London poised to elect its first Muslim mayor

Coming to our shores soon.

May 5, 2016: London mayoral candidate Labour Party's Sadiq Khan arrives with his wife Saadiya to cast their votes at a polling station in Streatham, south west London. (AP)

LONDON – Britons voted Thursday in local and regional elections that will choose a new mayor for London — and are expected to deal a blow to Britain's main opposition Labour Party.

Voters are electing a Scottish Parliament and legislatures in Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as choosing members of many English local authorities, including a new London mayor to replace flamboyant Conservative Boris Johnson.

The mayoral race pits the Labour Party's Sadiq Khan against Conservative Zac Goldsmith. Pollsters and bookies make Khan the favorite to win and become the city's first Muslim mayor, after a bitter campaign that saw Goldsmith accuse his rival of sharing platforms with Islamic extremists.

Khan, a former human rights lawyer and the son of a bus driver from Pakistan, accused wealthy environmentalist Goldsmith of trying to divide voters in one of the world's most multicultural cities, home to 8.6 million people — more than 1 million of them Muslims.

Muslim Population Incursion in Europe 

https://www.graphiq.com/wlp/9aIev4APbBr?utm_source=viz&utm_medium=viz.referral&utm_campaign=viz.ref&utm_viz_id=9aIev4APbBr&utm_pubreferrer=www.foxnews.com%2Fworld%2F2016%2F05%2F05%2Flondon-poised-to-elect-its-first-muslim-mayor.html

Tony Travers, a local government expert at the London School of Economics, said the introduction of a directly elected London mayor 16 years ago has "brought into politics an American form of government" that differs from traditional British Parliamentary and local government structures.

"Now intriguingly this time — and we've seen a bit of it before — it appears to have brought with it some of the harder American campaign tactics," he said.

A victory for Khan would be a bright spot in what looks set to be a grim day for Labour, which has been out of office nationally since 2010.

Opposition parties usually gain seats in mid-term elections as voters punish the sitting government. But Labour under left-wing leader Jeremy Corbyn is divided and beset by a controversy over allegations of anti-Semitism within its ranks. The furor erupted when former London mayor Ken Livingstone — a Corbyn ally — claimed that Adolf Hitler had supported Zionism before he came to power.

Livingstone, Labour lawmaker Naz Shah and several local party officials have been suspended over comments or social media posts about Israel, and Corbyn has faced renewed pressure over his links to pro-Palestinian groups.

Corbyn predicted last week that Labour would not lose seats, but later said that "predictions are not that important."

A poor showing would bolster discontented Labour lawmakers who believe the party is heading for a third straight general election defeat in 2020 if Corbyn — a rumpled life-long socialist with strong support among the party's grass roots — is not replaced.

Some voters were turned away from polling stations in the north London borough of Barnet early Friday after being told their names did not appear on a list of electors. The council said the problem had been fixed by late morning, and urged voters who had been turned away to try again.

Sophie Walker, mayoral candidate for the Women's Equality Party, said some voters would be unable to return, and she would make a formal complaint about the glitch.

"These are vital votes, particularly for smaller parties," she said.

In Scotland, the pro-independence Scottish National Party is on course to win a majority of seats in the Edinburgh-based parliament and retain governmental power, with Labour at risk of sinking to third place behind the Conservatives.

The SNP oversaw an unsuccessful 2014 referendum on leaving the U.K., but has said it could make a fresh independence bid if British voters choose to leave the European Union in a June 23 poll.

In Northern Ireland, which has its own set of political parties reflecting the Catholic-Protestant divide, rivals are competing to see whether the Catholic side can overtake the territory's dwindling Protestant majority for the first time.

The outcome of the Northern Ireland Assembly election will determine who serves as first minister atop the surprisingly durable, nine-year-old coalition government, which has overseen relative calm following four decades of conflict that claimed 3,700 lives.

The party with the most assembly seats always receives the top post. The incumbent is Democratic Unionist leader Arlene Foster, Northern Ireland's first female leader. Polls suggest the Irish nationalists of Sinn Fein will narrow the gap with the Democratic Unionists, but fall short of overtaking the Protestant side of the house.

Polls are open until 10 p.m. (5 p.m. ET), and results of all the races are due Friday.

London poised to elect its first Muslim mayor

CAL THOMAS: Who to blame for the rise of Donald Trump?

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Dr. Frankenstein created the monster that bore his name, and if Dr. Jekyll had not conducted those experiments in his laboratory, Mr. Hyde would never have emerged to terrorize London.

In literature, we know who to blame for the monsters, but who is to blame for the rise of Donald Trump? Is he the "monster" the elites say he is?

I am no fan of Mr. Trump and wish there were better candidates for president from both parties, but the major fault for his rise as the "presumptive nominee" of the Republican Party in 2016 can be laid at the feet of the very elites who are so vociferous in their condemnation of him.

It is they who have presided over the horrific national debt, spending as if there were no tomorrow. They are not good stewards of the money we make and they take. It is the elites who have started wars we should not have fought and then not fought them to win with too many "rules of engagement" that only guarantee stalemate, or victory for the other side.

They are the ones who overregulate even small businesses, stifling their growth and preventing the creation of new ones. They so penalize initiative that if today's Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations had been applied to Wilbur and Orville Wright, the two visionaries would never have emerged from their Ohio bicycle shop, much less flown for the first time at Kitty Hawk, N.C.

The career politicians, the lobbyists, the lawyers, the self-serving institution that government has become (instead of the constitutionally limited, people-serving institution it was originally created to be) have fueled the rise of Donald Trump. It doesn't help their position now that these elites appear at least as arrogant as Mr. Trump in their denunciations of him while refusing to accept responsibility for what they have failed to dismantle.

As Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan has noted, Mr. Trump projects love for America and increasing numbers of voters, who also love America, are captivated by his love song, even if he sings it off-key.

Many of those voices that have warned of dire consequences should Mr. Trump become president have enabled big government. Republican politicians, afraid of their own shadow, the media and the Democrats, have done little to reverse any of this. When former House Speaker John Boehner refers to Sen. Ted Cruz as "Lucifer," it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. What did Mr. Boehner do as speaker, other than cut deals with Sens. Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy and kiss former Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the cheek as she handed him the gavel? She must have instinctively known that Mr. Boehner wasn't going to rock the boat and would do little damage to the Democratic agenda until the day that party would return to the majority and members resume their former ways.

Voters gave Republicans a majority in both houses of Congress, and they did almost nothing with it. It is why Mr. Boehner was ousted by conservative members of his own party.

I would have left on the word "almost".

Don't you have a right to be angry if you love America, if you served in the military or have relatives who did, as I have and did? The anger is bipartisan, as the popularity of socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders attests.

This lyric from the British punk rock group Dead Swans might help explain the country's mood: "You're lying to yourself, just like you always have, the words you said never meant a thing, I could see it from the start, you just want attention, absent friends and enemies are all that's left in your life, every day is like a knife cutting through your chest, constant frustration, you choked on the best years of your life, no love, no hate, no hope, all lies."

CAL THOMAS: Who to blame for the rise of Donald Trump?

Conservative chasm: Some pundits vow to fight Trump till the bitter end

This may blow up in their face. What's done is done.  I'm not crazy about him myself but I say give the guy a chance. We already know everything we need to know about the Clintons… none of it good. They have shown time and time again lying to them is as natural as breathing. The Clinton Foundation is nothing more than a slush fund. Who would be tough on illegal immigration and invading Muslim refugees ...Clinton? When it comes to protecting illegals  (aka amnesty) wasn't it Killary who said, "Obama didn't go far enough". She is for all intents and purposes Barry's 3rd term. Ponder the Supreme Court after she makes her appointments which will extend y-e-a-r-s after she leaves office! Oh...and tell me again what candidate said, "I never sent or received classified information on my private email server" and is currently under criminal investigation by the FBI?

Think of all the scandals in the Obama and Clinton administrations...and somehow Trump is going to turn out worse than them!?!

Give me a fucking break.

Not supporting Trump in effect is a vote for Killary. 

 So her term could be four years maybe eight. 

Not sure yet if it's in the WH or the slammer.

------------------------------------------

By Howard Kurtz

From the insular political system to the naysaying media culture, Donald Trump essentially clinching the Republican nomination is a stunning development, especially the swiftness with which his two remaining rivals gave up.

But for the anti-Trump folks, it is sheer torture.

In the wake of an Indiana victory that drove Ted Cruz and John Kasich from the race, they are left with a series of unpalatable choices that will have an impact on fall campaign—and on the GOP’s future.

Some are already declaring themselves to be in the #NeverNeverEverTrump camp. They will oppose the billionaire up to and until he raises his hand over the Bible next January.

In doing so, of course, they will tilt the election toward Hillary Clinton. But the diehards are willing to accept another four years out of power as a reasonable price to pay for blocking Trump.

Trump, for his part, says he doesn’t want or need the support of everyone in the party. The truth is—and this is hard for his detractors to accept—he is remaking the party in his own image. Trump is not a doctrinaire conservative, and for the moment, he is the face of the GOP.

George Will, the syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor, casts the choice as a moral test:

“Donald Trump’s damage to the Republican Party, although already extensive, has barely begun. Republican quislings will multiply, slinking into support of the most anti-conservative presidential aspirant in their party’s history. These collaborationists will render themselves ineligible to participate in the party’s reconstruction.”

Trump fired back on “Morning Joe”: “Well, George is a major loser. You know, he’s a dour guy. Nobody watches him. Very few people listen to him. It’s over for him, and I never want his support.”

Steve Hayes, the Weekly Standard writer and Fox News contributor, quickly posted a piece titled “No Trump”:

“Trump's claim to be a unifier is not just specious, it's absurd. This casual dishonesty is a feature of his campaign. And it's one of many reasons so many Republicans and conservatives oppose Trump and will never support his candidacy. I'm one of them.”

Another Fox contributor, Townhall’s Guy Benson, tweeted: “Much to my deep chagrin (& astonishment ~8 months ago), for the 1st time in my life, I will not support the GOP nominee for president.”

Influential blogger Erick Erickson tweeted: “Reporters writing about the ‘Stop Trump’ effort get it wrong. It's ‘Never Trump’ as in come hell or high water we will never vote for Trump.”

The Daily Caller’s Jamie Weinstein: “There is just no question: I’d take a Tums and cast my ballot for Hillary — and I suspect so would many other life-long conservatives, whether they are willing to admit it now or not.”

There is a camp within this camp, led by the Standard’s Bill Kristol, that is actively encouraging a conservative third-party run. This would undoubtedly hand Hillary the keys to the White House. There is a fantasy that somehow it would throw the election into the House. But the Wall Street Journal editorial page, hardly a fan of Trump, calls this a truly bad idea.

An even smaller subset is finding Clinton, who is more hawkish than Trump, a better alternative. These include Mark Salter, once John McCain’s top strategist.

But there are other conservatives who are softening on Trump, saying that perhaps he wouldn’t be that bad. Some are acting out of party loyalty. Some want to clamber onto the winner's bandwagon (even after saying incredibly harsh things about him, according to Trump). Some think Clinton would be far worse. And some may be looking for jobs or contracts. I suspect this group will grow in size.

Here’s the bottom line for those on the right who still oppose Trump: How do they explain that he won one state after another, in some cases every county, before sweeping to seven straight victories? How do they explain that he beat 16 other senators and governors and assorted luminaries? How do they explain that his vision of conservatism proved more popular than theirs with Republican voters?

