Waching daily Sep 27 2018

[ROSENSTEIN] There have been people who have been making threats privately and publicly against me for quite some time

and I think they should understand by now, the Department of Justice is not going to be extorted.

That's Rod Rosenstein.

The former or current U.S. Deputy Attorney General.

Depending on when you're watching this,

he has either resigned from the Trump administration,

he is thinking about resigning from the administration,

or he was fired from the Trump administration.

Who knows?

Maybe you know - again - depending on when you're seeing this.

Rod Rosenstein was a member of the Bush, Clinton, Obama, and Trump administrations.

On the latter,

he was or is the current or previous balancing act between Mueller's investigation

and Mike Love's favorite president: Donald J. Trump.

Early reports suggested Rosenstein had verbally resigned to Chief of Staff John Kelly

before Trump had the chance to fire him,

[TRUMP] You're fired.

but then more reports came which disputed that report.

Either way,

Rosenstein was or is overseeing Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

His job had already been subject to much contention for months,

but then a New York Times bombshell report dropped.

It claimed Rosenstein had discussed wearing a wire to secretly record damaging statements — or half-thoughts —

muttered by Trump.

In turn, Rosenstein - along with several colleagues -

was looking at ways to invoke the 25th amendment,

a constitutional provision to remove the president from office with a majority of the Cabinet.

It's been clear for a while that the Mueller investigation wouldn't stay on the same track with a Rosenstein departure.

[NADLER] If you were ordered today to fire Mr. Mueller, what would you do?

[ROSENSTEIN] So, I've explained previously, I would follow the regulation.

If there were a good cause, I would act, if there were no good cause I would not.

[NADLER] And you see no good cause so far?

[ROSENSTEIN] Correct.

The special counsel had to go through Rosenstein before making any decisions involving the Russia investigation.

Rosenstein's temporary replacement, Noel Francisco,

could effectively refuse to be the middleman that the Deputy Attorney General once was

or currently is.

Either way, the guy in line for his job is worth noting.

Noel Francisco — as Mother Jones reported — is skeptical about Special Counsels.

Francisco could fire Mueller if he deemed it necessary.

So who was or is the seemingly neutral middleman between

pleasing Trump while at the same time allowing Mueller to work unbothered

as he indicts top members of the campaign?

Rod Jay Rosenstein was born in 1965 in the suburbs of Philadelphia

to a small business owner and a bookkeeper.

In 1986, he graduated from the same school Trump once did:

The Wharton School in Pennsylvania.

Rosenstein graduated with a Bachelor's of Science in Economics.

Three years later, he earned his law degree from Harvard,

where he also was the editor of the Harvard Law Review.

Obama would go on to become the editor just a year after Rosenstein.

In 1990, Rosenstein joined the Justice Department during the George H.W. Bush administration

where he prosecuted public corruption cases with the DOJ's criminal division which was led by Robert Mueller.

In the mid-90s, Rosenstein worked on a team of prosecutors,

investigating Bill and Hillary Clinton's "Whitewater" business dealings in Arkansas.

As The Atlantic reports, "Rosenstein came out in exemplary form".

the deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration told The Washington Post in 2011.

In 2005, George W. Bush nominated Rosenstein to become the U.S. Attorney for the district of Maryland.

He was unanimously confirmed and stayed on during the Obama administration.

And finally when the Trump administration took over 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.,

Rosenstein was the only remaining holdover from the Bush era.

He was confirmed as Deputy Attorney General in a Senate vote of 94-6.

Just two weeks into his new gig, the president fired FBI Director James Comey.

Rosenstein was tasked with writing a memo about Comey's performance,

a memo the White House used to rationalize the firing.

According to a New York Times report, Rosenstein told colleagues the White House

had manipulated him into securing any reason to fire Comey.

Rosenstein feared this would be career damaging,

even if he was once described by The Washington Post as an even-keeled Jimmy Stewart character.

A defense lawyer said of Rosenstein,

"He is the poster child for the professional, competent, ethical and fair-minded prosecutor…"

Rosenstein, was or is the man in charge of choosing what information got or gets to Congress

regarding the Russia investigation.

With the level-headed Jimmy Stewart-esque AG potentially or definitely out,

Mueller's bridge to Congress might cease to exist.

