Monthly Archives: January 2018

When will Hillary Clinton be arrested?, Judicial Watch, Clinton emails new smoking gun reveals Hillary fully in charge of setting up her outlaw email system, Deeply involved in her server and use of unsecure email system

When will Hillary Clinton be arrested?, Judicial Watch, Clinton emails new smoking gun reveals Hillary fully in charge of setting up her outlaw email system, Deeply involved in her server and use of unsecure email system

“If This Story Gets Out, We Are Screwed”…Wikileaks: Doug Band to John Podesta

“James Comey’s decision to revive the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server and her handling of classified material came after he could no longer resist mounting pressure by mutinous agents in the FBI, including some of his top deputies, according to a source close to the embattled FBI director.”…Daily Mail October 30, 2016

“This is a major victory. After years of hard work in federal court, Judicial Watch has forced the State Department to finally allow Americans to see these public documents. It will be in keeping with our past experience that Abedin’s emails on Weiner’s laptop will include classified and other sensitive materials. That these government docs were on Anthony Weiner’s laptop dramatically illustrates the need for the Justice Department to finally do a serious investigation of Hillary Clinton’s and Huma Abedin’s obvious violations of law.”…Judicial Watch


From Judicial Watch.

“Weekly Update: New Smoking Gun Clinton Emails!”

“One of the myths perpetrated by Hillary Clinton and her lieutenants is that she was mostly helpless when it came to using email and that she knew nothing about keeping it secure. It has been repeated so often that it has been accepted as true, even though it defies common sense.

Now there is even more evidence to debunk this myth.

This week we released 78 pages of new documents from the State Department containing emails that former Secretary of State Clinton sent and received over her unsecure, non-“” email system. Three of the email exchanges include classified information. The emails also reveal that Clinton had detailed knowledge about the security issues with her non-State Department email system.

On March 8, 2011, Clinton sent classified information regarding Bahrain to Justin Cooper, who reportedly had no security clearance, with instructions to show it to Bill Clinton. Cooper was the Bill Clinton aide who asked State Department IT specialist Bryan Pagliano to build a server for Mrs. Clinton in early 2009, as she started her new job as Secretary of State.

On August 24, 2010, Clinton emailed Cooper additional classified information to print, including the secretary’s call sheet for Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee.

In a February 13, 2010, email exchange, Clinton passed along classified information to Cooper. It originally was sent to Cheryl Mills (Clinton’s then-chief of staff) by U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual. The classified information included a note from Mexican Foreign Secretary Patricia Espinosa to Clinton. In the email to Cooper, Clinton asks him to “look for Espinosa’s note and respond.”

The documents are part of the accelerated schedule of production ordered by U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg, which requires the State Department to complete processing by September 28, 2018, the remaining documents of the 72,000 pages recovered by the FBI in its investigation into Clinton’s illicit email server. These new classified and other emails appear to be among those that Clinton had attempted to delete or had otherwise failed to disclose.”

“The emails also reveal that despite Clinton’s claims that she “really didn’t stop to think about what kind of email system there would be,” she was deeply involved in a wide variety of issues involving her server and her use of the unsecure email system. Discussions include:

  • March 8, 2012, email exchange among Cooper, Pagliano and Clinton about the server and email.
  • September 29, 2009, email exchange between Cooper and Clinton discusses the backup of emails.
  • An August 31, 2011, email between Cooper and Hillary Clinton discusses the setting up of Clinton’s iPad.
  • In an email on February 12, 2010, Sidney Blumenthal writes Clinton a memo passing along a speech on Saudi Arabia by Chas Freeman, former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, urging closer U.S. ties with the Saudi Kingdom. Blumenthal also reportedly worked for the Clinton Foundation.”

“Can we now also dismiss the myth that Clinton “cooperated” with the email investigations?

The fact that Hillary Clinton and her agents tried to destroy or hide emails shows how she flagrantly and knowingly violated the laws that protect classified information and government records. And these new emails refute Hillary Clinton’s repeated claims of having little or no knowledge about her email system. She clearly was fully in charge of setting up her outlaw email system and overseeing its use. When will the Justice Department act?

