SAN RAMON (AP) — Seeking to protect its image as a guardian of personal privacy, Apple maintains it was blindsided and handcuffed by a Trump administration probe that resulted in the company handing over phone data from California Democratic congressmen Eric Swalwell and Adam Schiff. Apple delivered its version of events Friday in response to news reports detailing the U.S. Justice Department’s aggressive attempts to use its legal power to identify leaks tied to an investigation into former President Donald Trump’s ties to Russia. READ MORE: COVID Recovery: BART Increases Saturday Service; Weekend Use On The Rebound The Justice Department was able to persuade a federal grand jury to issue a subpoena that culminated in Apple turning over the metadata — information that can include general records of calls and texts — about House Intelligence Committee members Schiff and Swalwell during 2018. Both lawmakers were key figures on the committee looking into Trump’s connections with Russia; Schiff is now the panel’s chair. Neither Schiff and Swalwell knew some of the information had been seized until May 5, after a series of gag orders had finally expired, according to the company. The revelation of Apple’s compliance with the subpoena emerged at a time when the company has been ramping up efforts to frame privacy as “fundamental human right” in its marketing campaigns. Apple also upped the privacy ante in April when it rolled out privacy controls on the iPhone as part of an effort to make it more difficult for companies such as Facebook to track people’s online activities to help sell ads. In a statement, Apple emphasized it will continue to fight unjustified legal demands for personal information and keep customers informed about them. But in this instance, Apple said it was constrained by a nondisclosure order signed by a federal magistrate judge and said it had no information about the nature of the investigation. “It would have been virtually ...
Apple
Origins of ‘Oaktown’: James Copes says it started on a T-shirt
6 James Copes says he came up with the nickname while he was in the clothing business, going to trade shows around the country. The people he met either didn’t know Oakland, or associated it with crime. Copes wanted to spread the good word about the city he loved. The answer was “Oaktown” — which he started putting on clothing in 1987. “When you go to New York, people would say ‘the Big Apple.’ When you go to Detroit, they call it Motor City, ‘Motown,’” Copes says. “But we didn’t have anything to match our flavor. So I was trying to think of a name that would fit our flavor here in our city, the city of Oakland.” Oaktown, or the Town, has grown algorithmically in the 30 years since it first appeared in Copes’ East Oakland store, on an “Oaktown is Kickin’ It” T-shirt. Rappers have immortalized the word in hit songs. At least a half dozen local businesses have Oaktown in their name. And the Golden State Warriors basketball team will debut their Town jersey this month. But the man who says he popularized the term — and carries around old newspaper articles to prove it — says the meaning hasn’t changed for him. “I love Oakland with all my heart. The people, the neighborhoods, the community,” Copes says. “I’m appreciative that people appreciate the name, the city and the culture and its people. That’s respect. And it can only make us more popular and help to create the flavor and spread the love all over so people will know about Oakland.” As Copes explains his life story, every turn seems to contain a different Oakland badge of honor. Born in Highland Hospital, Copes grew up in Harbor Homes, a port-side Oakland housing project that was connected to land with a wooden plank and infested with foot-long harbor rats. He went to five elementary schools, moving all around the city, as his mother struggled to make ends meet as a Kaiser Permanente nurse. A tennis prodigy at Oakland Technical High School who knew ...
UK-EU Brexit spat over N Ireland clouds G7 leaders summit
11 FALMOUTH, England (AP) — Turbulence from the divorce between the U.K. and the European Union provided an unwanted distraction at the Group of Seven summit taking place in southwest England, with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson saying Saturday that post-Brexit agreements will fail if the EU continues to take a “theologically draconian” approach to the rules. Johnson held meetings with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron and the bloc’s top officials on the sidelines of the summit he is hosting. Afterwards, the prime minister claimed the EU was not taking a “sensible or pragmatic” approach to post-Brexit arrangements, and he threatened to use an emergency clause to suspend agreed upon rules if the bloc did not compromise. Britain and the EU are locked in an escalating diplomatic feud over Northern Ireland, the only part of the U.K. that borders the 27-nation bloc. The EU is angry over the British government's delay in implementing new checks on some goods coming into Northern Ireland from the rest of the U.K., while Britain says the checks are imposing a big burden on businesses and destabilizing Northern Ireland’s hard-won peace. U.S. President Joe Biden has gotten drawn into the spat, raising concerns about the potential threat to Northern Ireland’s peace accord. The new arrangements, designed to keep an open border between Ireland and its northern neighbor, have angered Northern Ireland’s British unionists, who say they weaken ties with the rest of the U.K. Tensions over the new trade rules were a contributing factor to a week of street violence in April, largely in unionist areas of Northern Ireland, that saw youths pelt police with bricks, fireworks and firebombs. European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen tweeted after meeting Johnson that Northern Ireland peace was “paramount,” and the binding Brexit agreement protected it. ...
Garland sparks anger with willingness to side with Trump
Attorney General Merrick Garland Merrick Garland Garland vows fight against voting limits that violate law House Democrats push Garland for immigration court reforms Jeff Hauser: MacBride nomination is a return to administrations that ended 'rule-of-law' and 'rich-person accountability' MORE has angered Trump critics and the Biden administration's most ardent supporters in his first three months of office, as his Department of Justice (DOJ) has shown an increased willingness to side in court with the Trump administration. The early signs from Garland’s DOJ are worrying for those who are hoping that the new administration will provide transparency and accountability around what many saw as the department's misuse of power during the Trump administration. Earlier this week, the Justice Department told a federal appeals court that it would continue its efforts to represent Trump against his alleged rape victim, the writer E. Jean Carroll , in a defamation suit she filed in 2019 following comments he made about her while in office. ADVERTISEMENT The new DOJ’s stance in the case has surprised and disappointed critics who were outraged last year when the department first moved to bring its considerable resources to Trump’s defense in the case. Last month, after a federal judge in D.C. castigated former Attorney General William Barr Bill Barr Trump DOJ demanded metadata on 73 phone numbers and 36 email addresses, Apple says DOJ to probe Trump-era subpoenas of lawmaker records Democrats demand Barr, Sessions testify on Apple data subpoenas MORE and ordered the DOJ to release an internal legal memo that essentially cleared Trump of wrongdoing from the investigation led by former special counsel Robert Mueller Robert (Bob) Mueller Senate Democrats urge Garland not to fight court order to release Trump obstruction memo Why a special counsel is guaranteed if Biden chooses Yates, Cuomo or Jones as AG ...
It’s not just Manchin: No electoral mandate stalls Democrats’ leftist agenda
Sen. Joe Manchin Joe Manchin Why the Democrats need Joe Manchin Simmering Democratic tensions show signs of boiling over Out-of-touch Democrats running scared of progressives MORE (D-W.Va.) recently closed the door on two of the most radical foundational changes threatening the nation: H.R.1, the For the People Act , and a proposal to end the Senate filibuster. While the left is focused on attacking him, they are missing the point. The true culprit for their angst can be found in last November’s elections, whose outcomes provided no mandate to fundamentally change America. Clearly, President Biden Joe Biden Putin says he's optimistic about working with Biden ahead of planned meeting How the infrastructure bill can help close the digital divide Biden meets Queen Elizabeth for first time as president MORE ’s election charge was to work toward consensus for bipartisan solutions. Biden ran as a moderate to unify the country. He certainly didn’t win by offering radical prescriptions for America. Similarly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Nancy Pelosi Vaccinated lawmakers no longer required to wear masks on House floor Simmering Democratic tensions show signs of boiling over Pelosi signals no further action against Omar MORE ’s (D-Calif.) progressive House majority was significantly shrunk by that same electorate, and there was no clear majority for Democrats in the Senate, once the dust settled in the narrow Georgia runoffs. That means the American electorate in 2020 did not call for the revolutionary ideas that are taking shape in the White House and Congress. If anything, the election results were a recipe for compromise. Americans might not like to admit it, but the genius of our political system lies in compromise. It is weaved into our national heritage and our Constitutional structure of limited government. Our country breaks down when compromise is disregarded (as some will argue helped ...