And mass protests have been promised for a while in the face of the looming departure

of this career official.

His possible firing has drawn comparisons with Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre for months -

when the former President fired Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox

and caused a constitutional crisis.

Either way, something is <b><i>definitely</i></b>, <b><i>possibly</i></b>, or <b><i>not at all</i></b> happening.

[REPORTER] Do you have confidence in Rod Rosenstein?

[TRUMP] Uh, what's your next question please?

For more infomation >> Who Is Rod Rosenstein? Narrated by America Ferrera | NowThis - Duration: 6:13.

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

This Piece Of Evidence Just Settled Whether Kavanaugh Is Guilty - Duration: 3:13.

For more infomation >> This Piece Of Evidence Just Settled Whether Kavanaugh Is Guilty - Duration: 3:13.

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

Netanyahu claims Iran is hiding a secret atomic weapons warehouse - Daily News - Duration: 3:25.

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accused Iran of hiding nuclear-related material at a warehouse in Tehran

He claimed Iran had a 'secret atomic warehouse' in Tehran in an address to the UN General Assembly on Thursday, which he said proved it had not abandoned its nuclear weapons programme

Netanyahu held up a map and a photograph of an outwardly innocuous looking in the Turquzabad district of Tehran, which he said was concealed as a rug-cleaning operation

  'In May we exposed the site of Iran's secret atomic archive. Today I'm revealing the site of a second facility, Iran's secret atomic warehouse,' Netanyahu said

   'Iran has not abandoned its goal to develop nuclear weapons. Rest assured that will not happen

What Iran hides, Israel will find,' he added.'Today I am disclosing for the first time that Iran has another secret facility in Tehran, a secret atomic warehouse for storing massive amounts of equipment and materiel from Iran's secret nuclear programme

Share this article Share 'Since we raided the atomic archive, they've been busy cleaning out the atomic warehouse

 'Just last month they removed 15 kilograms of radioactive material. You know what they did with it?' he said

 'They took it out and they spread it around Tehran in an effort to hide the evidence

'  . There was no immediate reaction from Iran, which denies building nuclear weapons

In his address at the UN General Assembly, he spoke out strongly against the 2015 Iranian nuclear accord

 Netanyahu in April unveiled what he said was a pile of archives that showed a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program ahead of the US decision to pull out of a 2015 nuclear deal with Iran

He said Iranian officials had started cleaning out the atomic warehouse, but still had a lot of work to do because they 'have had at least 15 ship containers, they're gigantic, 15 ship containers full of nuclear-related equipment and materials stored there,' he said

'This means that this site contained as much as 300 tonnes - 300 tonnes - of nuclear-related equipment and materiel,' he said

France, Britain, Germany, China and Russia have stayed in the deal, vowing to save it despite the restoration of U

S. sanctions on Iran.Netanyahu accused the European powers of appeasing Iran.'Have these European leaders learned nothing from history? Will they ever wake up?' he said

  

For more infomation >> Netanyahu claims Iran is hiding a secret atomic weapons warehouse - Daily News - Duration: 3:25.

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

Gyrocopter Flight! Is it Crazy or Safe? - Duration: 3:34.

how was the experience?

super cool! I loved the gyrocopter!

we flew all the way to the Lorelei

and we saw a lot and I took a lot of pictures and videos

it is very stable and I loved it a lot!

very cool!

For more infomation >> Gyrocopter Flight! Is it Crazy or Safe? - Duration: 3:34.

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

Omisore's Decision To Support APC Is Shameful, Says Fani-Kayode - Duration: 2:19.

Omisore's Decision To Support APC Is Shameful, Says Fani-Kayode

Femi Fani-Kayode, a former Minister of Aviation and a chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), has berated the decision of the governorship candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Iyiola Omisore, to support the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the Osun governorship rerun election scheduled for Thursday.

In a statement made available on Wednesday, Fani-Kayode described Omisore's decision to pitch his tent with APC as "shameful", just as he noted that the latter did it "simply for money.

The former aviation minister firmly stated that Omisore had told him that "he would stand firm two days ago", same thing he was said to have told Chief Ayo Adebanjo on Tuesday night.

Following the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of the election as inconclusive, Omisore's home had become a Mecca of sorts as he was visited by various stakeholders in the PDP and APC, who sought his support to win in the rerun election.

