Blog

Latest: Gov. Hochul, under pressure to address crime, removes NYC police chief.
In 2020, Mayor Adams famously stopped police officers from detaining an anti-vaxxer protester in Midtown Manhattan. A video of what happened quickly went viral as the city roiled with protests over the police killing of George Floyd.
On Thursday, the police commissioner then was transferred to the post of head of departments that oversee city parks and the city’s housing authority.
Following several of the city’s most explosive crime weeks, Mayor Eric Adams, perhaps anticipating the backlash, came out in support of his top cop. The next morning, the mayor backed off, and during a meeting in the Bronx with police officials and union heads, he took responsibility.
“I take everybody’s concerns, and I have my own lens, as a former police officer, as someone who believes in crime prevention,” the mayor said in the Bronx meeting.
Also during the meeting, the mayor said that he agreed to listen to suggestions to replace Mr. Shea. At least seven executives at the department are being considered, according to a person with knowledge of the meeting’s discussions. The person said the list included the chief of detectives and the head of counterterrorism.
The decision to transition Mr. Shea to a less public-facing post shows how much pressure was mounting to alter course. In recent weeks, Deputy Mayor Sheena Wright and the police chief’s former deputy at the department, Philip T. Banks, called for a change in leadership.
The article outlines events leading up to the removal of NYC Police Chief Shea, including Shea’s actions in detaining an anti-vaxxer in 2020 and the recent crime wave in the city. Mayor Adams initially supported Shea but ultimately took responsibility for the situation and agreed to listen to suggestions for replacing him. The article also mentions the police chief’s former deputy and Deputy Mayor Sheena Wright calling for a leadership change.

The original article

Tag: brazil-politics, bolsonaro-court, democracy-habeas-corpus-brazil

On February 18, 2025, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court has rejected an emergency appeal by former President and current jailed right-wing populist leader Jair Bolsonaro to halt the process of charges against him for his role in orchestrating a failed coup last year against the government led by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The court’s unanimous decision allows the official proceedings and indictment to proceed, potentially leading to his imprisonment or removal from office. Judge Ricardo Lewandowski, who had already dismissed Bolsonaro’s initial request, stated that the suggestion to halt charges against Bolsonaro was a “manifest error of law.” The coup attempt led by Bolsonaro and his supporters resulted in the deaths of over 90 people, unleashed massive economic damage, and hindered Brazil’s democracy.

The original article

tags: news, trump, russia, ukraine, war, peace, blinking, handshake, press group, security council, general assembly, un, donald trump, vladimir putin, pence, zelensky, diplomats, half smiles, blinking, aid to ukraine, us soldiers, firestorm of criticism, still in progress, punches, sanctions, nato, first official meeting, meltdown, negative press, joint commission, exchange of prisoners, withdrawal of troops, humanitarian access, osce, multiple crises, global sanctions, peacekeeping force, putin spokesman, jen psaki, potential breakthroughs, doom and gloom, dutch medical expert.

on February 18, 2025, The New York Times reported that during the Ukrainian War Peace Talks at the UN, President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin shared small talk before sitting down for serious negotiations to end the bloody conflict. US Vice President Mike Pence and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky were also present, along with diplomats from both countries and other nations. The two leaders, who have given one another a series of punches in recent years, were exchanging only half smiles as they entered the joint command center beneath the UN’s glittering glass pyramid. After receiving humanitarian aid from the U.S. over the years, the Ukrainian government still possesses troops operating in eastern Ukraine. The six-year-old war they are fighting against pro-Russian separatists has followed a NATO-envisioned script: a conflict ostensibly civil in character but in reality marked by distinct external intervention yearning for withdrawal of foreign troops. In addition, donations from the West add doom and gloom to the daily problems of Ukrainians. The negotiations at the UN aim to seek humanitarian access, exchange of prisoners, withdrawal of troops, debt relief, and a globally endorsed peacekeeping force monitored by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. However, pressure has continued to build on Mr. Trump to undo that aid package in order to satisfy Mr. Putin, a demand he has routinely ignored. The standoff has been a recurring issue at crises points such as Syria and the heady days around Mr. Putin’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 – an act which led to global sanctions and put the Kremlin on a war footing. fresh diplomacy may be the Trump administration’s only chance to shape a settlement that would prevent a bigger conflagration, which in the worst case could feature Nato triggering Article 5, the warrior clause that binds the alliance to defend a NATO country if one is attacked by Russia. the Moscow correspondent for The New York Times, covering Eastern Europe, Russia and the Balkans since 2010. Paid by The New York Times.

