Dear colleagues, I will like to post here some correspondence which is clearly relevant for this "scenarios discussion group" regarding some issues related to the use of the new emission scenarios, simple models, etc. Please post any comments on these issues or any other issue that you may want to raise to the following address "scenarios@meto.gov.uk". I have added the following experts to the list posted in my first Email: P Wagner R Watson J Edmonds S Smith G Marland Many thanks. Maria Noguer *********************************** Issues raised by J Mitchell: 1. There are several uses for scenarios: a) Conversion to concentration using chemistry models to produce forcing curves b) Forcings for GCM runs c) Use in simpler models to produce global mean curves of concentrations, forcing, temperature and sea level. This would requires a simple model which is documented and calibrated against one (preferably several) climate models. The final IPCC approved scenarios will not be available until February 2000, so we should decide now on which draft scenarios to use 2. The provisional emissions will be made available imminently. These need to be evaluated as there are four basic families and many variants. How is the median scenario defined? 3. What criteria are to be set for the simpler models used for global mean projections? ************************************* Issue raised by Tom Wigley and reponses: Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 11:00:54 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Wigley To: Sir John Houghton , Patricia WAGNER , Hugh Pitcher , Robert Watson Cc: Jae Edmonds , Mike Hulme , Atul Jain , Fortunat Joos , Richard Richels , Dave Schimel , ssmith@ucar.edu Subject: IPCC CO2 Emissions Scenarios Dear Bob, Hugh, Naki and John, Mike Hulme has told me something that is quite alarming about the soon-to-be-released 'IPCC' CO2 emissions scenarios. If this is correct, you/IPCC should try to remedy it as a matter of some urgency. He said that the new 'IPCC' CO2 emissions scenarios will still begin in 1990 and will not use observed (Marland) emissions for the 1990s. You may either not realize, or not remember, that during the preparation of the SAR and (especially) TPs 2 and 4, IPCC was frequently criticized for using out-of-date emissions data that were manifestly wrong during the 1990s. It would be extremely embarrassing to be subject to the same criticism with the TAR. Indeed, since the criticism is a justifiable one, it would be inexcusable not to have responded to it. Equally embarrassing should be the fact that, in the published literature (my 1997 Nature and 1998 GRL papers), this 'error' has already been avoided. How can you get around this problem? Ideally, the energy-economics models need to be revised to begin in or around 2000 instead of 1990. Indeed, in talking to Rich Richels about this issue, as well as echoing my concern, he noted that his model (MERGE) is currently being updated in just this way. He also pointed out that beginning an energy-economics model run in 1990 leads to considerable 'flexibility' in 2000 emissions; when, in fact, the 2000 emissions will already be fixed and known by the time the TAR comes out. It is probably impossible to make this ideal type of 'fix', but a 'fix' can still be made. What you could do is just what I have done in the above two papers. This is a simple procedure that CAN be used since it is in the published literature. All I did was use observed emissions to 1996 (as far as data were available), linearly extrapolate these to 2000 (under the assumption that this was a better projection than the corresponding IS92a projection), and then use IS92a CHANGES from 2000. You may be able to improve on the second step, but this is unimportant. The crucial thing is to get the beginning years of the record to match observed emissions as far as such data are available. The above, by the way, does not have to be applied to emissions from land-use change because of the way we deal with initialization with the carbon cycle models. We do not use historical land-use- change emissions. You may argue that, in terms of projected CO2 concentrations, incorrect 1990s emissions have only a minor effect. This is such an obviously specious argument that I won't bother to discuss it. Not least, it will not satisfy the critics. A parallel issue does, however, arise with the CO2 concentration stabilization profiles. The 'S' profiles are already ludicrous, since their concentrations and implied emissions already diverge markedly from observations. The WRE profiles diverge less, but still enough for me to deem that they need revising. I have, in fact, already done this. I would be happy to pass the new profiles on to IPCC. Best wishes, Tom ======================================================= >From Robert Watson on July 13: Tom: I appreciate you bringing this critical issue to the fore - you are absolutely right that we must not look naive. I assume that Naki and Jon et al. Will deal with this while I an on vacation for the next four days. Bob ========================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 02:18:09 +0000 From: David Schimel To: Tom Wigley Subject: Re: IPCC CO2 Emissions Scenarios Tom, I raised this issue at the scoping meeting in Bad (very bad) Munstereieffel, where it was greeted with general agreement but it appeared to come as a complete surprise to many that scenarios should have a relationship to reality. There was also general mild surprise at the degree of non GCM-community interest in following Kyoto and stabilization rather than 1% per year and similar reactions to the fact that 1% year doubles the current rate of change. But the wind is shifting DS ======================================================== Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 09:46:49 -0500 From: Atul Jain To: Tom Wigley Cc: Sir John Houghton , Patricia WAGNER , Hugh Pitcher , Jae Edmonds , Mike Hulme , Fortunat Joos , Richard Richels , Dave Schimel , ssmith@ucar.edu Subject: Re: IPCC CO2 Emissions Scenarios Dear Tom, I got the same impression from Hugh's talk during the last week Community Meeting on IA, which was sponsored by NSF. It does not matter so much whether the starting point for the scenario calculations is 1990 or 2000. The main concern is that the emission scenarios should reflect the recent changes in fossil emissions, which show a decreasing trend from 1990 to 1995 in Annex B emissions. Using projected emissions that are incorrect, rather than updating them with observed emissions, is clearly not acceptable. I agree with you that the effects of these emissions on CO2 concentration is minor. However, recent observed emissions will have a major impact on estimates of the cost of CO2 abatement, which depend mainly on cumulative emissions rather than on concentration. It is important, especially in light of Kyoto commitments, not to produce inaccurate emission pathways that overestimate emissions from 1990-2000, since they may be used as baselines for producing cost estimates. Cheers! Atul ========================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 08:19:22 -0700 From: "Pitcher, Hugh M" To: "'jain@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu'" , Tom Wigley Cc: Sir John Houghton , Patricia WAGNER , Hugh Pitcher , Robert Watson , Jae Edmonds , Mike Hulme , Fortunat Joos , Richard Richels , Dave Schimel , ssmith@ucar.edu Subject: RE: IPCC CO2 Emissions Scenarios Dear Tom et al In setting up the MiniCAM to do the scenario work for the SRES, we tuned the 2005 energy and hence emissions numbers to reproduce the latest IEA forecast, which explicitly incorporates the slowdown in 1990 to 1995. The only problem here is that informal feedback from within Russia(Igor Bashmakov) suggests the IEA data significantly overstate the reduction in energy use. Our scenarios all go through the short term forecast for 2005 and then diverge onto alternative paths. Getting a good handle on recent historical data and a consistent/reasonable forecast for tuning the short term aspect of the scenarios is going to be increasingly critical as we try to sort out strategies and costs of strategies. This is a separate problem from the long term scenario work, and requires rather different tools. cheers, hugh ========================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:27:51 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Wigley To: "Pitcher, Hugh M" Cc: "'jain@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu'" , Sir John Houghton , Patricia WAGNER , Hugh Pitcher , Robert Watson , Jae Edmonds , Mike Hulme , Fortunat Joos , Richard Richels , Dave Schimel , Gregg Marland , ssmith@ucar.edu Subject: RE: IPCC CO2 Emissions Scenarios Dear all, I appreciate the responses regarding my concern about the new 'IPCC' fossil CO2 emissions scenarios. However, no-one seems to be willing to grasp the nettle and suggest what can be done about it. From what Hugh says, all scenarios go through the same 2005 value, so this suggests an obvious 'fix'. (I am curious to know what this 2005 value is, and how close it is to what I used in my Kyoto papers.) Hugh also suggests the 'IPCC' 2005 value may be open to improvement, but I presume it is too late to do this now. So ... what should be done? The obvious solution would be to use Gregg Marland's 'observed' values as far as they go, and then linearly interpolate from his latest year to 2005. When I did my work, I had Gregg's values to 1995, and was able to make a good guess from what he told me about what the 1996 value would be. By now, 1996 should be available, and a good estimate may be possible for 1997. If so, then the linear interpolation would go over 1997 to 2005. Do you all agree with this strategy? ... or does someone have a better idea?? I'm copying this to Gregg to see what more recent data he can provide. Cheers, Tom