He, however, eventually embraced the APC's offer for collaboration. .

Expressly stating his disappointment, Fani-Kayode said: "Iyiola Omisore's decision to support the APC in tomorrow's rerun is shameful. It is sad that he would seek to deny Ile-Ife the position of Deputy Governor simply for money.

"He told me he would stand firm two days ago and he told our leader and father Baba Ayo Adebanjo the same thing last night.

I do not know what has turned his head but we shall forge ahead and by God's grace Adeleke will win.

"There is no excuse or justification for joining or supporting those who treated our people like filth and slaves over the last eight years, and who rigged last Saturday's election.

For more infomation >> Omisore's Decision To Support APC Is Shameful, Says Fani-Kayode - Duration: 2:19.

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

Republicans likely feel Ford testimony is moving at glacial pace: Jonathan Turley - Duration: 7:48.

For more infomation >> Republicans likely feel Ford testimony is moving at glacial pace: Jonathan Turley - Duration: 7:48.

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

WHO IS MORE LIKELY TO... - Duration: 6:10.

For more infomation >> WHO IS MORE LIKELY TO... - Duration: 6:10.

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

Why is Consent Such a Difficult Concept? - Duration: 10:39.

Hi, it's Alex!

Today I want to talk a little bit more about consent,

and in this video I want to focus on the question:

Why is consent such a difficult concept?

Why is it so hard for people to understand?

And why is it a little bit more complex

than some people make it out to be?

I see a lot of people talk about consent

in a way that suggests that it's a really simple concept.

And I think there is some truth in this.

Like the idea is: you want to do something

intimate or sexual with someone,

you ask them: "Do you want to do this?"

"Are you comfortable with doing this?"

and ONLY if the person unambigously says "Yes"

is it okay for you to do something with that person.

So, it sounds fine and dandy.

But, in the real world,

it's a little bit more complicated than this.

I made a video pretty recently

about the idea of "dubious consent",

and in that video I talk about some confounding factors

like alcohol and other drugs, large age differences,

and other factors that can make it so that

even if the other person says "yes",

it might not really be full consent.

And, if you haven't watched that video,

I highly recommend it.

I want to talk about some more things in this video though,

which is, inaccuracies in communication

or misunderstanding in communication.

Human communication is not perfect.

We have verbal and nonverbal communication,

and people can and do say one thing

when they mean another.

And I want to focus on the idea of

saying "yes" when you really mean "no".

A lot of the dialogue focuses on the other way around,

like saying "no" when you mean "yes",

and that's an ugly topic too,

but I want to talk about saying "yes" when you mean "no".

I've been in this situation a couple times, where

I'm being intimate with someone, and I'm like:

"Hey, are you comfortable doing this thing?"

and they're like: "Yeah!"

and they seem enthusiastic in the moment,

and then we start doing it,

and their body language makes clear

that they're not comfortable, so I'm like;

"Hey.

Do you want to stop?"

"Are you really comfortable doing this?"

And the person is like: "Actually, no."

"I wasn't comfortable doing this."

"I'm not comfortable doing this."

and then we stop.

I want to make clear, if you're in a situation like this,

I don't necessarily think that you

or the other person did something wrong.

Like, I don't think you necessarily did something wrong

just because you said "yes",

like we're all doing the best we can,

so if you say "yes" when you mean "no", it's like,

okay, we're all human, we have our limitations,

and similarly, assuming you're doing the best you can

to read the other person's signals,

don't beat yourself up because

you got into one of these situations.

That's the first thing that I want to say.

But I want to ask the question of

why do we end up in these situations in the first place?

And I think one of the answers lies in our socialization.

I think a lot of people are socialized

not to "hurt people's feelings",

and I actually have a video where I talk about

how I think "hurting someone's feelings"

can be a really problematic concept.

And, I think a lot of people struggle

with saying no to people.

I've talked to so many people about this,

and it's also something that I personally struggle with.

So, someone might ask me, total non-sexual situation,

someone might ask me for a favor,

and it's a little bit inconvenient for me,

but I still might have trouble saying no to the person.

And, I know so many people

who have talked to me about this.

And it definitely comes up in sexual situations,

like people are in a relationship,

or maybe they aren't even in a relationship,

and they just really want to please the other person,

they really want to give the other person what they want,

and then they have this conflict

because they might not actually want to do something.

And, in some situations, people will say yes

to things that they don't actually want to do.

And, it creates this weirdness, because it's like

how responsible do you want to hold the other person

for reading your nonverbal cues

that you don't really mean what you're saying?

This can get complicated when you add other factors

like autism or neurodiversity

that make it harder to read nonverbal cues.

Another factor is cultural diversity.

When people come from a different cultural background,

if you're not speaking the same native language,

if there are different sort of social environments

that they've grown up in,

that can make it harder to communicate with people too.

There are a lot of different confounding factors here.

Another thing that I think feeds into all of this is

not knowing what you want

and not knowing what your boundaries are,

not knowing what you are comfortable with

and not comfortable with.

And again, I think this is something that our society

doesn't make it easy for people to figure out.

A lot of the way people are raised nowadays,

the school system, it provides a lot of external structure

and kind of external motivators,

and people aren't really given much space

to figure out what they want to do of their own initiative.

And, because they are in this

somewhat authoritarian structure,

where the school system is constantly telling them

what they need to do,

and they don't have much choice or control over it,

people aren't necessarily accustomed

to asserting boundaries, like:

"Hey, I don't want to do this."

and sometimes people might have

extensive experience with their family

of trying to assert a boundary

and their parents really arguing with them about it.

I'm not talking about sexual things,

I'm talking about all sorts of things

from homework and tasks

to what teenagers want to do going out with their friends,

and all sorts of things like that.

People get into arguments about these things.

So basically, I think people are not being encouraged

to develop the sorts of skills

to figure out what they really want

and get in touch with what they really want.

And I think this is bad.

It's problematic for the question of consent,

cause say you end up in a situation where

someone is like: "Hey.

Are you comfortable doing this?"

and you don't really know how you feel.

There is one more thing here that feeds into this, and again,

I think the educational system plays a role in this.

I think in our society,

people have a hard time saying: "I don't know."

and saying: "I'm not sure."

I also made a video about this.

This ties into how people are treated in school, like

basically when the teacher calls on you,

or when you're taking a test,

you are often penalized for not having an answer.

You are penalized for leaving something blank.

But, you are often rewarded if you guess

and your guess is either correct or partly correct.

So, you're not rewarded for saying: "I don't know."

And I think in general,

the system is conditioning people away from saying:

"I don't know."

"I'm not sure."

You see this in how people talk about politics.

Like, people seem to speak poorly of candidates

who don't take stances on issues, or take like, they'll say

you're taking a "wishy-washy" stance on an issue,

like it's a bad thing.

Maybe the person is actually showing humility.

The point I'm making:

our society conditions people to not say "I don't know."

not say "I'm not sure."

Back to that sexual situation, you're in it,

you actually aren't sure how you feel,

but you may feel some pressure to just say yes or no

because of how you've been socially conditioned.

So basically, I think all of these things

feed into making consent a little bit more complex

than it needs to be ideally,

and I hope I've answered this question

a little bit more thoroughly, like:

"Why is consent such a difficult concept?"

What can we do, moving forward?

So, I agree with a lot of the advice out there

that it's important to only go forward

doing something intimate with someone

if you have unambiguous full consent.

If you're not sure, then talk about it more,

get clarification, and so on.

But I think that that, just saying that is not enough.

I think that we need to examine

some of the really deep things in our culture.

I think we need to examine the culture of

teaching people to be people pleasers.

We need to teach people that it's okay to say no.

We need to teach them how to say no.

Not just in sexual situations, but to all sorts of things.

I think people are a little scared to do that, and like

parents might not want to teach their kids to say no

because then they're gonna start saying no to them.

But this is what we have to deal with as a society.

I think it's a more sustainable approach if we do this.

And similarly in school.

If students start saying no to their teachers,

people don't necessarily want to deal with that,

it makes it easier to control a classroom

if you have people conditioned to say yes.

But I think, I really want us to change this.

I also want us to teach people

how to get in touch with what they really want.

And lastly, I want us to be more aware of neurodiversity

and cultural differences in communication.

