Flavor Flav was arrested at his Las Vegas home on Wednesday after a domestic dispute, and now a police report has revealed further details of what took place before officials were called in.

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police told ABC News Action 13 that the altercation took place around 3:30 a.m. Wednesday, and they responded to a call from a woman who said that she had been in a fight with her fiancé, who also threatened her son.

Police said that when they arrived, they could still hear an argument going on inside Flav’s house on the 7800 block of Via Venture Court. His fiancée, Elizabeth Trujillo, explained that a fight between the couple started after an argument over his infidelity and things spiraled out of control. Trujillo says that she was thrown to the floor twice during the argument, and when her 17-year-old son tried to defend her, he was also threated.

The rapper, born William Drayton Jr., reportedly began to wrestle with Trujillo’s son and eventually grabbed two knives from the kitchen, chasing him upstairs where he locked himself in bedroom. At this point Trujillo says that the former Public Enemy rapper kicked in the door and continued to threaten her son.

Flavor Flav has denied chasing the teenager in the midst of the fight with his fiancée, but police say two knives were found on the kitchen floor, and he sustained a cut from one of them.

He was arrested and taken to the Clark County Detention Center, where he was later bailed out with $23,000 and then appeared in court early on Thursday (October 18). Flav is facing felony assault with a deadly weapon and misdemeanor domestic violence charges.

LOS ANGELES — Newsweek will print its final edition at the end of this year. After nearly 80 years of publication, the news magazine will shift to a digital-only format, available online and on tablet computers, editor-in-chief Tina Brown said on the magazine’s website Thursday morning. Its last will be the Dec. 31 issue.

“We are transitioning Newsweek, not saying goodbye to it,” Brown said. “We remain committed to Newsweek and to the journalism that it represents. This decision is not about the quality of the brand or the journalism — that is as powerful as ever. It is about the challenging economics of print publishing and distribution.”

The digital-only publication, supported by paid subscriptions and dubbed Newsweek Global, will be aimed at a “highly mobile, opinion-leading audience who want to learn about world events in a sophisticated context,” Brown said.

Newsweek’s announcement marks a significant transition for the magazine, which was founded in 1933 and has been undergoing its own identity crisis and financial turmoil in recent years. Its problems are emblematic of the disruptions faced broadly by the print media industry, as readers shift online and away from the most valuable advertising.

In 2010, Newsweek and The Daily Beast announced they would merge, jointly owned by Sidney Harman, an audio equipment magnate who died last year, and IAC, the media and advertising company run by Barry Diller, chairman and senior executive.

Brown cited a Pew Research Center report that found 39 percent of Americans get their news from an online source.

“In our judgment, we have reached a tipping point at which we can most efficiently and effectively reach our readers in all-digital format,” she wrote. “This was not the case just two years ago. It will increasingly be the case in the years ahead.”

Brown said the shift would entail “staff reductions,” though she didn’t elaborate.

Editor’s note: Maria Cardona is a Democratic strategist, a principal at the Dewey Square Group, a former senior adviser to Hillary Clinton and former communications director for the Democratic National Committee.

(CNN) – Mitt Romney showed up Tuesday night talking about“binders full of women” being brought to him when he was governor. Sounds kind of kinky and certainly not something you want to be touting.

The phrase was part of Romney’s answer to a question from an audience member at the second presidential debate about how he would “rectify the inequalities in the workplace.” Referring to when he took over as Massachusetts governor, he said, “I had the chance to pull together a Cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men,” he said. “I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks?’ and they brought us whole binders full of women.”

The “binders” moment went viral immediately on Twitter, spawning @RomneysBinders and @womaninabinder Twitter handles. As of Wednesday morning, almost 300,000 people had supported aFacebook page about what a politically dumb statement it was. Romney may soon say it was “inelegant” phrasing or he didn’t finish his statement or some other excuse, but the comment shows why voters, especially women, don’t trust him and don’t believe he has their back.

CNN Money: Bindersfullofwomen.com snapped up in 90 seconds

Maria Cardona

In fairness, “binders” was most likely a slip of the tongue. But Romney said it in an effort to obfuscate and pivot from the issue at hand: equality for women. He avoided the real question, and that, and his remark, spoke volumes.

Even as a slip of the tongue, this odd phrase betrays Romney’s true lack of understanding, knowledge and comfort level on women’s equality. And besides the binders comment, there are several problems with the story Romney told Tuesday night.

First of all, it is not true. The “binder” of women’s résumés was prepared before the election by the Massachusetts Government Appointments Project, a coalition of nonpartisan women’s groups. When Romney won, the women — not in binders — gave him the résumés.

Romney told that story in an effort to demonstrate how well his administration had done in hiring women. Except it didn’t. A study by the University of Massachusetts and the Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy shows that the percentage of women in senior positions during his tenure actually declined. It went from 30% when Romney took office to 27% when he left and up to more than 33% after the new governor took over.

Did Romney undo gains with women?

Also, it boggles the mind that throughout his decades-long career in business, Romney had not come across any qualified women he could appoint to his Cabinet. The Romney campaign points to longtime aide Beth Myers, but she was not in the Cabinet.

The more reasonable explanation is that diversity of gender, or any kind of diversity, was never an important tenet of corporate leadership for Romney. Which is why he did not proactively seek out the “binders full of women”: Women’s groups, in fact, came looking for him.

All of this goes to the heart of why Romney has had such a hard time winning over the women’s vote. He answered the audience member’s question from the standpoint of a detached CEO who knew that he had to find qualified women to serve in his administration come hell or high water, given the vast disparity between men and women holding management positions. He must have known he would be blasted if he didn’t do it. In this day and age, this should be a no-brainer. You should not ask the American people to give you a medal for hiring qualified women.

The dissonance when it comes to the governor and women went even further at the debate. Romney not only couldn’t answer the question about women’ equality, he could not even answer a question about outlawing AK-47s without bringing up single mothers. Saying he did not believe in changing gun laws, he seemed to equate children raised by single parents with the “culture of violence.” I may be wrong, but I don’t think that is a good strategy to get struggling single moms to vote for you.

Tech: Social world thumbs through ‘binders full of women’

President Obama, in contrast, answered the equality question not just from a personal standpoint as a father but also as a commander in chief who signed a bill into law that guaranteed women could receive equal pay for equal work, the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Romney conspicuously never said whether he supported that act. The president’s approach was much more in synch with what women want to hear and with what all Americans know to be fair.

The binders comment was even more unfortunate for Romney in that he said it in the midst of Obama’s very strong showing. The president clearly showed that he had the fight, the passion and the commitment to continue to work for middle-class voters — on jobs, on health care, on taxes, on education, on immigration and, yes, on women’s issues.

This all underscores Romney’s inability to really connect with voters. Although he seemed to win a little more favor among women after the first debate, I predict binders of polling data as to why that movement stopped after Tuesday night.

Expedia is publishing a series of videos under the rubric “find yours” which focus on why Americans make the journeys they do
.

Sounds dull, right? In fact most of the videos in the series have received fewer than 10,000 views on YouTube.

The latest video, however, got more than 2.2 million views since Oct. 2. It’s an unexpectedly moving tale told by retired business owner Artie Goldstein, who describes the less-than-enthusiastic reaction he had to his daughter Vickie’s announcement that she was going to marry another woman. “That startled me. I told her, this is not the dream I had for my daughter,” he says.

He books a plane ticket anyway, and the ad follows him on the trip. At one point he drives past a church, and the shot is delivered in silence.

(Of course, the ad has a happy ending when he sees his daughter in her wedding dress.)

The spot — made by agency 180LA for Expedia clients senior marketing director Vic Walia and vp/gm Joe Megibow — is unexpectedly subtle, for a major brand.

Gay-audience targeted campaigns are commonplace in advertising these days, and they already have their own set cliches (smiling whitebread couples in spotlessly tasteful homes, rough-housing with their adorable kids, etc.).

What makes this ad worthy of note is the fact that it’s told entirely from the point of view of a member of a generation that, frankly, isn’t entirely on board with the whole equal rights thing.

The ad thus addresses its supporters and critics at the same time — which is what makes it so clever. Take a look:

It was clear who won the presidential debate last night in Hollywood.

Celebs were not kind to Governor Mitt Romney during the second live presidential debate last night.

For the most part, Romney received criticism for his stammering, his five-point plan, and, of course, his mention of women in binders, among other things.

(Sidenote: If you haven’t stumbled upon the bindersfullofwomen tumblr, check it out.)

Unlike the first debate, Obama was praised for his comeback after a lackluster first debate.

Moderator Candy Crowley was also better received than VP debate moderator Martha Raddatz.

The only person who really gave Obama a tough time last night was Donald Trump, calling him “no Bill Clinton.”

Here’s how the celebs tore Romney apart on Twitter:

Calling him a bully:

@billmaher / Twitter

On birds:

@ElizabethBanks / Twitter

@billmaher / Twitter

On gun violence:

@ElizabethBanks / Twitter

@katewalsh / Twitter

Everything else:

@billmaher / Twitter

@billmaher / Twitter

@elizadushku / Twitter

@JoyVBehar / Twitter

@JoyVBehar / Twitter

@pattonoswalt /Twitter

@pattonoswalt / Twitter

@pattonoswalt / Twitter

@katewalsh / Twitter

@aishatyler / Twitter

@EvaLongoria / Twitter

And, then there were the binder comments:

@BrooklynDecker / Twitter

@NIckKristof / Twitter

They were much more in favor of moderator Candy Crowley …

@jessetyler / Twitter

@joyvbehar / Twitter

@chrissyteigen / Twitter

@RyanSeacrest / Twitter

@SarahKSilverman / Twitter

@billmaher / Twitter

… and, Obama …

@MiaFarrow / Twitter

@MMFlint / Twitter

@billmaher / Twitter

@elizadushku / Twitter

@SherriEShepherd / Twitter

@JoyVBehar / Twitter

@NickKristof / Twitter

@NickKristof / Twitter

… unless you were Donald Trump:

@realDonaldTrump

However, this was the zinger:

@realDonaldTrump / Twitter

Last night, Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff published a white paper showing the recovery could have been a whole lot worse.

They argue that the U.S. did not experience a normal crisis, but rather a “systemic financial” one.

That’s only happened four other times in our history: 1873, 1892, 1907, and 1929.

So compared with those crises, our recovery looks pretty rosy:

Today in Bloomberg, the pair double down on their argument by taking issue with economists who’ve signed on to Mitt Romney’s campaign and have argued our recovery is different, and worse:

…a few op-ed writers have argued that, in fact, the U.S. is “different” and that international comparisons aren’t relevant because of profound institutional differences from one country to another. Some of these authors, including Kevin Hassett, Glenn Hubbard and John Taylor – who are advisers to the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney – as well as Michael Bordo, who supports the candidate, have stressed that the U.S. is also “different” in that its recoveries from recessions associated with financial crises have been rapid and strong.

we have to take issue with gross misinterpretations of the facts

Since they’re looking at the wrong kinds of benchmark crises, Team Romney ends up using the wrong metrics, they say. Instead of focusing on years to return to normal growth, they’ve fixed on rate of recovery.

But for post- World War II systemic crises around the world, it’s taken about four and a half years to fully recover. In 14 Great Depression episodes around the world (including the U.S.) it took 10 years on average.

Team Romney misses this point:

Taylor, for example, appears to show the recovery from the Great Depression as the strongest in U.S. history, even though it took about a decade to reach the same level of per capita income as at its starting point in 1929.

No doubt, this will likely come off to many as a partisan response to another partisan assertion.

But it seems like it’s impossible to avoid that kind of thing these days.

(Via FT Alphaville)

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has one aspect of his post-mayoral life finally worked out.

Raymond Hernandez of the New York Times reports that Bloomberg, one of the country’s most prominent independent politicians, just filed for a brand-new, as-yet-unnamed Super PAC, which he plans to use to dump portions of his fortune into races across the country.

Irrespective of party, Bloomberg is reportedly planning to support candidates who support three of his biggest policy initiatives: same-sex marriage; tougher gun laws; and overhauling schools.

To that end, Hernandez reports that Bloomberg expects to spend between $10 to $15 million on competitive state, local and congressional races this month, including Angus King, the former governor of Maine who is mounting a leading bid for the Senate as an independent, is one identified recipient of the mayor’s largesse.

Hernandez reports that the Super PAC will target Democratic Congressman Joe Baca of California, whom Bloomberg considers to be weak on gun control.