Or, to put it more bluntly, when will Hillary Clinton be arrested?”

Read more:


More here:


Oprah Winfrey website scrubbed down low articles after 2008 DNC convention, Coincidence or more hypocrisy?, Winfrey and Obama attended TUCC church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright ran “matchmaking service” known as down low club

Oprah Winfrey website scrubbed down low articles after 2008 DNC convention, Coincidence or more hypocrisy?, Winfrey and Obama attended TUCC church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright ran “matchmaking service” known as down low club

“Why was Barack Obama absent from the opening session of the IL Senate on November 4, 1999?”…Citizen Wells

“I spent the last two years of high school in a daze, locking away the questions that life seemed insistent on imposing. I kept playing basketball, attended
classes sparingly, drank beer heavily, and tried drugs enthusiastically.”…Barack Obama

“In both conversations with Obama for America and AKP Message & Media, I explained that on November 6, 1999, I had been introduced to Barack Obama by a friend and that Obama had, in fact, sold me an eight-ball of cocaine and had himself engaged in smoking crack cocaine in my limo on that date and again in my hotel room the following day.”…Larry Sinclair, “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder”


Oprah Winfrey’s website scrubbed down low articles that had been up since 2004 after the DNC Convention in 2008.

The articles were still up on July 6, 2008.

The Oprah Winfrey Show
Home Page
The Oprah Winfrey Show
Oprah After The Show
O, The Oprah Magazine
O at Home
Oprah & Friends Radio
Harpo Films
Oprah's Book Club
Oprah's Angel Network
Expert Minutes
About Oprah
Oprah Boutique
Spirit and Self
Food and Home
Mind and Body
Beauty and Style
World Exclusives
Message Boards
Oprah Alert
E-Mail Us

A Secret Sex World: Living on the “Down Low”

Author J.L. King blows the cover off a hidden sexual underground.
Watch Watch Video Preview Watch Order Tape/Transcript
Watch Watch After the Show E-mail to a Friend E-mail to a friend

Many of us thought AIDS was under control—we were wrong. AIDS is on the rise again and everyone is at risk.

New statistics reveal surprising high-risk groups AIDS/HIV in America
Not only are more African-Americans getting AIDS in record numbers, more women, more college students and people over age 50 are at greater risk than ever before.
Could your man be on the down low? Sex, Lies and Double Lives
J.L. King is breaking the silence about a hidden sexual lifestyle: husbands sleeping with other menWhat it means to live on the “down low.”
Unprotected sex puts everyone at risk for AIDS/HIV.
Could This Happen to You?
AIDS is not just a gay white man’s disease. African American men living on the “down low,” and straight women—the new faces of AIDS.

Related Resources
J.L. King’s book is called On the Down Low: A Journey into the Lives of “Straight” Black Men Who Sleep with Men
Organizations and online resources you can use to educate yourself about AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases.

Original Air Date: April 16, 2004
Video Help Video Help
Inside the Show
As an African-American woman, this is a topic that affects the way I think about dating. The ignorance and denial about the fact that anyone can be vulnerable to HIV if they engage in unprotected sex, especially with men, is THE major factor in the spread of HIV in the African-American community.

— pisceanchk

AIDS: A Global Epidemic
Bono on AIDS in Africa
Vintage Oprah: AIDS in West Virginia

The 2008 DNC Convention took place Aug 25, 2008 – Aug 28, 2008.


On September  22, 2008 we find:

“Thank you for your interest in this story. This page is unavailable at this time. Please try again soon for exciting new enhancements and an all-new”

Continue to browse  


From WND October 2, 2012.


‘Matchmaker’ Rev. Jeremiah Wright ‘provided cover for gays’”

“Ten years ago, the New York Times reported on a growing underground subculture in the black community known as Down Low, comprised largely of men who secretly engage in homosexual activity while living “straight” lives in public.

