In it, HUD says the social media giant allows landlords and home sellers access to advertising tools that limit which prospective buyers or tenants can view certain online ads based on race, religion, sex, disability and other characteristics. If Big Tech won't respect our First Amendment, then to paraphrase Hillary Clinton, "we need to put a lot of Big Tech companies out of business."

“According to the complaint, Facebook permitted advertisers to discriminate based on disability by blocking ads to users the company categorized as having interests in 'mobility scooter' or 'deaf culture.' It similarly discriminates based on familial status by not showing ads to users that were labeled as being interested in 'child care' or 'parenting,' according to the complaint. Facebook could also modify or block ads depending on ZIP code, the complaint adds.”

“A spokesperson for Facebook said it would respond to the HUD complaint in court and that the company will work with the department about concerns raised.” This is an attack on the core of Facebook's business model. Microtargeted advertising is the reason people buy ads on Facebook. You can target only old, wealthy people in Beverly Hills or only young, poor people in Appalachia.

The Republican establishment would never dare make a move like this because it contradicts their "conservative principles" which tell them you can never interfere with the so-called "free market."

These companies deserve to be run into the ground with onerous regulations. They need to be prosecuted by the feds and forced to abide by FCC rules mandating true net neutrality in the form of forcing all these companies to allow free speech. If these tech giants fall in the process, so be it. Other, better platforms will take their place.

These tech giants have become monopolies and they're abusing their power by colluding together and interfering in the midterms to favor Democrats in the hope they can impeach our president and end all free speech.

The president did not indicate what steps his administration might take to prevent private companies from setting up and enforcing terms of service that have allowed them to discipline or shut down accounts for reported abuses. “Too many voices are being destroyed, some good & some bad, and that cannot be allowed to happen,” he wrote, without naming any specific accounts.

“Censorship is a very dangerous thing & absolutely impossible to police,” the president wrote, suggesting that social media companies may be politically motivated in enforcing their rules about hate speech and direct calls for violence. “If you are weeding out Fake News, there is nothing so Fake as CNN & MSNBC, & yet I do not ask that their sick behavior be removed,” he wrote.

The president’s Twitter storm comes a week after Facebook, Apple, Spotify and YouTube removed from their services most of the content posted by Jones and his InfoWars network, citing what they said were violations of their terms of service.

She then turned to “the main purpose of my remarks today,” which was “to shed light on another important and frequently overlooked item when it comes to the Palestinian community.” “Here at the UN … there is no end to the speeches on their behalf. Country after country claims solidarity with the Palestinian people. … Talk is cheap. …Last year, Iran’s contribution to UNRWA was zero. Algeria’s contribution to UNRWA was zero. Tunisia’s contribution to UNRWA was zero. Other countries did provide some funding.

Last year … the United States gave 364 million dollars. That’s ten times the combined amounts from every country I just named. And that’s on top of what the American people give annually to the Palestinians in bilateral assistance. That is another 300 million dollars just last year, and it averages to more than a quarter of a billion dollars every year since 1993.

Since that year, the United States has provided over six billion – with a B – dollars in bilateral assistance to Palestinians. How much have the Arab countries – some of whom are wealthy countries – how much have they given to the Palestinians? It does not come anywhere close to what the United States has done. …

Judging by the vitriol that is directed toward the United States from the Palestinian representatives, including the one here today, and from some of their allies, one might fairly conclude that our support is unappreciated or unwelcomed.

The Palestinian leadership has been allowed to live a false reality for too long because Arab leaders are afraid to tell them the truth. The United States is telling the truth because we do care about the Palestinian people. …So the next time we have a meeting like this in the Security Council or in the General Assembly, and we hear speech after speech about the plight of the Palestinian people, I would ask those who are making the speeches to examine what your country is doing to help – other than speech-making.”

Francis said he supported the statements made by US Catholic bishops who called the separation of children from their parents "immoral" and "contrary to our Catholic values." "I am on the side of the Bishops' Conference," Francis told Reuters, referring to those statements. "It's not easy, but populism is not the solution," he added. There was no mention of the fact the US Conference of Catholic Bishops received $176 million in federal contracts for refugee resettlement in 2015 and 2016 alone.

Pope Francis had nothing to say about the allegations some 300 "predator priests" sexually abused more than 1,000 children in Pennsylvania since 1947. In July, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro wrote a personal letter to Pope Francis, warning him that "a comprehensive investigation" by his office had found "widespread sexual abuse of children and a systemic cover-up by leaders of the Catholic Church."

Shapiro says he never received a response. "We have no comment at this time," Paloma Ovejero, deputy director of the Vatican's press office, said on Wednesday. On Thursday, the Vatican again declined to comment. Perhaps the Pope could work on getting his own house in order before casting stones?

US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo are slated to resume talks Wednesday for a fourth straight week as the two sides scramble to reach an agreement before the end of August.

“Right now, it appears they are getting incredibly close to finishing the discussions between the US and Mexico,” said Inu Manak, who has monitored the talks for the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington. “It would be a very big thing if the US and Mexico have settled their issues,” Wallach said. “But there is no final NAFTA deal unless Canada, in the few remaining days, agrees to rejoin the process and also comes to an agreement.”

The idea is to bury the spent fuel on site, about 100 feet from the ocean and just a few feet above the water table. Edison has already begun transferring the waste from cooling pools into specially designed steel canisters. The containers are prone to corrosion and cracking, and cannot be monitored or repaired. Work crews even discovered a loose bolt inside one of the canisters earlier this year.

But flawed storage containers are just one of many worrisome aspects of the scheme. San Onofre sits on an active earthquake fault, in an area where there is a record of past tsunamis.

On the face of it, these should be heady times for American workers. US unemployment is as low as it’s been in nearly two decades (3.9% as of July) and the nation’s private-sector employers have been adding jobs for 101 straight months – 19.5 million since the Great Recession-related cuts finally abated in early 2010, and 1.5 million just since the beginning of the year.

But despite the strong labor market, wage growth has lagged economists’ expectations. In fact, despite some ups and downs over the past several decades, today’s real average wage (that is, the wage after accounting for inflation) has about the same purchasing power it did 40 years ago. And what wage gains there have been have mostly flowed to the highest-paid tier of workers.

The term “bear market” is being thrown around a lot lately, but a lot of people don’t understand what a “bear market” actually is. A bear market is generally considered to be when we see a decline of 20 percent or more from the 52-week high, and after the carnage of this past week a lot of those thresholds are now being crossed. It would probably be too early to call this a “global stock market crash”, but we are well on the way to getting there.  The following are 5 signs that global financial markets are entering a bear market…

#1 Global stocks have now fallen beneath all key moving averages.  Those key moving averages are important psychological thresholds for investors…

#2 European banking stocks have now officially entered a bear market, and all major European stock indexes are now red for the year.

#3 Global banking stocks are down a whopping 23 percent from the peak established earlier this year, and that means that they have officially entered a bear market.

#4 Emerging market stocks have fallen 20 percent from the peak, and that means that they are also now in a bear market.

#5 When demand for industrial metals falls, that indicates that an economic slowdown is coming.  On Wednesday, prices for industrial metals fell to their lowest level in almost a year, and “Dr Copper” officially entered a bear market.

If the financial carnage continues (and that is a big “if”), this could be the beginning of another financial crisis like we experienced in 2008, and that would almost certainly mean a crippling global recession.

It still is not clear if China’s delegation will carry with it a reform offer serious enough to stave off the Trump administration’s threat of tariffs.  The US side will be lead by Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs David Malpass. China is sending a trade envoy to Washington in a renewed effort to end a worsening tariff dispute that has raised worries it will chill global economic growth.

The delegation led by a deputy commerce minister will visit in late August to discuss “issues of mutual concern,” the Commerce Ministry announced Thursday. It gave no details of a possible agenda. The two governments are poised to impose a new round of tariff hikes on $16 billion of each other’s goods next week in their worsening conflict over Beijing’s technology policy.

The study, written by Dr Robert Hancké of the London School of Economics in partnership with derivatives trading company IG, looked at what would happen were Germany to decide to quit the single European currency and go it alone once more – with potentially dire economic consequences. It states: “As the strongest economy in the eurozone, Germany is the only country that can credibly leave the euro.”

“Some German citizens and politicians see themselves as 'victims’ of the euro, feeling that it forces them to prop up countries with weaker economies. If that feeling grows, a majority of citizens could vote in favour of a new deutschmark if given the choice.” The research points out that Germany is the “economically dominant” country in the euro area, accounting for roughly 27 percent of the eurozone’s total GDP.

The report suggestions that a move to create a new German national currency would have “dramatic regional consequences” and would very likely to opposed by the other 18 member-states of the EU who have adopted the euro as their currency. The report suggests: “Germany’s departure from the eurozone would likely lead to the collapse of the currency and conceivably even the European Union as a whole.”