So I don't want us to just be assuming

that everyone out there can read our body language

as easily as we can read theirs, or each other's,

and I don't want us to assume

that everyone has the same body language,

both because of neurodiversity and cultural differences.

I want us to be more aware of these things.

I think that addressing all of these issues

can make consent a little bit easier of a concept.

It's maybe never going to be super easy, but

I hope this has been clarifying, and

I really want us to stop talking about consent

as if it's super super simple,

because I don't think it is.

Yeah, that's what I have to say.

If you have anything to share, please comment,

and as usual, if you like my video,

I really love when people subscribe.

I talk about just about everything, but

if you like how I talk about things,

consider subscribing to my channel.

Thank you!

For more infomation >> Why is Consent Such a Difficult Concept? - Duration: 10:39.

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

Is the Maschine Mikro mk3 a game changer? - Duration: 4:11.

- I'm a huge fan of the Maschine MK3.

The original, the big one, this one.

I've been playing it exclusively for the past year

because I liked the pads so much.

I usually use the device in MIDI mode

and I trigger a software drum kit with it

and from the moment I got it, I loved it.

And when I heard that Native Instruments

was releasing the Maschine Mikro MK3

I was very excited because I figured this could be

a game changer, 'cause you know, as I said,

I use the device mostly in MIDI mode,

the original Maschine MK3 and I basically only need the pads

so, I figured wow, if they release this Mikro MK3 for $250

and the pads are as great as the original Maschine MK3 pads,

boy oh boy, this, it's going to be a game changer.

So, I ordered one, I got it, I received it on Monday.

And, I'm gonna tell you whether I think this device

is everything that I hoped it to be, so stay tuned.

♪ Hmm, The Quest for Groove ♪

- So is the Mikro MK3 the game changer

that I hoped it would be?

Well the answer is, almost, but not really.

To me it's all about the pads,

about the sensitivity of the pads,

responsiveness of the pads, and in all honesty

I did notice a slight difference in quality

and in some other reviews on YouTube

I noticed that people said the pads are exactly the same.

Well they're not exactly the same,

if you set them to the most sensitive level,

they're just a little bit less responsive.

And I guess for $250 the cheapest machine

Native Instruments ever released, for $250,

it's still great value for money,

but it's not the same thing as the big Maschine MK3.

Lets do a quick comparison between the two devices,

and the way I'm gonna do that,

is by setting the pads to fixed velocity,

and setting the sensitivity to the maximum sensitivity

Maschine software for both devices.

And I'm going to try and play the exact same pattern

with the exact same force,

and we're gonna see what that sounds like.

Okay, the Maschine MK3, whoa, (cymbals)

well, as you notice it's very sensitive.

Okay, here we go.

(lively drum beat)

Okay here we go, the Mikro, same pattern.

(lively drum beat)

So, this thing comes close, but it's not the exact same

pad sensitivity as the MK3,

Three more things, one thing that I noticed

was that with this Mikro MK3 there was a little bit more

double notes triggering.

I don't think that's a big deal

or a deal breaker or anything but, I noticed it.

Second thing is, right now you cannot use

the Mikro MK3 in MIDI mode.

But, when I went to the Native Instrument's forum

I noticed that Native Instruments already

put out a statement saying that they will

implement MIDI mode in the Mikro MK3 soon.

So, that's also not really a deal breaker.

The last thing is that I'm actually

looking forward to a new release

by PreSonus, which is the PreSonus ATOM.

It's a $150 pad controller

that I'm looking forward to checking out.

So, I actually emailed PreSonus and I asked them

if they can send me one.

And as soon as they have one available,

they will send me an ATOM controller to review,

and obviously I can't make any promises.

If the pads suck, they suck, and I will be honest about it,

but you know, it's a $150 device.

Maybe, if the pads are just as good,

or maybe a little bit better,

or just as good as the Maschine.

I have high hopes, because you know,

I feel like you always have to have a positive outlook so.

Yeah okay, blah blah blah blah blah,

but should I buy the Mikro MK3, that's what I wanna know.

It's not a bad device, you can definitely buy it,

and use the Maschine software.

250 bucks, it's great value for money,

but if you want super good pads,

I would still get the normal Maschine MK3.

I hope to see you again next week for another video.

And until then stay groovy, bye bye.