It’s within that subtext that opposition researchers for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign began investigating rumors that Rev. Jeremiah Wright was running a “matchmaking service” for members of his Trinity United Church of Christ known as the Down Low Club, which included Barack Obama.

Over the past several months, WND investigators have interviewed a number of members of the church who claim the president benefited from Wright’s efforts to help black men who engage in homosexual activity appear respectable in black society by finding them a wife.

The 2003 New York Times story, “Double Lives on the Down Low,” said that though many black men reject “a gay culture they perceive as white and effeminate,” they “have settled on a new identity, with its own vocabulary and customs and its own name: Down Low.”

The Times said that while “there are black men who are openly gay, it seems that the majority of those having sex with men still lead secret lives, products of a black culture that deems masculinity and fatherhood as a black man’s primary responsibility – and homosexuality as a white man’s perversion.”

The Down Low Club at Trinity “doesn’t have meetings, and it isn’t like the Rotary Club,” a source identified for this article as “Carolyn” explained to a WND investigator in Chicago.

“It was more that Wright served as a matchmaker,” said Carolyn, a 20-year member of Trinity who has played a role in church administration and knows the Obamas personally.

“He kept his eye on the young guys coming up in Trinity,” she said, “and if he spotted someone that acted or looked gay, then Wright would give them kind of a guidance counselor-type direction on how to keep down low – how to do the things they wanted to do, but then also getting married and looking ‘respectable’ – being part of black society.”

To Trinity insiders, the Down Low Club was simply known as “the program.”

“That’s the terminology. At Trinity, you’re urged to ‘get with the program,’” explained a male beneficiary of the Down Low Club. “What that means is it’s OK to go ahead and have sex with men, just as long as you ‘get with the program’ and marry a woman, somebody no straight guy would want to marry.”

The wife, the Down Low Club member explained, is “your ‘beard,’ your cover – so you can look like you’re living a straight life, even thought your not.”

The male source was a “computer consultant” who claims not to know “scratch” about computers. But “getting with the program” at Trinity meant he could keep living a “gay” life and receive lots of computer consulting work thrown his way by Trinity, as long as he was willing to marry an unattractive woman who otherwise might have ended up a lonely spinster with no means to provide for living.

Carolyn explained that for many black families, attending Trinity was a way out of poverty.

“Trinity was a chance to network,” she said. “The stuff preached was hateful, but about 70 percent of those who go there ignore the radical rhetoric and just trying to get ahead.”

Carolyn said Trinity “helped a lot of blacks get successful and connected.”

“That’s what Wright did for Obama,” she claimed. “He connected Obama in the community, and he helped Obama hide his homosexuality.”

Openly homosexual author and commentator Keith Boykin, a former White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, mentions Obama’s former pastor, Wright, on pages 264-265 of his 2005 book “Beyond the Down Low: Sex, Lies, and Denial in Black America.” While Boykin doesn’t refer to the Down Low Club by name, he regards Wright as among a small group of ministers who are “coming to grips with sexuality and opening up a dialogue with heterosexuals, homosexuals, and bisexuals in the pews.”

Chicago-based author, businessman, speaker and HIV/AIDS activist J.L. King wrote a controversial book in 2005 called “On the Down Low: A Journey into the Lives of ‘Straight’ Black Men who Sleep with Men.”

He was a guest on Oprah Winfrey’s Chicago-based TV show in 2004, which described him this way: “J.L. King had a life most would envy. He married his high school sweetheart, had two healthy children and was on the fast track to success. But, unbeknownst to his family and friends, he had a dark secret—he was living on the down low.”

Carolyn and the other members of Trinity who provided statements corroborating her testimony were insistent that WND conceal their identities as a condition of being interviewed.

“I’m still scared to discuss any of this,” Carolyn said.

“At Trinity, if you even hint at talking about Obama being gay, you are reminded of our dear departed choir director,” she said. “He was killed, and it wasn’t a robbery. The Christmas presents weren’t touched. The TV was not taken, nothing in the apartment was missing.”

