealed pistol permit can be burdensome.


Backers are likely to get a boost from Noem, who triumphed over Democratic state Sen. Billie Sutton in the Nov. 6 election. Noem in January urged passage of a permitless carry bill.


At the time Noem didn't endorse a specific plan, though her campaign said she supported the policy "in principle." Transition team spokeswoman Kristin Wileman said in a statement this week that Noem won't commit to legislation until she can review its text, but said she's a strong 2nd Amendment supporter and thinks provisions like constitutional carry can "protect and even strengthen this right for South Dakotans."


"The governor-elect will work to find a way that law enforcement and gun-right proponents can come together around a solution," Wileman said.


Staci Ackerman, executive director of the South Dakota Sheriffs' Assn., said the group hasn't discussed 2019 legislation yet. But she said the organization supported a bill in the 2018 session that allowed permitless carry for state residents with a South Dakota driver's license or identification card; the measure didn't advance out of the Senate.


The 2019 session is scheduled to run Jan. 8 to March 29. Republicans will control both houses of the Legislature as well as the governorship.


SOURCE



https://www.foxnews.com/politics/south-dakotans-may-soon-be-able-to-carry-concealed-handguns-without-a-permit

Winter storm to bring 'hazardous' conditions during busy post-Thanksgiving travel rush

　


A vigorous winter storm across the nation's midsection may throw a wrench in plans for millions of Americans making their way home on Sunday on one of the busiest travel days of the year.


The National Weather Service said that the winter storm is expected to bring near-blizzard conditions from the Central Plains into the Great Lakes, impacting the Kansas City and Chicago metro areas the hardest.


"It's going to impact many going home after this long holiday weekend," Fox News' Chief Meteorologist Rick Reichmuth said Sunday on "Fox & Friends."


Heavy snow is expected to fall throughout the day on Sunday, with many areas seeing between 6 to 12 inches from eastern Kansas, Iowa, Northern Missouri and into Illinois. Some places may see up to 18 inches and strong winds, according to the NWS.


"We'll see some spots over a foot of snow, a lot of places 6 to 12 inches, and that means a lot of troubles all over the roads," Reichmuth said.


In Illinois, state officials warned drivers that conditions are expected to deteriorate throughout the day, with heavy snow, high winds, and "much longer travel times" to be anticipated.


"This storm is expected to hit at a time when millions of people are on the roads, heading home after visiting friends and family," Illinois Transportation Secretary Randy Blankenhorn said in a statement. "Please take all necessary precautions, including altering travel plans to leave early or asking yourself if your trip can wait."


At Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, the sixth-busiest in the world, at least 197 flights were canceled as of Sunday morning, according to flight tracking website FlightAware. Nationwide, FlightAware reported that nearly 500 flights were canceled on the last day of the Thanksgiving holiday weekend.


Airline travelers brace for delays as they head home from Thanksgiving; Jacqui Heinrich reports from LaGuardia Airport in New York.


The site reported that the majority of the cancellations are flights that were supposed to be routed through Chicago or Kansas City -- two areas forecast to be hit hard.


Several airlines that operate out of Kansas City International Airport were waiving fees for rebooking flights due to the storm, FOX4 reported.


Many in the region decided to hit the road on Saturday in order to beat the oncoming storm, filling area gas stations.


"I`m a college student at Mizzou and I`m trying to beat the storm back," graduate student Sydney Eastman told FOX4. "When I saw the weather, I thought I better get out of here now."


In Nebraska, the state highway patrol said that Interstate 80 was closed westbound from Mahoney to Lincoln because of "multiple crashes."


Multiple crashes were reported on Interstate 80 in Nebraska due to the snow. (Nebraska State Patrol)


Authorities in Kansas said that Interstate 70 was shut down in several places Sunday morning due to drifting snow, and several crashes were reported.


Kansas Highway Patrol Public Information Officer Tod Hileman posted a video to Twitter showing the conditions, which read: "We have 100% snowpacked & iced roads with drifting. Winds are near 45 to 50 at times. There are many slide offs. We have jackknifed semi’s in Gove, Ellis and Russell Counties!"


For those who decide to wait to let the storm pass, conditions are expected to improve by Monday across the region with partly-sunny skies and temperatures into the 30s, according to the NWS.


SOURCE



https://www.foxnews.com/us/winter-storm-bring-hazardous-conditions-across-midwest-during-post-thanksgiving-travel-rush