Maybe Trump’s critics are right that he will lead the party to a major defeat. The question now is how many will work toward that outcome.

Conservative chasm: Some pundits vow to fight Trump till the bitter end

Romanian hacker Guccifer: I breached Clinton server, 'it was easy'

Well, if it was easy for him who else hacked into her email server?

EXCLUSIVE: The infamous Romanian hacker known as “Guccifer,” speaking exclusively with Fox News, claimed he easily – and repeatedly – breached former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal email server in early 2013. 

"For me, it was easy ... easy for me, for everybody," Marcel Lehel Lazar, who goes by the moniker "Guccifer," told Fox News from a Virginia jail where he is being held.

Guccifer’s potential role in the Clinton email investigation was first reported by Fox News last month. The hacker subsequently claimed he was able to access the server – and provided extensive details about how he did it and what he found – over the course of a half-hour jailhouse interview and a series of recorded phone calls with Fox News.

Fox News could not independently confirm Lazar’s claims.

In response to Lazar’s claims, the Clinton campaign issued a statement Wednesday night saying, "There is absolutely no basis to believe the claims made by this criminal from his prison cell. In addition to the fact he offers no proof to support his claims, his descriptions of Secretary Clinton's server are inaccurate. It is unfathomable that he would have gained access to her emails and not leaked them the way he did to his other victims.”

The former secretary of state’s server held nearly 2,200 emails containing information now deemed classified, and another 22 at the “Top Secret” level.

The 44-year-old Lazar said he first compromised Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal's AOL account, in March 2013, and used that as a stepping stone to the Clinton server. He said he accessed Clinton’s server “like twice,” though he described the contents as “not interest[ing]” to him at the time. 

“I was not paying attention. For me, it was not like the Hillary Clinton server, it was like an email server she and others were using with political voting stuff," Guccifer said.

The hacker spoke freely with Fox News from the detention center in Alexandria, Va., where he’s been held since his extradition to the U.S. on federal charges relating to other alleged cyber-crimes. Wearing a green jumpsuit, Lazar was relaxed and polite in the monitored secure visitor center, separated by thick security glass. 

In describing the process, Lazar said he did extensive research on the web and then guessed Blumenthal’s security question. Once inside Blumenthal's account, Lazar said he saw dozens of messages from the Clinton email address.

Asked if he was curious about the address, Lazar merely smiled. Asked if he used the same security question approach to access the Clinton emails, he said no – then described how he allegedly got inside.

“For example, when Sidney Blumenthal got an email, I checked the email pattern from Hillary Clinton, from Colin Powell from anyone else to find out the originating IP. … When they send a letter, the email header is the originating IP usually,” Lazar explained. 

He said, “then I scanned with an IP scanner."

Lazar emphasized that he used readily available web programs to see if the server was “alive” and which ports were open. Lazar identified programs like netscan, Netmap, Wireshark and Angry IP, though it was not possible to confirm independently which, if any, he used.

In the process of mining data from the Blumenthal account, Lazar said he came across evidence that others were on the Clinton server.

"As far as I remember, yes, there were … up to 10, like, IPs from other parts of the world,” he said. 

With no formal computer training, he did most of his hacking from a small Romanian village.

Lazar said he chose to use "proxy servers in Russia," describing them as the best, providing anonymity. 

Cyber experts who spoke with Fox News said the process Lazar described is plausible. The federal indictment Lazar faces in the U.S. for cyber-crimes specifically alleges he used "a proxy server located in Russia" for the Blumenthal compromise.

Each Internet Protocol (IP) address has a unique numeric code, like a phone number or home address. The Democratic presidential front-runner’s home-brew private server was reportedly installed in her home in Chappaqua, N.Y., and used for all U.S. government business during her term as secretary of state. 

Former State Department IT staffer Bryan Pagliano, who installed and maintained the server, has been granted immunity by the Department of Justice and is cooperating with the FBI in its ongoing criminal investigation into Clinton’s use of the private server. An intelligence source told Fox News last month that Lazar also could help the FBI make the case that Clinton’s email server may have been compromised by a third party.

Asked what he would say to those skeptical of his claims, Lazar cited “the evidence you can find in the Guccifer archives as far as I can remember." 

Writing under his alias Guccifer, Lazar released to media outlets in March 2013 multiple exchanges between Blumenthal and Clinton. They were first reported by the Smoking Gun. 

It was through the Blumenthal compromise that the Clintonemail.com accounts were first publicly revealed.

As recently as this week, Clinton said neither she nor her aides had been contacted by the FBI about the criminal investigation. Asked whether the server had been compromised by foreign hackers, she told MSNBC on Tuesday, “No, not at all.”

Recently extradited, Lazar faces trial Sept. 12 in the Eastern District of Virginia. He has pleaded not guilty to a nine-count federal indictment for his alleged hacking crimes in the U.S. Victims are not named in the indictment but reportedly include Colin Powell, a member of the Bush family and others including Blumenthal. 

Lazar spoke extensively about Blumenthal’s account, noting his emails were “interesting” and had information about “the Middle East and what they were doing there.”

After first writing to the accused hacker on April 19, Fox News accepted two collect calls from him, over a seven-day period, before meeting with him in person at the jail. During these early phone calls, Lazar was more guarded.

After the detention center meeting, Fox News conducted additional interviews by phone and, with Lazar's permission, recorded them for broadcast. 

While Lazar's claims cannot be independently verified, three computer security specialists, including two former senior intelligence officials, said the process described is plausible and the Clinton server, now in FBI custody, may have an electronic record that would confirm or disprove Guccifer’s claims.

"This sounds like the classic attack of the late 1990s. A smart individual who knows the tools and the technology and is looking for glaring weaknesses in Internet-connected devices," Bob Gourley, a former chief technology officer (CTO) for the Defense Intelligence Agency, said. 

Gourley, who has worked in cybersecurity for more than two decades, said the programs cited to access the server can be dual purpose. "These programs are used by security professionals to make sure systems are configured appropriately. Hackers will look and see what the gaps are, and focus their energies on penetrating a system," he said.

Cybersecurity expert Morgan Wright observed, "The Blumenthal account gave [Lazar] a road map to get to the Clinton server. ... You get a foothold in one system. You get intelligence from that system, and then you start to move."

In March, the New York Times reported the Clinton server security logs showed no evidence of a breach. On whether the Clinton security logs would show a compromise, Wright made the comparison to a bank heist: "Let’s say only one camera was on in the bank. If you don‘t have them all on, or the right one in the right locations, you won’t see what you are looking for.”

Gourley said the logs may not tell the whole story and the hard drives, three years after the fact, may not have a lot of related data left. He also warned: "Unfortunately, in this community, a lot people make up stories and it's hard to tell what's really true until you get into the forensics information and get hard facts.” 

For Lazar, a plea agreement where he cooperates in exchange for a reduced sentence would be advantageous. He told Fox News he has nothing to hide and wants to cooperate with the U.S. government, adding that he has hidden two gigabytes of data that is “too hot” and “it is a matter of national security.” 

In early April, at the time of Lazar’s extradition from a Romanian prison where he already was serving a seven-year sentence for cyber-crimes, a former senior FBI official said the timing was striking.

“Because of the proximity to Sidney Blumenthal and the activity involving Hillary’s emails, [the timing] seems to be something beyond curious,” said Ron Hosko, former assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division from 2012-2014.

The FBI offered no statement to Fox News.

Romanian hacker Guccifer: I breached Clinton server, 'it was easy'

Trump last man standing?

Less we forget, Jim Gilmore, the ever resourceful, has not thrown in the towel!

Trump last man standing?