Diamond and Silks’ Take After the 1st Presidential Debate
– theGatewayPundit.com | Youtube
““Now Hillary started lying right off the bat . . . Overall, Donald Trump won that debate. But Lester? He got under my skin… We don’t give a damn about that birther issue!
Why wasn’t you asking Hillary about her pay for play schemes? About her email scandal? About the fact that she don’t even understand a ‘C’ stands for “Classified?” About the fact that she don’t know how to remember anything? Oh, you didn’t ask her that!
Well, listen up, Lester! Don’t make us fester! Or you gonna feel the wrath of Diamond and Silk. I just want you to know one thing: In the end, Donald J. Trump is going to win!”
Hillary Clinton’s Foreign-Policy Performance as Secretary of State: The Worst. Ever.
– The National Interest
“She’s been a cheerleader for America’s biggest mistakes.
As the general election heats up, Clinton supporters have been eager to tout the virtues of her foreign-policy experience relative to Donald Trump. And as a former Secretary of State and First Lady, no one questions Mrs Clinton’s bona fides in that regard.
There is just one problem. Foreign-policy stewardship over the past two decades has been the most cataclysmic for American interests abroad in the entire history of the Republic—and Clinton has been in favor of all the biggest mistakes….
As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was a cheerleader for those overthrowing governments friendly to the United States (such as in Egypt). These governments ended up being replaced with the Muslim Brotherhood, dictatorship and chaos. The Arab uprisings, combined with the ham-fisted withdrawal from Iraq, led to the formation of ISIS, which subsequently took over much of Iraq and Syria, extending its reach deep into the surrounding Arab states.
This includes Libya. Gaddafi had previously given up his WMD program and sought to reconstitute himself into the international system. The price he paid for this cooperation was severe. Relying on Clinton’s assurances, Russia abstained from UN Resolution 1973, enabling military intervention to protect civilians under the explicit understanding that this would not mean regime change.
Clinton immediately reneged on the deal (which I warned against at the time). NATO bombing led to Gaddafi’s overthrow in favor of ISIS-style militants. Later, four Americans including Ambassador Stevens were murdered at an American diplomatic compound in Benghazi on Clinton’s watch. Today Libya is a failed state. Obama has since labelled this his single greatest failure as president, a failure for which Clinton is largely responsible.”
Hillary’s Senate Accomplishment: One Bill Enacted into Law: to Name a Federal Building After Thurgood Marshall
– National Review
“In eight years, her one concrete achievement was getting a courthouse renamed for Thurgood Marshall. Democrats have been using their convention speeches this week to make Hillary Clinton look like a can-do politician. On Tuesday, Bill Clinton flatly declared, “She’s a natural leader, she’s a good organizer, and she’s the best darn change-maker I ever met in my entire life.”
We heard speech after speech about how Hillary cares about the children, about her innovative ability to solve problems. But there is a reason the speeches lack specific examples.
Hillary wasn’t much of a change-maker in the U.S. Senate. Sure, being president is different from being a senator, but both jobs require making deals. Both offices require drawing up proposals and winning the support of others. Given all of the insight she must have gained as first lady, one might have expected her to be better at pushing legislation. She intimately knew all of the players, had Bill by her side, and had access to the tremendous wealth of the Clinton Foundation.
Yet, Hillary’s Senate career is defined by safe, noncontroversial bills, most of which were essentially pure fluff and yet she couldn’t get them passed.
In her eight years in the Senate, just one of Hillary’s bills got enacted into law. This bill designated the U.S. courthouse at 40 Centre Street in New York City as the “Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse.
Hillary had eleven other bills that were passed by the Senate, but none made it through the House. Four of those bills were to rename U.S. Postal Service offices. Then there was another courthouse renaming, a commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the Military Order of the Purple Heart, and another commemoration for the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution.
“A popular meme on the right is that the former First Lady of Arkansas, former First Lady of the United States, former two-time Senator of the State of New York, and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is without accomplishments.
First ever student commencement speaker at Wellesley College. • President of the Wellesley Young Republicans • Intern at the House Republican Conference • Distinguished graduate of Yale Law School • Editorial board of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action • Appointed to Senator Walter Mondale’s Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. • Co-founded Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families • Staff attorney for Children’s Defense Fund • Faculty member in the School of Law at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville • Former Director of the Arkansas Legal Aid Clinic. • First female chair of the Legal Services Corporation • First female partner at Rose Law Firm. • Former civil litigation attorney. • Former Law Professor at the University of Arkansas School of Law. • Twice listed by The National Law Journal as one of the hundred most influential lawyers in America • Former First Lady of Arkansas. • Arkansas Woman of the Year in 1983 • Chair of the American Bar Association’s Commission on Women in the Profession • Twice named by the National Law Journal as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America • Created Arkansas’s Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth • Led a task force that reformed Arkansas’s education system • Board of directors of Wal-Mart and several other corporations • Instrumental in passage of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program • Promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses • Successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the National Institutes of Health • Worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War (now recognized as Gulf War Syndrome) • Helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice • Initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act • First FLOTUS in US History to hold a postgraduate degree • Traveled to 79 countries during time as FLOTUS • Helped create Vital Voices, an international initiative to promote the participation of women in the political processes of their countries. • Served on five Senate committees: -Committee on Budget (2001–2002) -Committee on Armed Services (2003–2009) -Committee on Environment and Public Works (2001–2009) -Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (2001–2009) -Special Committee on Aging. • Member of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe • Instrumental in securing $21 billion in funding for the World Trade Center site’s redevelopment • Leading role in investigating the health issues faced by 9/11 first responders. • In the aftermath of September 11th, she worked closely with her senior Senate counterpart from New York, Sen. Charles Schumer, on securing $21.4 billion in funding for the World Trade Center redevelopment. • Middle East ceasefire. In November 2012, Secretary of State Clinton brokered a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas. • Introduced the Family Entertainment Protection Act, intended to protect children from inappropriate content found in video games. • First ex-FLOTUS in US History to be elected to the United States Senate (and re-elected) • Two-term New York Senator -(senate stats here: https://www.govtrack.us/…) -(voting record here: http://votesmart.org/…) • Former US Secretary of State • GRAMMY Award Winner • Author”
Obama Admin Wants To Surrender US Control Over Internet To Global Bureaucracy
– Daily Caller
“The Obama administration is planning to relinquish American control over a central portion of Internet governance.
The implications of this move range from control by an international bureaucracy to totalitarian regimes locking up entire portions of the Internet, according to experts.
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) is in the process of transitioning stewardship of the Internet’s domain name system (DNS) — the technical network that converts website address names into numbers — to a global entity. The DNS is essentially the “yellow pages” of web addresses. The transition is set to occur Oct. 1.
DNS control is causing deep disagreement in the technology world, as experts in the industry and academia have vastly different opinions on the issue. Some say security and free use of the Internet is better under the umbrella of an organization that resides in America, while others assert this power should be given to a global organization.”
Statement: Donald Trump Opposes Ceding Internet Control To Foreign Powers…
“Candidate Donald Trump has released the following statement on the controversial President Obama plan to hand over control of the internet to the United Nations:
“Donald J. Trump is committed to preserving Internet freedom for the American people and citizens all over the world. The U.S. should not turn control of the Internet over to the United Nations and the international community. President Obama intends to do so on his own authority – just 10 days from now, on October 1st, unless Congress acts quickly to stop him.
The Republicans in Congress are admirably leading a fight to save the Internet this week, and need all the help the American people can give them to be successful. Hillary Clinton’s Democrats are refusing to protect the American people by not protecting the Internet.
The U.S. created, developed and expanded the Internet across the globe. U.S. oversight has kept the Internet free and open without government censorship – a fundamental American value rooted in our Constitution’s Free Speech clause.
Internet freedom is now at risk with the President’s intent to cede control to international interests, including countries like China and Russia, which have a long track record of trying to impose online censorship. Congress needs to act, or Internet freedom will be lost for good, since there will be no way to make it great again once it is lost.”
US NTIA’s plan to end ICANN contract puts Internet freedom at risk, critics say
“The freedom and openness of the Internet are at stake after the U.S. government announced plans to end its contractual oversight of ICANN, some critics said Thursday.
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s announcement last month that it will end its contract with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers to operate key domain-name functions could embolden other nations to attempt to seize control, some Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee said.
“All hyperbole aside, this hearing is about nothing less than the future of the Internet and, significantly, who has the right, the ability and the authority to determine it,” said Representative Bob Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican. “Should it be decided by a few people in Washington, Beijing, Moscow, Sao Paolo or even Silicon Valley or should it be determined by those who use and stand to benefit from it?”
Goodlatte suggested that other countries would try to control ICANN after the U.S. ends its contract. The U.S. can “rightly take credit for the freedom that exists the Internet today,” he said during a hearing. “When we let go of that final link, will that institution be safer from those efforts to regulate the Internet, or will it be more exposed because it no longer has the protection of the United States?”
The Internet engineers, companies and civil society groups involved in ICANN wouldn’t allow a government takeover of the organization, supporters of the NTIA’s plan said. “I cannot imagine the Internet engineers that I know agreeing to do any of the parade of horribles that people are concerned about,” said Representative Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat.
Separately, the technology subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee voted Thursday to approve the Domain Openness Through Continued Oversight Matters (DOTCOM) Act, which would require a U.S. Government Accountability Office study about the effects of the transition before it happens. Members of that committee raised similar concerns in a hearing last week.
President Barack Obama’s administration opposes the bill because it raises questions about the U.S. government’s long-term support of a multistakeholder governance model at ICANN, said NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling.
Strickling assured Judiciary Committee members that the agency would not give up oversight of ICANN unless it is satisfied that the organization has a transition plan in place that prohibits a government takeover.
Several Republicans committee members questioned NTIA’s move to end its contractual relationship with ICANN as soon as late 2015, but Strickling defended the plan, saying one of the main reasons for the change is to remove the perception in some countries that the U.S. has too much control.”
Fifty years ago, in response to the surprise Soviet launch of Sputnik, the U.S. military set up the Advanced Research Projects Agency. It would become the cradle of connectivity, spawning the era of Google and YouTube, of Amazon and Facebook, of the Drudge Report and the Obama campaign. Each breakthrough—network protocols, hypertext, the World Wide Web, the browser—inspired another as narrow-tied engineers, long-haired hackers, and other visionaries built the foundations for a world-changing technology. Keenan Mayo and Peter Newcomb let the people who made it happen tell the story.
Bob Taylor: Working with AT&T would be like working with Cro-Magnon man. I asked them if they wanted to be early members so they could learn technology as we went along. They said no. I said, Well, why not? And they said, Because packet switching won’t work. They were adamant. As a result, AT&T missed out on the whole early networking experience.
Bob Kahn: They said, We want a network. This would be like a bid for a rocket to the moon—you know, handle a thousand pounds of payload, launch from a vertical liftoff in Florida, bring back something safely.
Leonard Kleinrock: September 2, 1969, is when the first I.M.P. was connected to the first host, and that happened at U.C.L.A. We didn’t even have a camera or a tape recorder or a written record of that event. I mean, who noticed? Nobody did. Nineteen sixty-nine was quite a year. Man on the moon. Woodstock. Mets won the World Series. Charles Manson starts killing these people here in Los Angeles. And the Internet was born. Well, the first four everybody knew about. Nobody knew about the Internet.
So the switch arrives. Nobody notices. However, a month later, Stanford Research Institute gets their I.M.P., and they connect their host to their switch. Think of a square box, our computer, connected to a circle, which is the I.M.P., 5, 10 feet away. There’s another I.M.P. 400 miles north of us in Menlo Park, basically at Stanford Research Institute. And there’s a high-speed line connecting those two. We are now prepared to connect two hosts together over this fledgling network.
So on October 29, 1969, at 10:30 in the evening, you will find in a log, a notebook log that I have in my office at U.C.L.A., an entry which says, “Talked to SRI host to host.” If you want to be, shall I say, poetic about it, the September event was when the infant Internet took its first breath.”