Carolyn’s reference was to Donald Young, the 47-year-old homosexual choirmaster at Trinity who died of multiple gunshot wounds in his Chicago apartment Dec. 24, 2007.”


Read more:



More here:


Grace Murray Hopper USNR, David and Goliath, Selected computer articles 78, Department of Defense computer institute

Grace Murray Hopper USNR, David and Goliath, Selected computer articles 78, Department of Defense computer institute

“People are not ‘well-behaved’ mathematical functions.”…Grace Murray Hopper, “David and Goliath”

“It is insufficient to plan on the past alone; the plan must be examined in the light of ‘all possible future developments.'”…Grace Murray Hopper, “David and Goliath”


I have a book given to me by Admiral Grace Murray Hopper. She was a Captain when I met her. During the 1979-80 academic year I escorted her to a speech she gave at the small college in NC where I taught Computer Science. I had the great fortune and honor to have over an hour of one on one time conversing with her.

I have not decided what to do with the book. I could only find one reference to it on the internet. There is a copy in the Jimmy Carter Library.

Even though Ms Hopper is often quoted from her article, I could find no reference to it on the internet. Duty called and I subsequently typed in the article and it is now available to read.

David and Goliath

By Captain Grace Murray Hopper, USNR

From “Computers in the Navy” 1976.

Included in “Selected Computer Articles 78”, Department of Defense Computer Institute

“Captain Grace Murray Hopper, USNR, graduated from Vassar College and received her M.A. and Ph.D. from Yale University. She entered the Naval Reserve in 1943 under the V-9 program. Completing Midshipman School, she was commissioned a lieutenant (junior grade) and reported to the Bureau of Ordnance Computation Project at Harvard which was then operating the Mark I computer and designing the Mark II. Released to inactive duty in 1946, she joined Sperry UNIVAC as a senior mathematician, advanced to staff scientist, and was retired, in absentia, in 1971. Capt. Hopper was placed on the Naval Reserve Retired list on 31 December 1966 with the rank of commander and recalled to active duty 1 August 1967. She is presently serving in the Information Management Division (Op-91) of OPNAV. Capt. Hopper is a member of Phi Beta Kappa and of sigma Xi, a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a Distinguished Fellow of the British Computer Society and a member of the National Academy of Engineering. She has received many awards for work in computer software including the Harry Goode Memorial Award from the American Association of Information Processing Societies and the Wilbur Lucious Cross Medal from Yale. She has received honorary doctorates in science from Long Island University, in engineering from the New Jersey College of Engineering and of laws from the University of Pennsylvania. At the request of the Department of the Navy, she was promoted by an Act of Congress in 1973 to Captain on the Naval Reserve Retired List.


Early in the 1950’s, a Naval War College correspondence course included a task which, in part, and paraphrased, read:
1. Make a plan to take an island.
2. Review the plan in the light of all possible enemy actions.
3. Examine the cost of failure to execute the plan.

This technique must be applied to all plans for the use of computer equipment. It is insufficient to plan on the past alone; the plan must be examined in the light of “all possible future developments.” Further, the lost-opportunity cost of omitting the plan or any part of the plan must be evaluated against the cost of implementing the plan. In a practical sense, we examine feasible alternatives and future developments that we can foresee.

The examination of future possibilities is dictated by factors endemic in the computer world: the acceleration of change in hardware developments, the exponential increase in the complexity of application systems, the changing ratio of software against hardware costs and the steadily increasing demand for information–processed data for management decision-making. All of these are pressured by an increasingly complex and interdependent world with its growing population, greater demand for supplies of food and goods, recurring shortages and unpredictable economic and political events. More rapid decisions require fast acquisition of more data and more timely interrelation and reporting of the derived information.

One of Parkinson’s laws says in effect that the growth of a system increases its complexity and that this increase of complexity leads ultimately to confusion and chaos. Even before this final stage is reached, however, facilities can be so overloaded that a small breakdown anywhere in the system produces a close to catastrophic result.