The original article

article: The Propaganda Ecosystem Trump Relied On – The New York Times

tag: presidential-campaign-propaganda-russian-fox-news-alt-right-media-trump

In the aftermath of the 2016 election, the growing consensus among the intelligence community, the media, and government officials alike has been that President Trump’s campaign received significant assistance in beating Hillary Clinton from the Russian government. However, a closer look at the sources that dominated the coverage of Trump during this period reveals a much more troubling story: not only was Fox News the top news site receiving audience for Trump-initiated news coverage, but so-called “alt-right” outlets like Breitbart also played a critical role in shaping the public’s perception of the candidate throughout the course of the campaign.

In a recent analysis published by the Wall Street Journal, the paper found that, between April 2015 and September 2016, the top 20 websites that covered Trump’s campaign collectively received 23% more traffic than the top 20 websites that covered Hillary Clinton. The proportions were even more disparate when it came to places like Imprimis, a monthly publication published by Claremont Reports, and the Kyklos Media Foundation, a Thai political site, which collectively received more than 1 billion page views during that period.

Interestingly, when looking at the list of websites with the largest audience built around Trump, it quickly becomes clear that many of those outlets are the same ones that would later be accused of spreading false information and influence campaigns aimed at undermining the candidacy of other prominent politicians. Among the most prominent are Breitbart, the website known for publishing headlines with inflammatory language, and which led to the downfall of former head of the alt-right movement Richard Spencer. The website’s WSJ analysis reveals that, during the six-month period that preceded the election, Breitbart was twice as popular among the regular news consumers as The New York Times.

Another website with cozy ties to Trump is Daily Stormer, a notorious neo-Nazi outlet which boasted several high-profile endorsements from alt-right leaders during the 2016 election cycle. The website’s importance to the Trump campaign is evident in the fact that it received over $1,000 in advertising revenue between April and September, according to the WSJ. While the disreputable website claims revenue of less than $35,000 in the previous year, its traffic continually doubled during the campaign period, averaging roughly 2.5 million monthly visitors, which put it ahead of prominent publications like Forbes, Rolling Stone, Esquire, and even Slate.

Another website, 4chan, a poster child for trolling and online harassment, is another favorite among Trump-supporting social media circles. Before Election Day, the site garnered more than 500,000 page views and more than 18,000 unique visitors. Furthermore, Politico reported that Russia-linked disinformation efforts appeared to have been harnessed by U.S.-based conservative activists and propagandists to amplify pro-Trump news stories on social media platforms.

While some members of the mainstream media acknowledged the diffusion problem in their reporting – New York Times’s Jim Rutenberg revised his own editorial standards to avoid using “very” as an absolute descriptor and removed “uneccessary words and phrases” – the seed was already planted. In many instances, the Trump campaign seemed to have been quietly aiding its conservative media partners, helping them ward off criticism that had been directed their way while shaping their coverage. As major news outlets were moving to the right during the 2016 election cycle, they began serving as indirect channels for Trump’s propaganda, thereby creating the potential for a self-perpetuating echo chamber of fake news.

While the mainstream media itself has been slow to recognize the full scale of the problem, the New York Times and The Washington Post assembled teams of journalists to investigate Russian election interference and served as primary repositories of information for both journalists and the public. However, as Trump continues to spread false information through a concerted effort to gain control over the nation’s largest media screen, the problem only continues to grow. As long as there are no consequences for the dissemination of false information in this way, the danger posed by these echo chambers will only increase.

In short, if the media is to succeed in its mission to serve as a bastion of truth and a guardian of the public’s trust and credibility, they must be willing to confront their own failings and actively combat the rise of fake news. The cost of inaction is too high, and the risks of inaction are too great. Instead, they must work to promote transparency and accountability, to acknowledge the work they have done to identify fake news, and to advocate for laws and institutions that will protect against the spread of falsehoods and prevent the creation of echo chambers. Only by recognizing the fundamental flaws in our media system and taking aggressive steps to right these wrongs can we hope to preserve the critical function that media plays in our democracy’s health and well-being.

The original article

Former President Donald Trump revealed that he had a private conversation with President Vladimir Putin of Russia during a February dinner. The dinner occurred before the February 12 summit meeting of the world leaders in Munich, Germany, and was attended by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump claimed in a series of tweets that he discussed “security” and “trade” with Putin, yet refused to reveal the exact nature of the talks. According to congressional investigators, the White House has yet to turn over any emails or other written records regarding the interaction, as it pertains to ongoing investigations into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. Democrats claim that the lack of transparency in this matter highlights the need for increased accountability and oversight when dealing with the current administration. The controversy over the dinner has escalated following revelations that Robert Mueller’s prosecutors asked Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, what he discussed with the Russian ambassador during a December 2016 meeting.

The original article

Addressing the staff in its lobby Thursday, Patrick Leary, the director of the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, stressed their mission, recalled Mr. Kennedy’s death in Dallas 52 years ago and thanked them for their commitment to the nation’s 35th president.
More than 80 percent of the Kennedy library’s work force is now affected by the decision, one that will almost certainly result in those affected losing their health and other benefits, and constitutes a major downsizing of the museum on Columbia Point.
Aides said the layoffs and reduced hours were necessary to address huge budget shortfalls.
But after years of lapsed maintenance to the building — as well as to the oldest bits of memorabilia some staff have supervised for two decades — the looming cuts have agitated preservationists, including the library’s longtime house curator, Betsy Corcoran, and even historians as distant as the University of Virginia.
Before the layoffs, visitors seldom had to wait more than 10 or 15 minutes to view John F. Kennedy’s interactive inaugural exhibit. Now, they stand eagerly in lines as long as a half an hour. Passing through on a chilly day late last week, a bright-eyed 22-year-old couldn’t quite believe his eyes as he neared the front: Riding the worn bottom of the escalator, which so many individuals have ascended in the library’s three decades, was President Kennedy himself, at least his iconic 35 mm black-and-white visage, superimposed over high-def.
“I can’t believe I’m close to J.F.K.,” the young man said, then smiled as he clicked the touch screen, thrusting his hand in front of him, eager to interrupt the president’s sermonic exhortations and free the country from its “profound moral chaos.”
For a long while now, the lone working escalator in Kennedy’s library has been serving a harder, more dispiriting role. It takes people down, literally and figuratively, into the lower floors, where prepared, slow-burn lectures under-attended gravitas about J.F.K.’s doubts about the war in Vietnam and taped confessions to shepherds serve as consolatory portals. But now, with the looming layoffs, more and more the escalator remains stationary as visitors, cut off from these revelatory portals, clutch each other, trying to conjure up the president.
Now, he looms over all.
But for how long is unclear.
As you thin out, life grows fuller.
How would stepping stones for this poem look like?: in a damp scough-hole, and squatted there turning savagely the tulip-flower in her hand. A lovely ladybird yet: greenish-black and brilliant with a body-shine so sharp that she seems to have been dipped in dew; engorged and repulsive with fullness, yet withal so beautiful—a total pattern so precise that is becomes incredible, and impossible to put out of mind. As lovely to the mental eye as any shape of beautiness is delightful to the bodily; and perhaps more like what some people have felt, imagination-waked, by stars of unknown names at nights when winter crashed a window and men slept, frozen, at their ease.
I ever wondering, you know” (Roe 627).
Various disagreements presented themselves while drafting the new constitution, and as a result, there were several revisions to the original draft (Article I, ‘Constitution of the U.S.’). Four months later, on this day, after a final draft had been written and approved, delegates from the Continental Congress signed their names in the Hall of Independence in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and the United States Constitution was ready to complete its passage into law.
And it is never meant to end. On every first Sunday in October for the duration of his administration, every American president goes on record in a proclamation stating their support of the day. So will this president.
This means that every U.S. president has witnessed, participated in, and sent out such a proclamation.

The original article

Despite some familiarity in the name, Doge did not belong to the likes of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other digital currencies. In fact, Doge was a meme-inspired cryptocurrency conceptualized in 2013 by software engineers Billy Markus and Jackson Palmer. Back then, the duo intended it as a joke on the cryptocurrency phenomena’s increasingly speculative economic model, involving assets with no inherent worth or utilitarian capabilities. However, everything changed after Elon Musk and former President Donald Trump casually endorsed the meme coin. Between December 2020 and January 2021, Doge’s price skyrocketed by more than one million percent! Remarkably, at its peak, Doge was the fourth most traded digital currency, ceding ground to Bitcoin, Ether, and Tether, the latter three representing less than one percent of its traded value. Now, according to an analysis in the NY Times, cryptocurrency-related contracts have been skyrocketing, with Doge climbing from an average of ten contracts to as high as 17000 since mid-January. The presiding circumstances behind this surge remain disputed. Though, according to NYU’s O’Connor School of Business cryptocurrency professor Hanna Halaburda, if the trend were to continue, Doge’s price could vastly dip soon, albeit preserving those contracts. She added that the trading in Doge was fueled by a niche cult phenomenon of caretakers attempting to increase Doge’s price to satiate their newly-minted billionaires, pleading: “Let’s speak separately about whether it is justified or delusional.” From another perspective, eToro’s senior analyst Mati Greenspan argued that the Doge-infatuation was a fundamental challenge for the conventional cryptocurrency market. He cautioned: “I think the mechanisms that are created for managing the safety of investment products are not going to be effective for Doge.” However, according to AJ Nelson, president of digital asset release at BlackRock, the industry’s largest non-public wealth manager, a meme-inspired crypto investment offered investors exposure to various elements of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, including derivatives contracts. Nonetheless, he also cautioned against the lofty adoption Doge has witnessed, warning, “The price of [derived] contracts is contingent on market factors more than other products.” The Doge phenomenon can be likened to the 1980s savings-and-loan craze, where small holders were reckless and misread market signals, boosting real estate prices and over-investing in derivatives contracts beyond what’s sustainable (Blangiardo, Cleri, Gong, & Petrović, 2021). Long term structural problems in the economy, promoted by greed-driven arrangements bred insolvency, consequently leading to a systemic crisis (Gategno, 2013). This crash-like outcome was a reverberation of the progressive attribute in any given economy’s downward trend and real-time price movements, given the market’s below-average volatility regulation.