…Continue reading the fascinating article on the Internet and people who built it @ VanityFair.com
“At tonight’s debate, Donald Trump faced off not just against Hillary Clinton, but against moderator Lester Holt.
The game of two-on-one saw Holt ask no questions about:
The Clinton Foundation
While ignoring these issues, Holt grilled Trump on stop-and-frisk, the birther story, his comments about women, his many bankruptcies, why he hasn’t released his tax returns — and a host of other issues the media sees as unfriendly to the Republican candidate.”
We Need To Listen To The People On The Front Lines
Lifezette is reporting today that the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Council has endorsed Donald Trump for President.
The article reports:
The National ICE Council, the union representing 5,000 federal immigration officers and law enforcement support staff, decided to endorse the GOP nominee after carefully considering the impact a Hillary Clinton presidency would have on their officers. Saying that Clinton has embraced the “unconstitutional executive orders” of President Barack Obama, Chris Crane, president of the National ICE Council, said in a statement that these orders “have forced our officers to violate their oaths to uphold the law and placed every person living in America at risk — including increased risk of terrorism.”
According to the article, this is the first time the National ICE Council has endorsed a candidate in a national election. This is important. We need to listen to these people as they are on the front lines of our fight against domestic terrorism.”
Mark Cuban Says Sorry for ‘Black Kid’ Remark | 2014
“Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban found himself at the center of a social media beat-down Thursday after telling an interviewer at a conference a day earlier, “If I see a black kid in a hoodie on my side of the street, I’ll move to the other side of the street.”
Later Thursday, Cuban issued an apology to Trayvon Martin’s family on Twitter.
“In hindsight I should have used different examples,” Cuban wrote. “I didn’t consider the Trayvon Martin family, and I apologize to them for that.”
He added that he stood by the substance of his interview.
“We’re all prejudiced in one way or the other,” Cuban said. “If I see a black kid in a hoodie and it’s late at night, I’m walking to the other side of the street. And if on that side of the street, there’s a guy that has tattoos all over his face—white guy, bald head, tattoos everywhere—I’m walking back to the other side of the street. And the list goes on of stereotypes that we all live up to and are fearful of.”
The Associated Press reported that Miami Heat player Chris Bosh cringed when he was shown the controversial portion of Cuban’s Wednesday interview.”
– So Donald Sterling was forced out of the NBA for making racist, bigoted remarks, but Mark Cuban gets to stay? What’s wrong with this picture? /CJ
Mark Cuban is honestly offensive in his words on black kids in hoodies
– LA Times
“The words were filled with context and steeped with insight. The words came from a respected businessman with no documented history of bias.
But no how much you dressed them up, they were still words of racial stereotyping. Coming from the owner of a professional sports team, particularly in this current Donald Sterling-shrouded climate, they were words that should not go unchallenged.
Less than a month after Sterling rocked the sports world with racist remarks, Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, has openly acknowledged his own prejudices.
In an videotaped interview with Inc. Magazine Wednesday, Cuban casually tossed out stereotypes as if discussing the weather. He said he was just bringing honesty to our national discussion on race, but since when does honesty give someone a free ticket to ignorance? One hopes NBA Commissioner Adam Silver will ignore the intentions of the messenger and focus on the danger of the message.”
“Facebook insists it’s no big deal that it inflated numbers on viewership of its video ads — but some advertisers aren’t buying it.
Mark Zuckerberg’s social-networking giant apologized Friday as it admitted that, for the past two years, it has overestimated the amount of time users spent watching video ads by as much as 60 to 80 percent.
Specifically, Facebook said it had only included video views of 3 seconds or longer when calculating the average length of a video views it showed to advertisers, leaving out shorter times that would have brought down the averages.
The “discrepancy,” as Facebook called it, distorted its numbers to its advantage as the company ramped up a fierce battle with Google’s YouTube division for video ads — the most lucrative segment of internet advertising.
Facebook claimed the screwup didn’t affect its “billing” because technically its ad rates are based on the number of clicks a video ad gets rather than how long users linger over it.
Nevertheless, metrics on average viewing time are prominently circulated to advertisers. Don’t be surprised if, in the near term, existing advertisers demand reimbursement, and if prospective advertisers hesitate over launching fresh, high-dollar campaigns, experts said.
“Advertisers will be demanding compensation, and I’ll bet they get it,” said Mitchell Reichgut, chief executive of New York ad firm Jun Group.
Facebook initially disclosed the problem on an obscure Web page for advertisers several weeks ago.
“They tried to bury it in a blog,” Reichgut said. “That’s not how you announce something of this magnitude.”
On Thursday, the issue blew up when the Wall Street Journal reported (paywall) that advertisers including Publicis Group were asking questions, forcing Facebook to come clean.”
Doubts About Digital Ads Rise Over New Revelations As Facebook Inflates Stats
Advertising industry grapples with questions about viewer metrics, adding to rebate concerns
“Marketers who have been pouring huge sums into digital advertising are wrestling with several recent events that add to a troubling picture: some are finding they can’t be sure how well that money was spent or what they’ve received in return for it.
The lack of transparency that plagues the advertising industry was on stark display this week. Revelations that Facebook Inc. overestimated by up to 80% the average time people spent watching video ads on its platform shocked the media and marketing world.
Meanwhile, Japanese ad giant Dentsu Inc. admitted on Friday it overcharged at least 111 companies for internet ads. The mea culpa was prompted by a complaint from Toyota Motor Corp. that its internet ads weren’t having the promised impact. Dentsu apologized and blamed overworked employees for the overbilling.
At the same time, marketers increasingly are questioning whether their ad agencies accepted rebates from media companies without telling their clients. An industry probe earlier this year into rebates highlighted digital advertising deals as a key area of focus. Companies including General Electric Co., J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. have launched audits of their agencies. Ad companies have denied wrongdoing.
These developments add to the nagging sense for marketers that digital advertising—for all its promise as a way to reach consumers who are tethered to mobile devices and are spending less time on traditional media—has real pitfalls and risks.
The lack of transparency and trustworthy measurement in online advertising will be among the issues weighing on ad executives gathering in New York next week for annual Advertising Week festivities. Also on their minds: fears that they are wasting billions of dollars on ads that aren’t “viewable,” or visible to the human eye, or are being shown on sites with computer-generated fake traffic.
The confluence of issues “could be a tipping point” for how marketers perceive digital advertising, potentially denting growth in the $194 billion global digital ad market, saidBob Liodice, chief executive officer of the Association of National Advertisers. The trade group represents large advertisers such as General Motors and AT&T.
“Marketers are reassessing the level of investment in the digital area because they are beginning to question what they are really getting in terms of the return on investment,” Mr. Liodice added.
In Facebook’s case, the company disclosed that the metric it reported for two years for the average time users spent watching videos was artificially inflated, because it only factored in video views of more than three seconds. Big ad agencies pressed Facebook for more details and ad buyer Publicis Media, a division of Publicis Groupe SA, was told that the Facebook error likely overestimated average time spent viewing videos by 60% to 80%, The Wall Street Journal reported.
On Friday, Facebook apologized for the erroneous video metric. “While this is only one of the many metrics marketers look at, we take any mistake seriously,” said David Fischer,vice president of business and marketing partnerships, in a Facebook post.
The Facebook revelation played into a narrative among some Madison Avenue executives that large online platforms are unaccountable “walled gardens,” doling out limited information on how media or ads are consumed on their platforms.
“The primary concern for me is the walled garden needs to disappear and they need to be treated like other vendors with a level playing field,” said Ron Amram, vice president of media at Heineken. He said he and his agency are meeting with Facebook next week to discuss the impact of the metric discrepancy.
The news holds implications for companies competing with Facebook for ad dollars, from legacy publishers to, increasingly, TV networks. Facebook has been gaining momentum—it has a 22% share of the $46 billion U.S. mobile ad market, according to eMarketer, and its mobile ad revenue jumped 80% in the latest quarter. Those competitors are looking for ways to drive a wedge between the tech giant and advertisers and might look to exploit the video metrics snafu.
Sites including Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Snapchat boast of the number of people watching videos on their services.
By contrast, Nielsen ratings in the TV business serve as the standard currency for ad deals. While ad buyers and TV networks have made a sport of complaining about Nielsen ratings data for years, marketers are happy to have an independent party to rely on.
Big online platforms are “telling you what they are worth and it’s difficult to verify it,” said Mr. Leech. Still, Mr. Leech isn’t ready to cut his digital spending.”
Lying, Cheating, Fraud: Is Facebook Video Too Good to Be True?
– Contently.com | Aug 2015
“For months now there have been rumblings of a controversy around Facebook video. Yesterday, those rumblings finally became something of an earthquake.
Hank Green, brother of author John Green and co-host of their highly successful YouTube channel VlogBrothers, wrote an incisive Medium post that voiced the collective frustrations of digital video creators. Green accused the powerful social network of “lying, cheating, and stealing” its way to the top of the digital video space—swindling content creators, and even advertisers, along the way.
Green focused the piece on those three accusations, beginning with “cheating.” His claim revolves around the astronomical views Facebook touts for its native videos compared to the small amount the same videos will get if they are externally hosted (namely, if they are links to YouTube). He backs up his argument with a narrow study, done by Duke University’s social media team, which shows the huge gaps in engagement between native video they published on Facebook and YouTube links that were posted on Facebook. Of all Green’s issues, this one is the least heinous. It’s not really cheating: Facebook predictably gives its own product preferential treatment, and there is a fair chance this is just Facebook’s algorithm responding to user behavior. The difference in engagement should be attributed more to Facebook video’s autoplay feature and a more attractive presentation than any sort of shady number fudging.
But then Green moves onto “lying,” a more severe allegation meant to draw attention to the notoriously low bar that qualifies as a video view on Facebook. Unlike YouTube, which counts a view after 30 seconds (and draws most of its views from direct search or clicks—more purposeful actions than autoplay), Facebook has defined a view as three seconds. Considering that most video views come from users scrolling past autoplaying, muted videos, it’s hard to see this paltry standard as anything more than a strategy to inflate view counts. Green then provides two charts (see below) to show that if Facebook followed the same standards as YouTube, view rates would be much smaller. Viewer retention at 30 seconds on Facebook sits at 21 percent, while YouTube can boast an 86-percent retention rate for organic views at the 30-second mark.”
Bill Clinton’s ex-lover Gennifer Flowers accepts Trump’s invitation to attend debate
– Chicago Tribune
“Gennifer Flowers, who revealed a sexual relationship with Bill Clinton in the 1990s, is saying she will attend Monday night’s debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as Trump’s guest.
Flowers’s assistant confirmed the decision to BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski Saturday afternoon, and Flowers herself told the New York Times in a text message, “Yes, I will be there.”
The decision was the latest play in a bizarre bit of gamesmanship between the Clinton and Trump campaigns over the debate. Clinton’s camp confirmed this week that they would invite billionaire Mark Cuban, a Trump antagonist, to the debate.
“Just got a front row seat to watch @HillaryClinton overwhelm @realDonaldTrump at the ‘Humbling at Hofstra’ on Monday. It Is On!” Cuban tweeted.
The two billionaires have feuded regularly in recent years. At a July campaign stop for Clinton, Cuban called Trump “bats— crazy.”
On Saturday, he taunted Trump on Twitter: “Donald. Remember when you told me on the phone we were ‘Bobbsie Twins’ and I laughed?”
And Trump tweeted that he might invite Flowers – first in a tweet that misspelled her name as “Jennifer,” which was deleted within minutes, quickly followed by a repeat. Both tweets also mentioned Cuban’s “Apprentice”-like TV show, which was canceled in 2004: “If dopey Mark Cuban of failed Benefactor fame wants to sit in the front row, perhaps I will put Gennifer Flowers right alongside of him!”
Despite the confirmations from Flowers and her assistant, the Trump campaign still has yet to say whether he will bring her to the debate – a move that would certainly add a subplot (if not a sideshow) to the highly anticipated proceedings.”