Imperial Cleaning

Ashley Madison

I checked on Twitter and still could not find anything.

DEA Inflicts Harm on Chronic Pain Patients

Write with confidence with...

Documents seen by the Observer , and confirmed by a Facebook statement, show that by late the company had found out that information had been harvested on an unprecedented scale. However, at the time it failed to alert users and took only limited steps to recover and secure the private information of more than 50 million individuals.

Aleksandr Kogan was born in Moldova and lived in Moscow until the age of seven, then moved with his family to the US, where he became a naturalised citizen. He studied at the University of California, Berkeley, and got his PhD at the University of Hong Kong before joining Cambridge as a lecturer in psychology and expert in social media psychometrics. While at Cambridge he accepted a position at St Petersburg State University, and also took Russian government grants for research. He changed his name to Spectre when he married, but later reverted to Kogan.

That earned Bannon the post of chief strategist to the president and for a while he was arguably the second most powerful man in America. By August his relationship with Trump had soured and he was out.

Robert Mercer, 71, is a computer scientist and hedge fund billionaire, who used his fortune to become one of the most influential men in US politics as a top Republican donor. The New York Times is reporting that copies of the data harvested for Cambridge Analytica could still be found online; its reporting team had viewed some of the raw data. The data was collected through an app called thisisyourdigitallife, built by academic Aleksandr Kogan, separately from his work at Cambridge University.

Through his company Global Science Research GSR , in collaboration with Cambridge Analytica, hundreds of thousands of users were paid to take a personality test and agreed to have their data collected for academic use. On Friday, four days after the Observer sought comment for this story, but more than two years after the data breach was first reported, Facebook announced that it was suspending Cambridge Analytica and Kogan from the platform, pending further information over misuse of data.

The revelations provoked widespread outrage. The Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey announced that the state would be launching an investigation.

The Democratic senator Mark Warner said the harvesting of data on such a vast scale for political targeting underlined the need for Congress to improve controls. He has proposed an Honest Ads Act to regulate online political advertising the same way as television, radio and print. It may be data about people who are on Facebook that they have gathered themselves, but it is not data that we have provided.

Wylie, a Canadian data analytics expert who worked with Cambridge Analytica and Kogan to devise and implement the scheme, showed a dossier of evidence about the data misuse to the Observer which appears to raise questions about their testimony.

It includes emails, invoices, contracts and bank transfers that reveal more than 50 million profiles — mostly belonging to registered US voters — were harvested from the site in one of the largest-ever breaches of Facebook data. Facebook on Friday said that it was also suspending Wylie from accessing the platform while it carried out its investigation, despite his role as a whistleblower.

At the time of the data breach, Wylie was a Cambridge Analytica employee, but Facebook described him as working for Eunoia Technologies, a firm he set up on his own after leaving his former employer in late That legal letter was sent several months after the Guardian first reported the breach and days before it was officially announced that Bannon was taking over as campaign manager for Trump and bringing Cambridge Analytica with him.

Facebook did not pursue a response when the letter initially went unanswered for weeks because Wylie was travelling, nor did it follow up with forensic checks on his computers or storage, he said. They waited two years and did absolutely nothing to check that the data was deleted. All they asked me to do was tick a box on a form and post it back. Paul-Olivier Dehaye, a data protection specialist, who spearheaded the investigative efforts into the tech giant, said: A majority of American states have laws requiring notification in some cases of data breach, including California, where Facebook is based.

Facebook denies that the harvesting of tens of millions of profiles by GSR and Cambridge Analytica was a data breach. Facebook said it removed the app in and required certification from everyone with copies that the data had been destroyed, although the letter to Wylie did not arrive until the second half of The company is now investigating reports that not all data had been deleted. Kogan, who has previously unreported links to a Russian university and took Russian grants for research, had a licence from Facebook to collect profile data, but it was for research purposes only.

For the fraudulent allegation that the couple had earned tax-related "income" and owed taxes, the DOJ conspirators produced what was purported to be an IRS "Examination Report" saying this, and entered it into the record of the case.

But anyone who actually read the accompanying "declaration" of the anonymous "preparer" who admitted to be using a fake name for some unexplained reason would discover that in fact, no actual examination had been made. So, both the assertion that the refunds were made in error and that the couple actually owed tax were fraudulent. Instead, the evidence shows that the educated filings reclaiming everything withheld and determining that no tax-relevant "income" had been received other than the interest and dividend gains shown on the returns were correct in every respect and actually undisputed as such.

The real purpose of the schemer's "lawsuit" was the delivery of a giant lie to the American public in order to prevent more people from reading CtC and learning the individual-empowering, state-restraining truth about the real nature and application of the income tax. So, in addition to the fraudulent assertion that the couple's returns and claims were "false", there was another assault on the truth in the contrived "complaint". This other assault involved two components.

One of these real-purpose-of-the-lawsuit components was a mendacious assertion that CtC makes the absurd claim that "only federal, state and local government workers are subject to the income tax".

See that lie and another that the book argues that "wages are not income" acknowledged, and repeated, here. And if you haven't read CtC for yourself yet, see some rebuttals of those lies by folks who have here , and see well over a thousand examples of the hundreds of thousands of occasions in which the federal and state governments have acknowledged that what the book DOES say is perfectly correct, here.

These lies about what appears in CtC are then used as grounds for a "finding" that the book is "false and frivolous" by a judge who never actually read it.

This "finding" is then used both for direct efforts to smear the book in a general propaganda campaign among tax professionals, and so that the returns which produced the refunds that are the purported focus of the lawsuit, and which are declaredly in keeping with what is found in CtC , can, in turn, be "found" by the judge, and trumpeted to the world by the DOJ, as "false".

Truly an Orwellian kind of corruption and deceit. By one of these requested injunctions the author of CtC and his wife would be ordered to repudiate their freely-made declarations of belief concerning the taxable character of their earnings and made to instead declare-- over their own signatures-- that they believed that all their earnings are taxable.

By the other, the couple would be threatened with a 'contempt-of-court" charge if they ever testified in a fashion the conspirators didn't like in a future tax-related matter by virtue of the pretense that any disfavored testimony on a tax form would be based on the notions they had falsely ascribed to CtC.

Never before in American history have the contents of a book been the subject of a deliberate misrepresentation in a formal legal filing by government officials. Of course, you would think that the judge presiding over this "lawsuit" with its bogus documents and assertions, and plainly lawless and unconstitutional requests would throw it out while holding her nose, and sanction, if not propose criminal charges against those responsible Unfortunately, you'd be wrong.

Instead, Judge Nancy Edmunds joins the assault on the law and the truth, and becomes party to this monstrous crime against the American public.

Without so much as a single hearing , and without ever reading CtC , she ignores the couple's demand for a jury trial and simply signs a "judgment" written entirely by the DOJ operatives. Unsurprisingly it having been written by the plaintiff , Edmunds' "judgment" makes "judicial findings" of every single assertion in the complaint.

It also includes the rights-gutting, law-defying injunctions, as well. National press releases are issued trumpeting CtC 's "defeat in court". Government trolls begin creating websites touting the "judicial findings" and doing everything possible to spread the lies. The "tax honesty" communities on the net are infected with the lies, which therefore take hold in the alt-media community.

The "tax-trouble remediation" industry is especially well-dosed with this Kool-Aid. In every way they can think of, those behind this conspiracy have been working feverishly for years now to prevent the American public from realizing the liberating truth about the broadly-loathed but equally-broadly misunderstood income tax.

They have been working equally hard to intimidate those who know the truth into relinquishing their rights to speak freely and to assert and defend their interests in legal contests over whether or not they are liable for any tax. And yet, all the while, Americans across the country who aren't so stupid as to take on faith anything chucked-up by government officials, especially anything which, if other than how the officials portrayed it, would threaten the power and perks of those same officials, and have actually read CtC and know what it REALLY says, continue to demand and receive all their improperly-collected money back and to shut down efforts to misapply the tax to their non-federal-privilege-connected earnings.

Every single one of those now hundreds of thousands of refunds and other effective implementations of what CtC REALLY says happen only after thorough vetting by the government. Occasional resistance by the government to claims made by CtC -educated American men and women end in government surrender to the truth. Those two have certainly been the victims of crimes see here and here , and these vicious crimes continue to this day and deeply threaten the rights of every single American.

But the crime of the century is not against them. It is YOU who are being deliberately and systematically lied to, for the specific purpose of keeping you in ignorant subjugation to an exploitative scheme by which corrupt elements of the political class, their cronies and their clients have been fleecing you for vast amounts of wealth throughout your entire life. The US Department of Treasury has never treated Judge Nancy Edmunds' judgment in the fraudulent lawsuit discussed here as valid, and quietly continues to recognize the accuracy of the Hendricksons' original and returns.

Nonetheless, that "judgment" was presented as witnessless evidence against Peter Hendrickson in his trial on charges that he doesn't really believe what he has written in CtC , and was used as a pretext for charges against Doreen Hendrickson for allegedly-criminal resistance to the orders it included. It should be kept in mind going forward that every adverse, scary or scornful thing you've ever heard about CtC has come from the minds, mouths and hands of the same folks whose frauds are documented above, or is based on their efforts.

Those folks have been struggling hard since to keep you from realizing that the actual legitimate institutional responses to CtC are what you see here , and to keep you from thinking about what you will find here.

Navigation menu

Share this: