Duke: I saw you beat that man like I never saw no man get beat before, and the man kept coming after you

Rocky 2 1979

Ulysses don’t scare worth a damn!”

Union a soldier during the Battle of the Wilderness 1864

Amid all the the various pronouncement concerning the Alabama Senate Results President Trump has made it clear that no matter what the MSM thinks he knows how to play this game.

First his reaction to the Democrat win.

Note the contrast to how the MSM/Left reacted to his win. No blaming the people, no cries of interference a polite congratulation and a reminder that the seat will be up again soon and that political contest never ends. He doesn’t give the left what they want, reminds those of the right that tomorrow is another day.

Then he follows up with this:

He points out that Moore wasn’t his candidate but he wanted that vote and complements him on hard work but notes the “deck stacked against him” acknowledging to his base what was done here.

But the best part is what happened next. And this is where Trump takes a page from US Grant’s book.

The first battle that Grant fought after being put in charge of all Union Armies was the Battle of the Wilderness. Though for a time it was a close run thing in the end Robert E. Lee’s confederates beat beat him left right and center and delivered as sound a thrashing to the Union Army as ever he had done in the war.

But it didn’t matter because Grant didn’t stop

for the first time, the Army of the Potomac marched south after a battle in Virginia, instead of retreating, as all previous Union generals had done. Grant forced Lee onto the defensive

In other words in the face of a defeat what did Grant do? He moved forward and kept fighting.

So now we have the MSM / Democrat / Left  going on about how Alabama changes everything and it means the GOP is in full retreat and the Trump agenda is finished, so  what does Trump do:

GOP leaders on Wednesday agreed on a final tax cut plan that would lower the corporate rate to 21% and drop the top individual rate to 37%, according to a Republican source briefed on the deal.

Earlier House and Senate versions of the measure would have lowered the corporate rate to 20%, but in reconciling the two plans, leaders needed to nudge up the corporate rate in order to pay for benefits elsewhere.

Among those benefits will be a drop in the rate paid by the richest Americans, a risky move since President Trump and GOP leaders have tried to portray their sweeping plan as aimed at the middle class.

Democrats cried foul

The push to pass the bill next week was sharply criticized by Democrats, who called on Republican leaders to slow what has been a sprint to pass the tax bill and wait for a newly-elected Democratic senator from Alabama, Doug Jones, to be seated before holding any more votes on the legislation. Mr. Jones won a special election on Tuesday night over Roy Moore, a Republican, flipping control of the seat and reducing the Republican Senate margin to 51-49.

But Trump was having none of it:

Trump said he hopes to sign the bill “in a very short period of time” and that it’s “very important for the country” that Congress vote on it next week.

The compromise bill is expected to set the U.S. corporate income tax rate at 21 percent, effective in 2018, according to a Republican official who asked not to be named because the discussions are private. The top federal corporate rate is now 35 percent, and Trump had insisted it should be no higher than 20 percent, but gave ground on that position earlier this month.

Trump said Wednesday that he’d support a 21 percent rate.

“I would,” Trump said, “We’re going to see where it ends up but I said that already. It’s at 35 right now so if it got down to 21 I would certainly, I would be thrilled.”
“We haven’t set that final figure yet, certainly 21 is a very great success,” he added.

“I’m just very excited by” the bill, he said. “This is one of the biggest pieces of legislation ever signed by this country.”

So what do the Democrats get for their Victory on Tuesday? A while house moving forward with their agenda without skipping a beat.

That’s going to take the wind out of a few Democrat / media sails.

By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT – Are you trying to get into the Christmas spirit?  Already IN the spirit?  Here’s a list of things to do because it is Christmas (inspired by British Logic):

  1. Bake some fruitcake cookies (fruitcake is awful; fruitcake cookies are wonderful).
  2. Watch Love Actually.
  3. Mix up some spicy Bloody Marys and an assortment of garnishes. Invite friends over.
  4. Go to a really crowded shopping center. You don’t have to buy anything.
  5. Avoid every WalMart.
  6. Bake and decorate sugar cookies.
  7. Build a gingerbread village.
  8. Drive around and look at Christmas lights.
  9. Listen to Christmas music on Pandora, especially the traditional tunes.
  10. Hang tiny white lights around your kitchen.
  11. Make four batches of Chex Mix. Throw in whatever sounds good.  Distribute what you can’t eat to friends at the office.
  12. Wear Christmas socks.
  13. Go see Santa. Count how many children cry when their picture is taken with him.
  14. Put up a live Christmas tree.
  15. Have an argument with someone about white v. colored lights.
  16. Watch Christmas Vacation.
  17. Buy one really extravagant gift for someone who would least expect it but really deserves it.
  18. Write out Christmas cards: not the obligatory Xerox Christmas letter and not a Shutterfly photo of your perfect family – real cards with glittery Christmas scenes.
  19. Buy Christmas stamps for your Christmas cards.
  20. Stand in a really long line at the post office at absolutely the last possible minute.
  21. Put a red tablecloth on your table. Find some holly to use as decoration.  Bonus points if it has red berries.
  22. Postpone all of your gift wrapping until the last minute. Spread it out across the living room floor and do all of your wrapping in one evening.
  23. Forget where you hid at least one gift.
  24. Put antlers or a reindeer nose on your car.
  25. Attend a performance of The Nutcracker.
  26. Read a great Christmas book.
  27. Attend a local performance of Christmas music.
  28. Make a killer rum cake.
  29. Buy at least one present for yourself.
  30. Buy an advent calendar.
  31. Hang a live wreath on your door.
  32. Donate to the charity of your choice. Bonus points if it’s a local animal rescue or a homeless shelter.
  33. Watch A Charlie Brown Christmas.
  34. Attend a small-town Christmas parade.
  35. Eat your weight in Brach’s peppermint nougat.
  36. Make a pot of seafood gumbo. Serve with hot French bread.
  37. Watch the A Christmas Story
  38. Find some live mistletoe growing in a tree; knock it down and hang a sprig in a doorway. Do not do this at the office.
  39. Roast pecans. Add sugar and butter.
  40. Take your next door neighbor a plate of Christmas cookies.
  41. Treat yourself to a shot of really fine bourbon.
  42. Buy a poinsettia. Or two.  Or three.
  43. Build a bonfire.
  44. Go sledding. Unless you live in Louisiana.
  45. Play upbeat Christmas tunes over your outdoor speakers while doing yardwork. Look at how many neighbors come outside.
  46. Visit with neighbors.
  47. Have a really good cry for those you miss so badly it hurts.
  48. Check out the list of top 100 Christmas movies. Watch a few you’ve never seen.
  49. Make cheese straws. They are best with a cold bourbon over ice.
  50. Go to the midnight Christmas service at your church. Or someone else’s church.
  51. Attend a Christmas play.
  52. Go ice skating.
  53. Watch The Bishop’s Wife.
  54. Call your mother, if you can.
  55. Read ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas with a child.

Wednesday Morning I woke up to a phone call saying I was laid off and the situation for the month and the bills were completely in doubt

It is 2 AM on Friday, I really should be in bed because I have to go to the 8 am mass and then take DaWife for a scheduled MRI but I’m not in bed because I’ve been too busy opening emails, sending thank you notes and updating my goal totals.

I’m stopping at this point partly because I have to sleep but mostly because even though there are over 40 emails from tip jar hits and new subscriptions we’ve made the base cash goal with some to spare to pay the paypal fees that will come.

My thanks to Ed and Glenn for the link and to all of you who have kicked in.   I’ll be thanking you all personally by email when I get back home from Worcester and get through the rest of the emails.

It’s unlikely that we have the 91 more subscription necessary for me to not have to worry about a job and do this full time but I know that at least though January I don’t have to worry if the bills are paid.

That’s a really big Christmas gift.

If you’re interested in padding that number to February you can do so by hitting DaTipJar




As for the book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer

You guys have me selling better than the Pope as of yesterday at least on kindle

12,000 paperback copies sold at $6.99 can make me a full time author, reporter and writer next year   And of course it would make an excellent Gift for the person of faith on your Christmas list.

And if we get enough new subscribers (90 more at $20) then I’ll never have to shake DaTipJar for anything other than a special project like CPAC


Choose a Subscription level



Either way to all who kicked in thanks once again, you’ll be getting a blast email with the final numbers as soon as I have them and if you haven’t gotten your personal thank you it’s because I haven’t opened your email yet but I’ll get back to that mail tomorrow as soon as DaWife and I are home.

On November 21st FCC Chairman Ajit Pai sent shock waves throughout the internet when he released this Statement announcing an end to President Obama’s misguided and disastrous Net Neutrality.  Here are the opening paragraphs from that statement.

For almost twenty years, the Internet thrived under the light-touch regulatory approach established by President Clinton and a Republican Congress. This bipartisan framework led the private sector to invest $1.5 trillion building communications networks throughout the United States. And it gave us an Internet economy that became the envy of the world.

But in 2015, the prior FCC bowed to pressure from President Obama. On a party-line vote, it imposed heavy-handed, utility-style regulations upon the Internet. That decision was a mistake.  It’s depressed investment in building and expanding broadband networks and deterred innovation.

When I read the statement I was quite elated.  I knew all of my liberal friends on Facebook would not share my joy, they would be angry and they would express their anger in the form of memes which bore little resemblance to reality.  My response was to leave them alone and to share articles setting the record straight about Net Neutrality, which was President Obama’s attempt to make the internet into a socialist utopia.

From the beginning Net Neutrality was misguided because it was based on a lie.  In a speech, which was quoted in this Breitbart Article, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai described this lie when he said:

Number one there was no problem to solve; the internet wasn’t broken in 2015. In that situation, it doesn’t seem me that preemptive market-wide regulation is necessary. Number two, even if there was a problem, this wasn’t the right solution to adopt. These Title II regulations were inspired during the Great Depression to regulate Ma Bell which was a telephone monopoly. And the broadband market we have is very different from the telephone market of 1934. So, it seems to me that if you have 4,462 internet service providers and if a few of them are behaving in a way that is anticompetitive or otherwise bad for consumer welfare then you take targeted action to deal with that. You don’t declare the entire market anticompetitive and treat everyone as if they are a monopolist.

There was no evidence of widespread price gouging, censorship by ISPs, or other harmful practices prior to the enacting of Net Neutrality.  Regulating the internet as a utility was the most overbearing form of regulating the Obama administration could implement.  Why did the Obama administration take over the internet through executive fiat? This American Thinker Article sheds light on the primary motivation:

President Obama feared the free flow of information as a threat to his power grabs and attempt to fundamentally transform the United States. Just as cable news eliminated the old guard network’s role as gatekeepers of what we saw and heard, the Internet freed information consumers to seek the truth and speak their minds in an unfettered environment.

Under net neutrality, the FCC took for itself the power to regulate how Internet providers manage their networks and how they serve their customers. The FCC would decide how and what information could flow through the Internet, all in the name of providing access to the alleged victims of corporate greed.

Net Neutrality was all about social justice not eliminating harmful practices.   According to this Investor Business Daily editorial, Obama’s FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski stated purpose for Net Neutrality was:

Genachowski insists net neutrality is designed only to prevent communication giants such as Comcast and Verizon from blocking some websites while favoring others, particularly their own, with higher speeds and better quality. The poor and minorities are shoved aside in the name of profit….

…In the name of providing access to the alleged downtrodden victims of corporate greed, the FCC proposes to take unto itself the power to regulate how Internet providers manage their networks, how they serve their customers. The FCC would decide how and what information could flow through the Internet.

According to the same article, Obama’s FCC Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd wrote:

Net Neutrality Is A Civil Rights Issue.  Unfortunately, the powerful cable and telecom industry doesn’t value the Internet for its public interest benefits.  Instead, these companies too often believe that to safeguard their profits, they must control what content you see and how you get it

The free market, which is the most mighty economic engine yet devised, built the internet.   What fuel does the free market run on?  Profits are the fuel.  It was the quest for higher profits that created the most revolutionary communication medium that ever existed.  Competition was what regulated the internet.  Government regulation only hinders and destroys.  The free exchange of money for goods and services is the most color blind form of social interaction that ever existed.

Net Neutrality has had very negative effects on the internet.   Free State Foundation President Randolph May describes these negative effects in this Breitbart article

The FCC’s current regulations, put in place at President Obama’s direction in 2015, constitute a misguided act of regulatory aggression leveled at the dynamic broadband Internet marketplace. It is none too soon to repeal them. Already, there is persuasive evidence that applying a public utility regulatory regime to Internet service providers has slowed investment in new facilities. As demand for Internet services continues to grow exponentially, the nation can ill-afford to risk deterring investment in new high-speed networks.

The moment FCC Chairman Ajit Pai released his statement a wave of outrage swept over individuals from the political left.   Julian Sanchez of the Cato Institute described the outrage in this Fox News Article

There’s plenty of scaremongering around steps broadband providers could take in the absence of neutrality regulation — blocking off certain sites, or charging extra fees to access certain services — but not a ton of reason to think they would do these things, which would antagonize customers, be technically tricky to enforce against sophisticated users, and invite the re-imposition of regulations.

Major Internet Service providers do make convenient villains in all of this Net Neutrality debate because they are not popular with their customers.   A great many believe their ISPs provide lousy customer service and many feel they are overcharged for the service they receive.  Why are ISPs able to get away with these unpopular practices?  Government regulations at the federal, state, and local levels effectively grant these companies monopolies on the local level.   This article from Wired documents how these monopolies are granted and how they limit competition.  Repealing Net Neutrality is just the first step to truly freeing the internet.  Regulations at all levels must be repealed.

By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT – I loved Fausta’s view from her front porch Saturday; it looks sunny and warm and is exactly why I love living in the South.

This morning I was sitting in my swing under the magnolia tree, sipping my coffee, reading Southern Living magazine and watching the yellow hackberry leaves flutter to the ground like feathers.  It really never gets very cold here in Louisiana.  My husband grew up in Iowa and he swears that the reason he has trouble getting into the Christmas spirit is because it never gets cold here and there is no snow.

We sort of skipped Christmas last year; it had been a rough and expensive year and neither Steve nor I felt much like celebrating Christmas last year.  I’m known in my family for my ceiling-scraping traditional Christmas trees that are, of course, always real and feature our heirloom ornaments and real tinsel applied one single strand at a time.  It’s a herculean feat of decoration each year and I’ve always enjoyed it, but last year I just couldn’t muster the spirit.

I went to WalMart and I bought a fake, pre-lit tree and I bought blue and silver plastic ornaments.

You can not imagine the final damper this put on our Christmas holiday.

My grown son was horrified.  My friends were aghast.  Nobody could quite believe it.

I managed to make Chex Mix but there were no fruitcake cookies or fudge, and presents were token, impersonal items.

I just wanted it to be over.  It was too much pressure.

On December 26, I yanked that fake tree down, shoved it into a bag, and stuck it in the garage where it still is.  The tree was pretty enough and if there is a family in need in my area I’ll probably donate it to them.

This year has been a better one and although not without issues, so far they’ve all been things we can handle.  I’m in the Christmas mood this year and have put up my real Fraser fir, complete with lights and tinsel.  There are actually presents under the tree this year – well, not exactly under the tree yet because the new puppy would destroy them, but there are presents.  I made my Mama’s fruitcake cookie recipe, I’ve soaked the little things in Makers Mark, and they are aging nicely.  I made three giant pans of Chex Mix yesterday and I’ve taken full advantage of Cyber Monday.

The point is that sometimes these holidays are hard for people.  Very hard.  The pain we feel at the absence of people who can’t be here is very real.  The celebrations of our childhood are often romantic and lovely and we feel such a pressure to recreate those, but too often that can not be accomplished and we put more stress on ourselves.  I think as I grow older I’m learning to accept a new normal with the holidays, be it Christmas, Thanksgiving, New Years, whatever.

Somehow, skipping Christmas last year has helped me this year to see things differently. The holiday came and went last year whether I participated or not.  It wasn’t the end of the world and when it was over I was kind of glad I didn’t have a big mess to clean up and a lot of credit card bills to struggle with.  I was a little envious of all the big happy family gatherings I saw going on around me – we have a very small family and not all of us like each other very much – but it was fine.  I had those I love close to me and it really was just fine.

But this year, I’m ready to get back into the fray.  I want the pretty packages, the smell of the tree, the twinkly lights, and the pleasure of finding just the right gift for someone.

I don’t want to be didactic, but try to be aware of those you know who may be struggling with depression or other issues during the holidays.  For a million reasons there are people that do not feel the Christmas spirit that perhaps you feel.  For many, the pressure to be as happy and perfect as the people in the Christmas commercials is just too much. For a lot of us, the pain of an absent loved one is crippling.

Be kind. Be generous when you can.  Smile at people.  Step back from politics for a while.  Quit worrying about the tax bill.  Who cares what Trump said on Twitter?  Sit on your porch, in your swing, in front of your fireplace, and enjoy the season in your own way.  If that means skipping Christmas or going all out, do whatever you need to do.

But most of all, be nice.

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

It was the end of our baseball, but who cares?

Buck O’Neil

…and it looks like at Evergreen College they’re still all for it:

The student newspaper at Evergreen State College has a section in its opinion pages described as “for people of color by people of color.”

“This should be a place where we can be us without it being overshadowed by the dark cloud that is living under white supremacy and having to see things from a white perspective.

Of course I’m being a little hard on Evergreen, all over the liberal collegian world Democrats are discovering the joys of segregation and separate but equal and declaring anyone who doesn’t agree with them beyond contempt.

It reminds me of this description of the Movie Birth of a Nation (1915) by the late Roger Ebert:

Watching them today, we are appalled. But audiences in 1915 were witnessing the invention of intercutting in a chase scene. Nothing like it had ever been seen before: Parallel action building to a suspense climax. Do you think they were thinking about blackface? They were thrilled out of their minds.

Today, what they saw for the first time, we cannot see at all. Griffith assembled and perfected the early discoveries of film language, and his cinematic techniques that have influenced the visual strategies of virtually every film made since; they have become so familiar we are not even aware of them. We, on the other hand, are astonished by racist attitudes that were equally invisible to most white audiences in 1915.

If that movie was made today that scene wouldn’t be there because the modern college SJW’s would have already excoriated the black man interested in a white woman as a traitor to his race.

To the liberal of 1955 or 1963 or even 1915 the idea of separate but equal was an abomination designed to keep American Blacks from fully becoming part of American society, culture and success. To the Democrat party of that time, it was, like slavery before it, a means to maintain power and control. That the Democrat party of 2017 is arguing for the same cultural separation that they were 100 years ago in the heyday of Jim Crow and that many of those Democrats arguing for it are black Democrats who are so excited at the prospect of potential power that they don’t see the blatant racism in their actions is an irony so deep that anyone with the smallest grasp of history can barely wrap one’s head around it.

This week, President Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Governments around the world were quick to condemn the unilateral decision, with Saudi Arabia particularly vehement in its criticism of the “unjustified and irresponsible” move.

The fear is that the decision threatens to undermine the Peace Process between Israel and Palestine, and that this could potentially re-ignite a centuries old conflict in the middle east.

Much ink has been spilled on this topic in the past week, and it has further polarized opinion in both the US and Europe. Read both sides of the argument, however, and a strange point of agreement between left and right emerges: while the move may be good for the USA, there is no conceivable way that it furthers the peace process.

Trump claimed otherwise, of course, saying that “I’ve judged this course of action to be in the best interests of the United States of America and the pursuit of peace between Israel and the Palestinians.” But notice which point he put first? The interests of the USA.

Of course, the interests of his own country should always be the priority of a US President. But in the current context – a decision that appears to only affect Israel and Palestine – his justification raises a question: in what sense is it good for the USA?

My answer to this question might be controversial, but it is worth raising. The decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is good for the US precisely because it threatens to exacerbate conflict in the region.

Why Regional Conflicts Are Good For The US

The sad truth of the matter is that armed conflict in the middle east and elsewhere is an integral part of the US economy. This is true in a variety of ways. In the most basic sense, the US sells a lot of weapons to other countries. The State Department’s 2017 budget request includes approximately $5.7 billion for Foreign Military Financing, and the US accounts for 33% of all arms sales worldwide.

Returning to Israel, however, the situation is more complex. Though much is made of the fact that Israel would not be able to defend itself without US weapons, it’s worth noting that the country is not even among the top 10 countries that the US exports weapons to.

Instead, the countries are best seen as co-dependent. Israel is itself the world’s 10th largest arms exporter, which is quite impressive for such a small nation, and 5.9% of its weapons are bought by the USA.

Still, Israel’s dependence on US weapons export is hard to overstate. Though deals over fighter jets tend to hog the headlines, it’s also worth noting that a loot of the more mundane items used by the Israeli military are made in the US: everything from 9mm ammunition to popular concealed carry holsters for Glock 19 handguns.

What Is Trump Actually Doing?

I’m not going to put forward the conspiracy theory that Trump, or US administrations more generally, purposefully create conflicts in order to boost the domestic economy. Rather, Trump’s recent decision seems more likely designed to distract attention from his domestic legal troubles.

Rather, I merely wish to note that armed conflict has been an inherent part of international politics, and therefore the international economy, for as long as humans have been around. The USA has managed to capitalize on this, as any sensible nation would. As a result, asking the US to create peace in the world is not only unreasonable, but against its own self-interest.

For that reason, whatever you believe about Trump’s recent decision, one has to admit that he is acting in the most responsible way possible: he is charged with protecting and furthering the interests of the USA, and that is the way he should act, even if other countries disagree with him.

Harvey Weinstein image by DAvid Shankbone via Wikipedia

With the departure of Keillor (and David Sweeney) at NPR and Matt Lauer at NBC and with the Black Caucus trying to force Conyers out it’s time to repeat the question I asked months ago when Weinstien and the Hollywood sexual harassment dam broke.

So for those who you Hate Trump but are outraged over Weinstein I have two questions for you:

Would the price of Weinstein never being exposed have been worth it to you if it meant Hillary Clinton beating Donald Trump in 2016?

If the answer to the first question is yes: At what number of new women victimized by Mr. Weinstein would that price become too high?

Now let repeat these questions to our media/feminist/liberal friends again with a slight modification:

Knowing what you know now would the price of all the predators of the left from Weinstein to Keillor to Lauer never being exposed have been worth it if it meant Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump in 2016?

If the answer to the question is “Yes” at what number of new women victimized in the Pervnado revelations form Weinstien to Lauer make the price of a Hillary win too high to pay?

I think the answer to this question would be very telling.

Everyone who walks in through the casino doors hopes for a jackpot. However, fortune favors only those who are smart and shrewd enough to claim it. Admit it, we all want to get super rich super-fast. Even the most honest of gamblers must have wondered about hacking an online casino. A word of caution though, hacking a live casino is illegal. If you would like to know how to win the bonuses and free spin, hunting for promo offers would be the safer option!

Moreover, hacking a casino is not as easy as it looks in the movies. The casinos are heavily guarded and always under the eye of a surveillance camera. Tech-savvy players and coders can even infiltrate the gambling software only once they get past all the security and firewall protection.

All said and done, hacking into a casino is not unheard of. There are plenty of stories where people have managed to beat the house for millions! However, for all their meticulous planning, most of the cheaters do get caught eventually. Here are some of the most successful casino hacking stories:

FIN10 Hijacking Canadian Casinos

Cybersecurity of casinos in Canada was under serious threat of being hacked by a group called FN10. A team of hackers spent over three years, trying to find a way into the core systems of major Canadian casinos and betting platforms. Once successful they would infiltrate the sensitive files and steal information, holding the victim casino ransom for 100 and 500 Bitcoins — about $35,000 to $170,000 CAD. They collected crucial data such as bank records, customer information, corporate records and personal communication details from Canadian casinos. According to FireEye, a cyber-security group, the FN10 was operative in as early as 2013 and was only discovered in 2016. The hackers are yet to be identified.

The Fish Tank Fiasco  

Online casinos and live betting platforms are no longer safe from the eagle eyes of the hackers. They just need an outlet, one loose spot and they squirm their way in and steal vital information. In this case, a team used a fish tank to hack into the casinos of North America. The high-tech fish tank was equipped with internet connectivity and could be controlled via a remote. Hackers could transfer about 10GB data from the casino companies in minutes. The scam was eventually detected under the company’s software routine check-up. The entire fiasco was planned very cleverly using only the standard protocols used for streaming audio-visual content. Now, that’s innovative!

Mathematician Turned Hacker

A Russian mathematician Alex tried his hand at casino hacking. Tired of his monotonous and exhausting business, this programmer decided to con a casino. He developed a program that could get into the RNG or random number generator of the casino slots and retrieve the complicated algorithms of numbers. His business venture then started engineering reverse algorithms pseudorandom number generators, or PRNGs. These codes could monitor the happenings of the slot machines, hence predicting the outcomes. With the PRNGs, Alex could now decipher which casino or slot would win and invest his money there. He recruited a team of agents who would roam around the casinos from Poland to Peru and play only at the slots that Alex had “figured out.” A 4-member group can make more than $25,000 per week using Alex’s hack.

The Roulette Scam

The Roulette Scam involves a New York crime ring that invaded casinos in Ohio sometime in 2012. The group, consisting of 50-70 members, had its people spread out across different casinos across America; the Casino Control Authorities eventually discovered them. Each player would bet a small nominal amount initially, pocketing specific colored chips as another would distract the dealer. The player would then pass the chips on to another person who would take his place in the game. The second member would hit another table and cash in on the high-value chips and boost his earnings. The group made around $1000-$2000 per scam and were caught in four different cities in Ohio.

The 60-Seconds ATM Scam

Casino scams don’t usually take place on the betting tables; sometimes all one needs is a debit card. In 2014, a group of 14 people was charged with the theft of $1 million from Citibank via the casinos in Nevada and California. The hackers found a gateway, a gap in the kiosks security for about 60-seconds only via which they could make multiple withdrawals. The leader of the conspiracy, Ara Keshishyan recruited a team to visit the casinos in California and open various Citibank accounts. In that one-minute gap, the hackers could withdraw ten times the amount on their accounts. However, they were careful enough to limit the withdrawals under $10,000 to keep suspicions at bay. Talk about cashing in on opportunities!

The Roselli Brothers

A team of hackers who called themselves the Roselli Brothers managed to make over $37 million from casinos in New Jersey, Nevada, and Puerto Rico without having to spend a dime. They first infiltrated the casino software and obtained the details of people with excellent credit records. The brothers then opened various accounts in their names and deposited about $50,000. This scam spanned about five years from 1995 to 2000 where they successfully managed to dupe gaming officials into believing that they were losing. In reality, the associates won massive profits and paid off all the outstanding parties boosting their credit line by millions!

The Bottom Line

As long as gambling has existed, there have always been players who would strive to beat it. Only some are noble enough to tread the road never taken. They honestly place their bets without breaking the rules. Most shortcut approaches, however, culminate into one big scam. Raiding casinos is the fastest, easiest way to earn some big bucks, theoretically. However, there is always the fear of getting caught, and catch you they will. The modern-day security measures are pretty reliable in protecting the casinos from any “shady business” and infiltration.

None of this is to imply that the GOP doesn’t have its own predators. The difference is, Republicans don’t generally have the press providing 24/7 air cover.

Stephen Green

After yesterday’s post noting Cokie Roberts raining on the John Conyers “Old Man” meme advanced by Joe Scarborough, Jeffrey Toobin and Mike Brzezinski something hit me that I hadn’t though of concerning both Roberts and Brzezinski.

Mike Brzezinski’s late father has been a power player in Washington her entire life. He was an adviser to LBJ when she was born, National security adviser till she was 14 and remained well known and connected throughout his life.

Coke Roberts is the Daughter of former House Majority Lead Hale Boggs who was first elected in 1941, two years before she was born. After her father died in a plane crash in 1972 her mother Lindsay ran for the seat and won serving in congress till 1991.

This means that both of them had parents who were intimately familiar with Washington DC and the people in it. Furthermore Cokie parents in particular would have had a good grasp of the type of people the various members of congress were.

Maybe it’s just me, but if I had an attractive daughter who was working as a reporter in DC and I had some knowledge of who the leches on the hill were at the very least I just might have given them a heads up as to who to watch out for.

Now we don’t know if there was some kind of unwritten rule about preying on the families of fellow members or folks in DC resulting in a some kind of capital hill “do not grope or screw list” that might have provided these ladies with some cover, but it seems to me any parent worth their salt would warn them just to be on the safe side.

So that being the case I have this question for Mrs. Roberts and Ms Brzezinski:

Are you aware of any other current or former members of congress who have used their power to prey on women in the past and are there any men on capital hill that you were you warned about by either your parents or others on the hill to be careful of?

I think the answer to this question will speak volumes.