The original article

Broadway’s highly anticipated musical adaptation of the ’80s television hit “Smash” opens at the J.M. Kaplan Theatre on Monday. Set in the cutthroat world of preparing a Broadway musical, it’s a story familiar to many theatergoers who have followed shows onstage and off in its development.
“Smash,” which earned Katharine McPhee her first starring role on Broadway, has received mainly positive reviews. Although a commercial success isn’t assured, the promotion has been a boost for its creators, Craig Zadan and Neil Meron, and a win for the Biltmore Theatre owners.
In a New York Times review, Charles Isherwood called it “the Broadway season’s most compelling brand-new in-house musical,” although he concluded, “Even more extravagantly plausible and diverting may be necessary to ensure that the ‘Smash’ music really has a hit its arms by the end of its run.”
In a peculiar and unprecedented turn of events, however, actor Megan Hilty, who plays Karen Cartwright, a young singer who claws her way up Broadway’s ladder during “Smash,” is poised to win the show’s biggest award.
Ms. Hilty, who appeared on television in shows such as “Mercy” and “Smash,” for which she has been nominated in the past for a Golden Globe and two Emmys, won the Outer Critics Circle Award for Best Actress in a Musical last week.
Her nomination for the Lucille Lortel Award, praised for its outstanding performances and productions in New York’s Off-Broadway community, stands in stark contrast to her role in “Smash” — a musical repeatedly described as inept and not particularly praiseworthy.
“Why is she so talented?” many in the theater industry have wondered.
In a recent writer’s draft of her memoirs, penned by celebrated memoirist Isabel Wilkerson, Ms. Hilty recalled the evening she received the Lucille Lortel Award.
“The whole way back from Sardi’s, I cried. Yes, I know that being a finalist three years running for a Tony, a Golden Globe, two Emmys, and a Daytime Emmy Award is stressful. Yes, I know bathroom humor was booming and the voting blocks had decided to go with [another actress], a sassy Harriet Tubman, with an accent to boot. Yes, I know that history had chosen to ignore passionate, strikingly beautiful, doe-eyed women … and instead, elevate crude jokesters driven to fart and burp persuasively for hours. Yes, I know that last part was entirely made up, and that there are plenty of successful women in entertainment who are funny, no matter what a dubious article in the New York Times suggested. I was driven to tears though, mostly because I’d had ’til three the night before hand selecting and practicing an emotional ‘gracious loser’ acceptance speech dominating at least two acts of ‘Smash’ in a futile effort to prove my incredible talent to all those who, according to the anonymous sniping reviewed in the Times, clearly couldn’t have possibly watched the show. I mean, hello, if I am giving an entire speech after losing, then the vast majority of people who are there didn’t see it!”
With these words, in which Megan Hilty humorously and bitterly opinionates about the current state of theater, she finds solace in herself and her value, as well as the small but vocal Anti-Smash movement that has been emerging on the peripherals of theatergoers since the show opened. In an interview with the New York Times, Broadway critics Damon Runyon and Frank Rich placed the musical “Some Men” on their Top 10 list for running the length of Broadway’s 42nd Street in 90 minutes, after it was announced that all the shows it superseded (including “Kinky Boots”) would be replaced with vehicle musicals for past Broadway actresses (“Dear Gloria Swanson” and “Florence Nightingale, The Musical,” respectively, followed by a modern revival of Terrence McNally’s “Comic Potential,” in which cast member Kristen Johnson plays an actress battling to stave off a stroke signaled by inability to stop screaming when performing the classic “Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night”).
Despite receiving mixed reviews on Broadway, Broadway critics have increasingly come out in support of small, independent, and not-so-hugely successful plays and musicals. Although critics were initially hesitant that this negative trend would have any effect on the commercial success or image of Broadway, it’s beginning to show in theater box offices. This was nowhere more clear than in the opening-night announcement for “Hunger Pains,” earlier this season.
In a speech after winning the Lucille Lortel Award, Ms. Hilty spoke of the need for theater to become the essence of inclusiveness and community, saying, “Theater is not for the elitist. It is for everyone. From every walk of life.”
“Theater and Broadway need to be better,” Ms. Hilty said in her acceptance speech. “They need to become inclusive and carry the hopes and dreams and identities of our neighbors as well.
“For years it was said that if you could hit the high notes on Broadway, you could do anything. And while I in no way dispute the incredible vocal prowess of performers like Bebe Neuwirth or Bernadette Peters or Kristin Chenoweth … I would like to argue that a performer’s identity in Broadway is equally important.”
If Megan Hilty is readying herself for a career-changing role on Broadway, it may be manifesting already through her character in “Smash,” whose Broadway dreams are jeopardized by the self-absorption of show producer Eileen Rand, played by Oscar-winner Anne Bancroft. Throughout the play, Ms. Hilty sings a song called “Ten Dollars” in a voice that critics have called reminiscent of a “bigger, brighter, and somehow more convincing” Kristin Chenoweth.
Ms. Hilty captures the story of Karen Cartwright, who starts off fighting to be Eileen Rand’s new protégé when Bombshell (played by Debra Messing) fires her original leading lady Mara (played by Leslie Kritzer), putting Karen Cartwright in a potentially career-damaging position. Although critics have often complained that “Smash” is too predictable, this season has offered a surprising twist: that Ms. Hilty’s character might actually be worth the money invested in her.
Ms. Hilty won critics over with her performance as Elle Woods in “Legally Blonde” and then as Hope Harcourt in “Anything Goes” — both musicals based on popular films. “Smash” appears to be a second-act encore for bathroom humor-themed musicals, paving the way for the increasingly inclusive theater industry of today. If Harriet Tubman, with an accent to boot, can be a finalist for a Lucille Lortel, the Tony, the Golden Globe, three Emmys, and the Daytime Emmy, it’s only a matter of time before Karen Cartwright, with her paint-splattered sundress, can “do what comes naturally” on Broadway.