The proper preventative measure is to divide the system into subsystems, each module being as nearly independent as possible. When an enterprise created and directed by a single man grows beyond his ability to manage alone, he will divide it into divisions and sections and appoint vice-presidents to manage them. No engineer would attempt to design a missile alone; rather he will identify sections–nosecone with payload, guidance system, fuel section, motor–and the interfaces between them. Each section is then contracted to a specialist in that category. To divide the work properly, he must have a clear understanding of the how and why of each subdivision’s contribution to the whole.

The Problem

The application of systems has been successful in scientific and technical applications and to some extent in business situations. It meets difficulty when it is applied in social and political situations largely because people are not “well-behaved” mathematical functions, but can only be represented by statistical approximations, and all of the extremes can and do occur.

Entire books have been and will be written on the application of systems concepts to the development, transmission and use of information by computers. It is clear that as the quantity of information grows, so also does the complexity of its structure, the difficulty of selecting the information pertinent to a particular decision, and the amount of “noise” infiltrating the information. A flow is smooth and clear so long as the quantity of flow matches the size of the conduit. If the flow is increased or the conduit roughened, turbulence and confusion or “noise” appear.

Yet, information in large quantities must flow smoothly to decision makers if large systems are to be managed efficiently. Computers can process, control and direct this flow of information, but the speed and capacity of a single computer are limited by physical factors such as the velocity of electronic and optical circuits and the ability to dissipate heat, by cost of hardware and software, and by the ability of human beings to construct error-free, monolithic systems. Only by paralleling processors can the physical limits be overcome. The division of systems into subsystems also provides an answer to the complexity and cost of software as well as reducing error potentials. Fortunately, the rapid reduction in the cost of hardware, occurring simultaneously with an increase in the power of hardware, makes modular systems possible in the present–and practical in the near future.

Parrelleling of peripheral operations with central processor operations using multiprogramming techniques is common practice. Computer systems encompassing co-equal multiprocessors are also available. But, both types of systems are monolithic. The first is controlled by the single central processor and the second by a single executive (operating system). Hence, to cope with more information, processor and executive alike can only grow larger, faster, more complex, more subject to the increase of turbulance and noise and more demanding of controls and housekeeping to maintain the information flow. The system begins to resemble a dinosaur with a large, unwieldy load on his back. At some point an added requirement, like the proverbial last straw, will cause a collapse.

Thus at some point in the life of any system it becomes too large to be sustained by a single control. Tasks must be divided, subsystems defined and responsibilities delegated. Two elements were necesary before the concept of “systems of computers” could become a reality–switching systems and minicomputers.

The Opportunity

Consider a system of computers controlling, for example, an inventory system. At a remote site, A, a transaction is entered on a console called Alpha. The console contains a minicomputer which checks the message and reduces it to a minimal format for transmission using a “telephone number” or an “address” to dial the switching center, Beta, for the inventory minicomputers. Unless all are “busy,” in which case Alpha must try again after a delay, computer Gamma accepts Alpha’s message. Gamma determines that the message indicates the receipt of a particular shipment, B, at a certain warehouse, C; Gamma “dials” Delta, the computer controlling the necessary Master-file entry. Delta locates and transmits the master entry to Gamma who processes the transactions and returns the master entry to Delta for storage. Gamma probably also dials Epsilon with a message to increase the value of the inventory at warehouse C by the amount indicated. Epsilon is a minicomputer controlling a mini-database. Each element of the system contains, and is controlled by, its own minicomputer. Thus, input is processed before it is transmitted to the working-processing computers. The librarian minicomputer, Delta, will control the storage, withdrawal and updating of programs and will deliver a program to other minicomputerss in the system upon request.

Al of the computers in such a system operate asynchronously and can be replaced at will–with a few spares on hand, the system cannot really go completely down. The system can shrink or grow since units can be added or interchanged. Functions of an operating system are either eliminated or distributed. “Busy signals” limit access to a particular file controller to one mini at a time. Data security can be ensured by the file controllers which can reject requests or transmissions unless properly identified.

Savings in software costs can be considerable. Programs are short, modular and easily debuggable. Compilers break up into input compilers, processing compilers, computer compilers, editing compilers and output compilers. The difficulties encountered in debugging large, complex, interactive software systems are reduced to the lesser difficulties of debugging the component subsystems. Very large computational problems might require an assembly line of minicomputers, manufacturing results just as automobiles are manufactured.

Having cut back on overhead by breaking up the hardware and software into subassemblies and linking them by communications, we must now consider the effect on management information. Since computers were first installed to handle basic record-keeping, most systems operate by first updating basic records. Later, reports are accumulated from the basic record files. Taking a simple example, when a life insurance policy is sold, a record of all the facts about the insured is transmitted to a master file, including name, address, beneficiary, social security number, type of policy, amount, salesman, selling office and region. The insurance company marketing manager is not concerned with the facts about the beneficiary, but only the type of policy, amount and where sold. Hence, a mini-data-base can be maintained on-line for the local manager’s use, in which are stored current totals, such as total sales by salesman, by type and by area for this week or month, as well as last month, last year or any selected comparison bases. Another mini-data-base can be maintained for national headquarters. However, here the totals would be by office or by region rather than by individual salesman. For any basic record file, those quantities which can be totaled are collected. Management will be concerned with such totals and their comparisons and relationships. The mini-data-bases at each level will hold but a fraction of the raw data stored in the basic record files. Alternatively, a system of minicomputers can collect management totals as soon as a transaction enters a system, possibly even on-line, and update the basic files later, possibly in batches.

New concepts such as “systems of computers” and “mini-data-bases” will have to be employed to meet the challenging problems of the future. If such concepts are so obviously needed, why do the dinosaurs continue to proliferate? Three factors tend to retard the development of the new methods I have described: human allergy to change, economic arguments against disposing of existing hardware and software instantly, and the dearth of systems analysts trained in the new systems architecture.

An examination of coming developments should impel the creation of the dispersed systems. But visions of the future collide with the reluctance to alter old ways. Even in a world of accelerating change, it is still difficult to convince people that new ways of doing things can be better and cheaper.

Introduction of the new systems must proceed gradually–maybe helped along by a little persuasion, a catch phrase oe two (“don’t get a bigger computer, get another computer”). If an existing system is nearing saturation, it’s load can be eased by a front-end computer for validating and editing (which will later move to the data source). A back-end computer can guard and control the data base (and later become the data manager providing access to a system of computers serving the files and segments of files). Wholesale replacement is not required; rather the change may be made step by step as the potential of the new system becomes obvious.

In areas where hardware plays a larger role, such as industrial operations, the microcomputers will appear within the sensors on the equipment. They will communicate with concentrators making local decisions. Concentrators will forward processed and condensed information to local directing computers for action. Messages forwarded to and from the management data base will report production and receive instructions for alteration of a mix to be forwarded to controlling minicomputers. Only through such a system of computers operating in parallel will it be possible to provide the speed essential to the control of critical operations.

The Challenge

Thus, there is a challenge, a challenge to bring down the myth of the monolithic, expensive, powerful computer and replace it with a more powerful, more economical, more reliable and, above all, more manageable system of computers. A world concerned with more complex problems will require a quantum jump in information processing to meet management requirements. The computers can assist, but only insofar as they are recognized as sophisticated tools and as they are reformed and organized to meet specific needs for processed data.

The need for standards will become clear as communications among the components of such a system grow. Data elements, communications protocols, high level languages and more–all must be defined, standardized and conformance insured if large and flexible systems are to prove viable and costs are to be held to acceptable levels.

One concept must always govern planning–that it consider the future. Ignoring the future results in inadequate, outmoded systems continually in need of costly change and updating, and never quite in tune with the work requirements. Concomitantly, no innovation or standard should be rejected as too costly without careful evaluation of the “cost of not doing it.”

My encounter:

More on Admiral Grace Murray Hopper:



More here: