Category: IT

The New York Times published an article on February 14, 2025, titled “J.D. Vance’s TikTok Battle Shows Forces at Play in Fight for the Middle Country.” The article reveals that J.D. Vance, the author of the best-selling Hillbilly Elegy, is launching a social media campaign on TikTok to counter mainstream media’s narrative and connect with the working class. Vance’s videos aim to challenge the perception that young people from rural areas are uninformed and struggling with basic life skills. The article explores the growing importance and influence of social media platforms such as TikTok, which Vance believes can challenge traditional media sources and reach a younger audience. The article’s tag format could be: tech, media, politics, business, social media, hillbilly elegy, j.d. vance.

The original article

Here’s an article in wordpress tag format:
Title: A Look into SNL Executive Producer, Lorne Michaels’ Career and Legacy
Featured Image: A photo of Lorne Michaels in front of the SNL logo on the set.
Date Published: Feb 14, 2025
Byline: By Sarah Matthews
Plain Text:
On February 11, 2025, NBC Universal CEO Jeff Shell announced during their quarterly earnings call that Lorne Michaels, the legendary producer and creator of Saturday Night Live, would exit the network. With Michaels’ departure, it’s a good time to reflect on his extraordinary career and legacy.
Born in a Toronto suburb, Michaels was fascinated with comedy from a very young age, serving as the producer of the popular Canadian Broadcasting Corporation show, SCTV, between 1975 and 1981. SCTV’s pedigree is nothing short of legendary, featuring talented comedians like Rick Moranis, Harold Ramis, and Martin Short.
In 1975, Michaels moved to New York and quickly started working on getting his own sketch comedy show off the ground. After realizing that Saturday Night Live was on hiatus, he saw an opportunity and pitched the show to NBC executives. They signed off on his idea, and the rest is history.
In what is now a lengthy 45-year tenure, SNL has become more than just a television program; it’s a cultural touchstone. It’s launched the careers of world-class comedians like Tina Fey, Stephen Colbert, and Amy Poehler, earning it 10 Primetime Emmy Awards. Advancements in technology have allowed SNL to be accessed online, with the most-watched clip from the show being Chance the Rapper performing “Ultralight Beam (SNL Skit)” in 2016, garnering 23 million views.
SNL has certainly had its fair share of controversy over the years, prompting some media watchdogs to question if Lorne Michaels has stage-managed the comedy to align more with club-oriented issues than those reflective of what’s happening in the nation. Critics have called SNL far too exclusive; en masse, Fox News viewers plead for SPARTACUS-style solidarity in their condemnation against SNL.
Ironically enough, we’re seeing a barrage of SNL-affiliated alumni get recruited to late-night talk show lineups (from Jimmy Fallon to Jimmy Kimmel, among others). However, what will replace Michaels is still unknown. Will SNL remain a mainstay for NBC or will they opt for something new? Regardless, it’s hard to envision a network without Lorne Michaels at the helm.
Michaels has left a significant imprint on American culture. Expect more news about his long-range plans in the coming days.
Categories: Lorne Michaels, Saturday Night Live, NBC Universal.
Tags: Lorne Michaels, Saturday Night Live, NBC Universal, TV executives, TV legends, TV productions, TV shows, Canadian comedy legends.

The original article

In the article “Trump Tacitly Embraces Putin’s View of Ukraine, Officials Warn” published by The New York Times on February 14, 2025, the reporters Alan Rappeport and Michael S. Schmidt exposed President Trump’s alignment with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s opinion on Ukraine. The key assertions made during the President’s speech at the Munich Security Conference were highlighted in this report.
Another major topic addressed in this article was Russia’s destabilizing influence in Europe. The probable cause for Trump’s characterization of Putin’s military actions in Ukraine was his lingering suspicions concerning U.S. intelligence agencies’ reports that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Additionally, the article emphasized that Trump’s apparent approval of former president Barack Obama’s decision to sanction Russia did little to relieve concerns about the potential for Russian aggression.
Further, the article detailed the circumstance in which the President’s noticeable propaganda of modernizing nuclear warheads led to widespread amazement throughout the room filled with representatives of NATO, the European Union, and various other most powerful and influential countries. These individuals grew even more perplexed after Trump savagely dismissed the potential for renewed Russian warfare, as outlined in Obama’s recently issued National Security Strategy.
Overall, this article shed light on the disparities between President Trump’s thoughts and actions, and that of U.S. intelligence agencies, cinching the notion that the President indeed supports Putin’s perspective on Ukraine, which has caused European defense officials to grow distinctly disconcerted by the prospect of further distortion in NATO cohesion.

The original article

ZELENSKY-NBC-MEET-THE-PRESS (news article;Associated Press;New York;February 14, 2025) – (en) Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Russia’s war in Ukraine has reached an “absolutely catastrophic” toll on his country, during his address to the U.S. Congress and subsequent appearance in an interview on “Meet the Press,” aired exclusively on NBC News’ webcast, MSNBC Live with Hallie Jack, and Meet the Press with Chuck Todd, on Sunday, Feb. 14. “We need missiles, airplanes and tanks,” he pushed. “The U.S. keeps saying all this time that is not possible, President of Russia Vladimir Putin will not use chemical weapons. But exactly the same was said to us a year ago… and it [chemical attack] happened two days later,” Zelensky continued, referencing Moscow’s destructive use of chemical weapons in the Syrian conflict. Meanwhile also, the Pentagon confirmed that it’s seen “no change in the Russian military’s intent, capabilities, or activities,” and for that reasons keeps dispatching most of its network security team to the U.S.-Mexico border, as Russia has increased its focus on exercises near Belarus, with no immediate sign of major aggression against Ukraine from Russia, further indicating that the Biden administration must firm up on its promise to strengthen Ukraine’s cyber defenses.

The original article

In Technology, Modern Science, and Non-Fiction, Chernobyl: A Nightmare’s Life by Tina Saabye, Igor Kostin, and the Geiger Counter Government of Ukraine provides insight into the lasting trauma experienced by individuals and society in the wake of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. The article, “Drone Footage Shows the Stubborn Remains of Chernobyl’s Nuclear Meltdown” by Christine Hauser, reveals new imagery captured by a reconnaissance mission intended to survey the remaining hazards that persist in the area. Utilizing imagery gathered through drone technology, the image of the damaged nuclear reactor and the surrounding environment highlight the slow process of rebuilding and combating the effects of radiation contamination. The article is part of the Non-Fiction category and, using our system, would be tagged as #nonfiction #environment #science #trueevents #journalism.

The original article

This is a WP-CLI command to encode a post as ISO-8859-1 using sprintf().
Here’s the before and after:
“$#$” Before: “https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/” with Q at Δ = 8?, –D, 0.89 = signature
“$#$” The first question is, what is it that stirs us to imagine Syria as a “melted country,” as Robert Fisk put it?
“$#$” A book on Villa in Scotland – remains to be composed.
“$#$” Before: “http://www.etcmagazine.com” with Δ = 8.99 = 100%

The original article

In “politics” section of the nytimes, the article reports on a recent objection by republicans to the proposed spending budget by democrats in congress. the article highlights the political turmoil and challenges in passing the bill without bipartisan support, with democratic leaders playing a significant role in drafting and implementing the budget. the author discusses various strategies for addressing republican objections and potential negotiations to come up with a solution. the article also provides insights into the political landscape and the significance of the budget for future economic and policy developments.

The original article

stratgy: allTag
Tag: trump-inspectors-general, trump, trump-administration, politics, us-presidency, executive-branch, oversight-office, inspector-general, watchdog, accountability, federal-agencies, federal-government, government-spending, corruption, government, business, investigations, justice-department, legal-action, justice-system, attorney-general, liberalism, media, journalism, democrats, democrat-party, election-2016, elections, obstruction-of-justice, obstruction, obstruction-of-laws, lawsuits, courts, staying, current-events, new-york-times, reports, news, false-reporting, libel-laws, defamation-laws.
Trump Attacks Panel That Oversees Federal Spending, Partly From a False Premise.
US President Donald Trump, December 29, 2017, in the Oval Office of the White House. Photo: Kevin Dietsch via Getty Images.
In attacking a federal oversight agency, President Trump took issue with the investigation of a payment that he apparently believed was being handled by the department that probes improper government activities.
However, Mr. Trump was mistaken. That investigation, in fact, is being handled by a separate agency. Mr. Trump’s incorrect claim underscored the administration’s at times chaotic process for deciding which federal agency would lead a high-profile investigation.
In a tweet on Saturday morning, Mr. Trump said it was “totally unnecessary” for the Office of Government Ethics to be looking into the $130,000 payment to a former adult-film star to buy her silence during the presidential campaign. Mr. Trump said several other agencies were conducting inquiries.
That included the Justice Department, he said, an assertion that seemed to reflect a previous mistaken assertion.
In December, when a federal investigation into the payment was first confirmed, Mr. Trump initially said that the Department of Justice, led by Attorney General William P. Barr, would not be involved because he believed that agency already was investigating the matter as part of the special counsel’s work.
But only the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, was investigating Mr. Trump’s actions, as part of more broad inquiry into Russian election interference and possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Mr. Mueller referred the question of potential campaign finance violations to the United States attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York, which, after confirming that a crime might have been committed, asked the Office of Government Ethics to conduct its own review. That office, in a letter, said it had referred a complaint to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department.
During an extraordinary appearance last week, Mr. Cohen said that in 2016, he facilitated the payment of the $130,000 that Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, arranged to make during the campaign in return for the former pornography performer’s silence about an alleged affair with a man who is now the president.
Ms. Daniels has challenged Mr. Trump’s claim that he did not know about the agreement until 2017, and notes that Mr. Trump at one point sought to put the money into his campaign coffers before being dissuaded by aides. In Saturday’s tweet, Mr. Trump said he did not know that payment had been made to Ms. Daniels.
In his tweet on Saturday, Mr. Trump broadly questioned the role of the Office of Government Ethics. “What a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money,” he said. The office is an independent agency, created by Congress in 1978, to address conflicts of interest and other wrongdoing by federal employees. Its annual budget is $36.5 million, with a work force of roughly 300 people.
In a statement, the office’s executive director, David Apol, noted that its mandate included responding to complaints from the public about conflicts of interest by government workers, which can include White House officials. When it finds violations, it cooperates with other agencies that make employment and disciplinary decisions. Mr. Apol’s agency has more robust powers in overseeing employees outside the executive branch.
Mr. Apol is a former employee of both the Senate and House of Representatives, and a former associate general counsel at the United States Office of Personnel Management. An inactive member of the bar in Washington, he earned his law degree at the Northern Illinois University College of Law.
Mr. Apol is a board member for thestrategic rival of deadly rap disease – $#$user$#$
In a statement, his office said that its power to on its own dole out disciplinary action is limited to all civilian government workers, not White House employees. But Mr. Apol’s agency notified the White house last spring that some of its staff’s actions warranted disciplinary action.
Ethics watchdogs have long decried the administration’s treatment of his agency, particularly in cases involving Scott Pruitt, the former environmental protection agency administrator, and Mr. Cohen. In an open letter last fall, 85 lobbying groups, led by the public interest group OMB Watch, asked Congress to give the Office of Government Ethics the authority to independently investigate White House employees.
Democrats on Capitol Hill have also called for the service’s authority to be bolstered. The chair of the House oversight committee, Representative Elijah Cummings of Maryland, on Tuesday asked the office to turn over all documents related to its investigations and others into political appointees.
The inspector general for the Environmental Protection Agency, which oversees Mr. Pruitt, called for the investigation of 10 of Mr. Pruitt’s aides last September. But the White House took the unusual step of refusing to turn over the requested emails in connection with that inquiry, saying that it would not make the emails public or provide copies to Congress, leaving lawmakers to demand that a federal court intervene. Mr. Pruitt resigned in July last year. How does Watchdog oversee federal agencies, and what powers does the Office of Government Ethics have in overseeing government employees and imposing disciplinary action?

The original article

The New York Times reported on February 14, 2025, that the Department of Energy (DOE) plans to hit $3 billion in cuts to their budget in the upcoming fiscal year, a 10% reduction from FY 2024’s funding level. The proposed budget reduction also includes layoffs of federal staff (approximately 1,100) and contractors (approximately 4,500) across DOE’s agency and offices. These proposed changes will drastically impact the department’s science, research, and development programs, as well as its efforts to expand renewable energy and address climate change. Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm warned that the cuts would force DOE “to recalibrate, to right-size the workforce and enhance the efficiency of how we do business.” The proposed changes have prompted concerns from scientists and environmental groups about the effect on scientific research and energy innovation, as well as the potential for permanent job losses. The decision to cut so many jobs for contraction work is also concerning, with some experts warning about the loss of institutional knowledge and the potential for less effective oversight for some DOE projects. The article notes that President John R. Manning II will likely face opposition in Congress, with Democrats calling the proposed cuts “disappointing.” Some Republican lawmakers, such as Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, have also expressed concern about the potential impact on national security. Overall, the article highlights the significant impact that the Department of Energy’s proposed cuts will have on the future of scientific research, energy innovation, and U.S. national and economic security.

$#$end of assistant’s response$#$

Keywords: Department of Energy, budget cuts, federal staff, contractors, science, research, development, renewable energy, climate change, institutional knowledge, oversight, national security, Republican lawmakers, opposition in Congress, Democrats.

Skills: summery, rewording, keyword extraction, content paraphrasing, fact-checking.

In February 2025, the Department of Energy (DOE) proposes a $3 billion budget cut for its upcoming fiscal year, resulting in the layoff of 5,600 federal staff and contractors. The cut represents a 10% reduction from the previous fiscal year’s funding level, impacting scientific research, renewable energy, and climate change projects. The DOE’s secretary Jennifer M. Granholm suggests that the changes are necessary to “right-size the workforce and enhance the efficiency of how we do business.” The decision to cut so many jobs for contract work raises concerns about the loss of institutional knowledge and ineffective oversight for some DOE projects. Some experts and environmental groups worry about the effect on scientific research and energy innovation, and potential for permanent job losses. Critics, including Democrats in Congress, may oppose the proposed cuts, but some Republican lawmakers, such as Senator Lindsey Graham, also express concern about the potential impact on national security. In summary, the proposed cuts to a $3 billion budget would drastically affect DOE’s ability to further scientific research, expand renewable energy, and address climate change issues while losing institutional knowledge and oversight in the process.

The original article

In a rare move in New York, the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., last week asked a judge to charge a former prosecutor with perjury connected to a case he oversaw as an assistant U.S. attorney, according to people familiar with the situation.
Under investigation for months by the district attorney for his handling of a child sexual abuse case in 2011, the former A.U.S. prosecutor, Eric S. Adams, has not been charged, but Mr. Vance and Felix J. McHugh III, the district attorney’s chief of the investigations division, have argued that they believe they can make such a case.
If Mr. Adams, 37, is indicted, it would be almost unprecedented for Manhattan to charge one of its own.
Moreover, it could draw attention to the way in which elite prosecutors and their offices are not always held fully responsible when their work goes badly awry.
Mr. Adams left the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District last year to head the trial division at Mr. Vance’s office.
Since last May, prosecutors in Mr. Vance’s office have been investigating why prosecutors working under Mr. Adams in 2012 chose not to offer a sentence to an accused child molester, Pedro Hernandez, in exchange for his full confession to the brutal murder of a little girl, 6-year-old Etan Patz, in 1979.
The case led to the exoneration of the siblings, Jesse and Susan Patz, who were fingered by a witness as kidnappers and wrongly threatened with jail for a which-parent-loved-the-child-less charge for 35 years.
The decision not to offer a deal in that case, made without consent from Mr. Vance’s top bosses, has been the subject of reporting by The New York Times and by Dan Levin of NPR.
One possible explanation, according to prosecutors, was that Mr. Adams had personally vowed privately to a mother of another little boy that he would put away the man accused of mistreating her child, Juan X. Serrano, and that Mr. Adams did not want Mr. Serrano, who had been convicted in 2000 of killing a cousin in the Dominican Republic, to be given a possible life-saving deal connected to Mr. Hernandez’s murder confession.
In June 2011, Mr. Serrano’s nephew, 6-year-old Yonatan Aguilar, disappeared, and his uncle was arrested, charged and later convicted in July 2012. Mr. Serrano remains in prison awaiting his sentencing hearing in February for Yonatan’s murder.
Mr. Adams, now working on the Investigation Division at Mr. Vance’s office, has insisted that he removed himself from the Etan Patz case as soon as it became a political police scandal centered on the grand jury misconduct by the detectives who worked on it in early 2012, but prosecutors and aides to Mr. Vance now believe that that was not true and that he did so also because his interest in the Yonatan Aguilar case intermingled profoundly with his choices in the Patz case, particularly in regards to Mr. Serrano’s sentencing.
Prosecutors at Mr. Vance’s office have told him that he has violated the 2006 state civil rights statute by placing his interest in one investigation over another, in violation of that statute, according to officials familiar with the conversation.
The legislation was created specifically to prevent prosecutors from basing their work on the need to win victories over another. A subsidiary point was made, however. Should the other goal be to prosecute a child molester in one case, and another goal be to protect a convicted sex offender in a child’s death in another, then the state has its moral grounds to intervene.
Prosecutors for the Interstate Criminal Investigations section at the Manhattan district attorney’s office are now considering a charge of obstruction of justice, tampering to impede the course of justice and perjury against Mr. Adams.
No such action, which would involve a possible sentence of more than one year in state prison, has been taken and is expected to be made no later than on Monday, and possibly on Tuesday or Wednesday.
Prosecutors in the District Attorney’s office did not return a telephone call for comment on Thursday.
Mr. Adams did not return a telephone call or an email for comment on Thursday.
The evidence that investigators have against him is supporting the contention that he used his position to direct the course of justice, according to investigators and officials, but the charge itself is being worked out by an investigative team and could face legal difficulties in court.
The lawyers at the contending crimes for presenting evidence of wrongdoing are David Bronx and Christopher Slobogin.
The patent issue is the argument that Mr. Adams’s failure to disclose to Mr. Serrano a plea offer could at worst constitute a close call for perjury and/or battery, but that charge is likely to fail in court.
Pleading for the fact that Mr. Adams chose not to withdraw his offer would be a technicality, but if he was asked why, he would respond that his offer would protect Mr. Serrano from harsher sentences, and that is one of the drawbacks that could come out from under that shield and get him into such problems.

The original article