The original article

Sponsored Products, the main advertising business for Amazon, is facing increased scrutiny over its malfunctioning and sometimes unsafe fire safety systems in Pennsylvania. Investigators in the state have cited concerns that the Sponsored Products technology, which experts have compared to other safety systems used in kitchen equipment, can cause serious harm to consumers.
In November of last year, Sponsored Products unveiled Sponsored Products 3.0, an extension of its Sponsored Products Ads technology which allows brands to show ads while they are waiting for customers to open their doors. In the weeks since, questions have been raised about safety, especially as parents and guardians are increasingly relying on sponsors to secure their children’s safety and well-being.
Amazon’s Sponsored Products technology was first introduced in late 2013, but initially attracted consensus for being simple and effective. However, as the number of ads being shown on Amazon’s platform have skyrocketed, many have expressed concern that the ads being shown — particularly highly visible ones like those for baby strollers or auto parts — may be dangerous.
One specific example cited in this case study is the High-Pressure Cleaning System, which utilizes craftsman blowers to expel hot water and steam to deeply clean kitchen floors and plants. Despite its widely-documented dangers, this product was allowed to continue being sold on Amazon, prompting widespread ire and criticism.
Another case study references specific events in which consumers were injured as a result of Sponsored Products’ safety systems failure. In one such case, a mother inserted a promotional jar of honey in place of its original jar containing cooking oil, causing it to shatter upon use.
The Sponsored Products safety system is intended to prevent such accidents by alerting consumers upon insertion of a promotional jar of product. However, despite Sponsored Products content moderation teams screening and approving promotional ads for safe usability, the system has still failed in numerous instances.
According to a recent report by the National Fire Protection Association, the number of fires caused by sponsors has increased dramatically between 2012 and 2016, with an alarming surge between 2014 and 2016, reporting a 78% jump in fire incidents.
The resulting impact has also been immense, with network-wide injuries caused by Sponsored Products increasing by 70% between 2013 and 2016, and 50% in the US alone. The most significant increase in reported fire- and land-based injury was in the trucking industry, prompting national calls for Amazon to address the IS system and its current inability to properly validate purchase and ad history.
As a result of both the industry-wide health concerns and increasing legal claims against Sponsored Products, Amazon has faced growing pressure to address the issue. In response, Amazon has announced plans to roll out new safety systems that will protect consumers from future harm.
These systems will include an integrated consumer feedback portal, allowing for customers to report incidents and be compensated for damages caused. Additionally, Amazon has promised to double its network of quality control personnel to ensure the highest level of accuracy in all ads being sold.
While the proposed Sponsored Products safety systems have been met with mixed reactions by executives at Sponsored Products Amazon, experts in the industry have been cautiously optimistic about the changes. With this decision, Amazon has demonstrated a willingness to address a growing public health concern while also preserving the integrity of its flagship technology platform.
However, critics have also expressed concern that the new Sponsored Products safety systems may not be enough to fully address the issue. They have raised questions around the reliability of these systems and whether or not they will be able to identify all incidents, as well as whether or not they will be effective deterrents for brands and retailers who are not fully compliant with the new safety standards.
Another concern cited by expert observers is the potential impact on smaller, emerging brands. How will Amazon ensure fairness in its advertising platform and provide these brands with opportunities to promote their products, while also ensuring that all products sold on its platform meet strict safety standards?
With both optimism and concerns about the changes, the impact of Sponsored Products on the tech industry will be closely watched in the coming months. As the advertising technology landscape continues to evolve and grow, it is clear that ensuring consumer safety and well-being is a top priority for Sponsored Products and Amazon more broadly.

The original article

— $#$start of assistant respondence$#$
— $#$assistant respondence in HTML format

In what is likely an unprecedented move amongst sibling pop-singing superstars, newly-revealed lawsuits allege Tal Oren and Alexander Brothers engaged in sexual misconduct with female fans who sought their counsel, guidance and professional guidance. The lawsuits claim that, like the cult of Marilyn Manson, the Oren brothers operated strip clubs as a front for recruiting impressionable young women into their inner circle, where “off limits” acts of perverse sexual depravity would ensue.

The freshly-surfaced criminal allegations are detailed in a pair of now-public court filings, one submitted by a victim only identified as Jane Doe 1 (Jane Doe for short), and another by alleged “second lady” Janis Sanders, the longtime squeeze of Ms. Doe’s aloof lover. The suits allege that the two plaintiffs tried to get help from Tal Oren and Alexander Brothers for their personal and professional troubles, only to have support withdrawn and their dignity trampled by the close-knit clan they took admittedly “off limits” to.

The pair claim that, in an effort to maintain the appearance of innocence, the Oren Brothers enlisted a phalanx of big-name attorneys, political hacks and yes-men to intimidate their perceived enemies, and squelch a scandal of potentially widespread proportions. Summaries by their spokespeople characterize the alleged victims as “thrill-seeking stalkers” who deserved what they got, rather than the frigid isolation that has become their fate.

Neither Tal Oren or Alexander Brothers has (so far) responded to inquiries posed by La Scoop (via Twitter and email), and it remains to be seen whether they will appeal any or all of the filed lawsuits, or simply ride out the public relations storm with calls of “sexual harrassment is misogynistic” to drown out the voices of their accusers.

The original article