(Reuters) – - The alleged mastermind of the September 11 attacks told the Guantanamo courtroom on Wednesday that the U.S. government had killed many more people in the name of national security than he is accused of killing.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed was allowed to address the court at a pretrial hearing focused on security classification rules for evidence that will be used in his trial on charges of orchestrating the hijacked plane attacks that killed 2,976 people.

“When the government feels sad for the death or the killing of 3,000 people who were killed on September 11, we also should feel sorry that the American government that was represented by (the chief prosecutor) and others have killed thousands of people, millions,” said Mohammed, who wore a military-style camouflage vest to the courtroom.

He accused the United States of using an elastic definition of national security, comparable to the way dictators bend the law to justify their acts.

“Many can kill people under the name of national security, and to torture people under the name of national security, and to detain children under the name of national security, underage children,” he said in Arabic through an English interpreter.

“The president can take someone and throw him into the sea under the name of national security and so he can also legislate the assassinations under the name of national security for the American citizens,” he said in an apparent reference to the U.S. killing and burial at sea of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and the U.S. use of drone strikes against U.S. citizens accused of conspiring with al Qaeda.

He advised the court against “getting affected by the crocodile tears” and said, “Your blood is not made out of gold and ours is made out of water. We are all human beings.”

The judge, Army Colonel James Pohl, gave Mohammed permission to speak and did not interrupt him, but said he would not hear any further personal comments from the defendants.

Mohammed’s lecture to the court came during a week of pretrial hearings at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base in Cuba for him and four other captives accused of recruiting, funding and training the hijackers.

He did not indicate why he wore a camouflage vest, but his wardrobe choice suggested he might try to invoke protections reserved for soldiers.

Pohl had ruled on Tuesday that the defendants could wear what they want to court, so long as it did not pose a security risk or include any part of a U.S. military uniform like those worn by their guards.

Mohammed’s lawyers had argued that he should be allowed to wear a woodland-patterned camouflage vest to court because he wore one as part of a U.S.-armed mujahideen force fighting against Russian troops that occupied Afghanistan in the 1980s.

“Mr. Mohammed has previously distinguished himself on the battlefield by wearing a military-style vest or clothing. He did it in Afghanistan for the U.S. government during that proxy war, he did it in Bosnia and he has a right to do it in this courtroom,” his defense attorney, Army Captain Jason Wright, argued on Tuesday.

The United States is trying Mohammed and the other alleged al Qaeda captives as unlawful belligerents who are not entitled to the combat immunity granted to soldiers who kill in battle.

They could face the death penalty if convicted of charges that include conspiring with al Qaeda, attacking civilians and civilian targets, murder in violation of the laws of war, destruction of property, hijacking and terrorism.

Under the Geneva Conventions, one of the things that separate soldiers from unlawful belligerents is the wearing of uniforms that distinguish them from civilians. Soldiers must also follow a clear command structure, carry arms openly and adhere to the laws of war.

Wright had argued that forbidding Mohammed from wearing military-style garb could undermine his presumption of innocence in the war crimes tribunal.

“The government has a burden to prove that this enemy prisoner of war is an unprivileged enemy belligerent,” Wright said.

via Daily Paul: 

What does it take to get your name on the no-fly list in America? Apparently you only need to be classified as a “prepper.”

When 34-year-old U.S. citizen and Mississippi resident Wade Hicks boarded a military flight to visit his wife, a Navy lieutenant stationed in Okinawa, Japan, he did not think it would be a one-way trip. Stopping off in Hawaii to refuel, upon reboarding the plane, Hicks was quickly escorted back off again by armed guards. He was then taken to a secure interrogation room where Hicks was informed he would not be flying anywhere because he turned up on the no-fly list.

Hicks has since been stranded on the island state without a way home.

As seen below in a bombshell double interview on Infowars Nightly News, private investigator and founder of the Northeast Intelligence Network Douglas Hagmann revealed that Hicks not only passed through TSA screening at his original departure point in San Francisco, but he has also passed a criminal background check and an FBI screening for an enhanced concealed carry permit in his home state.

In addition, Hicks holds a TWIC card, or Transportation Worker Identification Credential, granted by none other than the TSA. Hicks has also held classified clearances as a defense contractor for the U.S. military. His passport is valid and has not been revoked.

Continue:

http://www.infowars.com/prepper-put-on-no-fly-list-stranded-…

NDAA critic stranded in Hawaii after turning up on no-fly list

via RT: 

Wade Hicks was en route to a US Navy base in Japan to see his wife when armed military guards informed him that they had other plans. Hicks, an American citizen with no criminal record, had just been put added to a federal no-fly list.

After being escorted off his plane during a routine re-fueling stop on the Pacific Island of Oahu, Hicks, 34, was left stranded in Hawaii this week. In an interview, he suggests that his opposition to a newly-created law that allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens at military prisons without charge or trial could be to blame for his mistreatment.

“I was very, very vocal about the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and I did contact my representative” about it, Hicks tells talk show host Doug Hagmann. “I do believe that this is tied in some way to my free speech and my political view.”

According to Hicks, he has little reason to believe otherwise. He tells Hagmann that he formerly worked as a contractor for the US Department of Defense and has undergone extensive background checks in order to obtain an enhanced license that allows him to carry a concealed firearm. Hicks says he also holds on to a special identification card issued by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the US Homeland Security Department sub-agency that administers pat-downs and screenings at airports across the country. An investigation carried out by Hagmann has led him to locating no criminal history for the man whatsoever.

In fact, the only “dirt” the host has managed to dig up on Hicks, he writes, is his occasionally vocal identification as an American patriot.

Hicks, says Hagmann, “appears to be a law abiding member of society.” He adds, however, that preliminary research has led him to link the man as being “an outspoken ‘patriot’” who is “openly critical of the NDAA,” a bill US President Barack Obama signed into law on December 31 despite openly acknowledging that he had “serious reservations” about provisions that allow the military to indefinitely detain anyone on mere suspicion of ties with terrorists. Hicks also tells the radio host that he is critical of the government’s handling of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and says, “I think the evidence I’ve seen warrants a new investigation, and I’m very vocal about it as well,”

“He is a former talk-show host of a small, local radio station known for its ‘patriotic bias.’ He is a member of ‘Patriots for America’ and the Mississippi Preparedness Project. He is openly vocal about the erosion of our rights – and it certainly looks like he has been proven correct. Is that now a crime worthy of being denied the ability to travel freely within the United States?” Hagmann writes.

The Mississippi Preparedness Project, according to the group’s official website, strives “to encourage and train others to prepare for any situation, whether it be political or disruptions in the infrastructure and civil structure of the communities in which we live and work.”

“We intend to prepare and train for all foreseeable aspects of personal preparedness including Political, Basic and Emergency Medical, Food and Water Storage, Equipment, Local, State and Nationwide Communications, Personal, Home and Community Defense,” their mission statement continues.

Hicks’ incident occurred on October 14 when a military plane Hicks had boarded to visit his wife, a lieutenant in the US Navy, stopped in Oahu to refuel. Although he had no issues with gaining admittance to the aircraft during the first leg of his trip, things went amiss in Oahu.There two heavily-armed officers entered the plane and escorted him to a small interrogation room at a military base and told him that he had showed up on the US “no-fly” list, despite having boarded a flight earlier that day in San Francisco where he had been subjected to military-sanctioned security screenings reportedly more stringent than the TSA treatment. He was hoping to visit his wife of only eight months when the mishap unraveled.

“They have given me no reason. They just basically are telling me, ‘You can’t fly because we said so,’” Hicks tells Hagmann this week.“They didn’t know how I even left Travis Air Force Base.”

“I said, ‘If I could find a way off the island, I could leave’? They said, ‘Yes, as long as you don’t fly.”

Hicks adds that he has since met with a Navy lawyer in Hawaii who attempted to resolve the case with so far no avail. He reports that the attorney reached out to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement hoping that the incident has been the result of a case of mistaken identity, but, “They said, ‘No, we have the right person that is in our database. His social security [number] matches and his birth date matches.’”

“I have no idea how long I’m going to be stranded in Hawaii or if I’m going to be able to leave out of here on an aircraft,” Hicks adds.“Try to get back from Oahu . . . It’s a long swim and it’s a long boat ride.”