Okay - rachel or jenna send out ASAP please. From: Crystal, Andy Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 3:06 PM To: Walker, Eric; Palermo, Rachel; CommsApproval_D; Helmstetter, TJ Cc: RR2 Subject: RE: For research approval: Excerpts from press call with Reps. Elizabeth Esty, Pete Aguilar, and Gun Violence Experts discussing Donald Trump and the NRA good From: Walker, Eric Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 2:55 PM To: Palermo, Rachel; CommsApproval_D; Helmstetter, TJ Cc: RR2 Subject: RE: For research approval: Excerpts from press call with Reps. Elizabeth Esty, Pete Aguilar, and Gun Violence Experts discussing Donald Trump and the NRA I'm good. Adding research. We should get this out before Trump stops speaking. From: Palermo, Rachel Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 2:53 PM To: CommsApproval_D; Helmstetter, TJ Subject: For comms approval: Excerpts from press call with Reps. Elizabeth Esty, Pete Aguilar, and Gun Violence Experts discussing Donald Trump and the NRA For Immediate Release May 20, 2016 Contact: DNC Press - 202-863-8148 Excerpts from DNC Press Call with Reps. Elizabeth Esty, Pete Aguilar, Brady Campaign President Dan Gross, and Gun Violence Prevention Advocates discussing Donald Trump at the NRA Leadership Forum This morning, Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty, Congressman Pete Aguilar, Brady Campaign President Dan Gross, and gun violence prevention advocates held a conference call to discuss Donald Trump's appearance at the National Rifle Association Leadership Forum. Below find excerpts as prepared for delivery. Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty (CT-5) Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut is in my district. I am sickened and horrified that in the three-and-a-half years since those shootings, nothing has been done to combat gun violence. I lay the blame on the NRA and the Members of Congress who are beholden to them. Despite the fact that 90 percent of Americans supported action on gun reform after the Newtown tragedy, the NRA and their allies worked to defeat the bill by spreading rumors and falsehoods. Meanwhile, news of shootings across the country still dominate the headlines. Both of our Democratic presidential candidates have proposed solutions to address this crisis, and President Obama's executive actions earlier this year addresses this crisis by expanding background checks, effectively enforcing the laws already on the books, increasing mental health treatment, and funding research for gun safety technology. Congressman Pete Aguilar (CA-31) ... We have held so many moments of silence for those lost to gun violence. We have prayed for their families, and we have vowed to take steps so that this would never happen again. Our words are empty if our actions don't back them up. No single reform could have stopped the tragedy that unfolded in San Bernardino, but that's not an excuse to ignore the need for a national discussion around gun safety. ... I don't know how officials at the NRA or the Republican Party sleep at night, knowing that we can and should do more to protect our communities. There's an emptiness to our unanswered prayers for change when we don't take steps to work for the type of change that we want. I don't want to hold another moment of silence - I want Congress to work towards a sensible solution and I want the Republican Party to realize that they answer to the American public, not the NRA. Dan Gross, President of the Brady Campaign ...As the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump has made gun violence in America a campaign trail punchline. In January, the front runner speculated that he could "stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody" without hurting his popularity. ... Make no mistake: this presidential election represents a critical crossroads for this issue and for our collective safety. Lives are literally at stake. The choice between Democrats and Donald Trump will be a referendum on gun violence in America - and the result will make a big difference either helping to fight or fuel the problem. ... As he prepares to address the National Rifle Association as today's keynote speaker, I challenge Donald Trump to stand by the 74% of NRA members who want expanded Brady background checks and I call on him to support Senator Schumer's recently introduced Brady Bill 2.0 that expands background checks to all gun sales. Po Murray, Chair of the Newtown Action Alliance I have lived in Sandy Hook for 17 years. I am a mother of 4 children, all graduates of Sandy Hook Elementary School. The shooter lived in my neighborhood. I lost my neighbors and our children's teachers. The entire community was and continues to be heartbroken. We made a promise to take action to end gun violence. ... Donald Trump appeals to the worst elements in our country. If he were elected president, we should be afraid of the toxic combustion that could result from his hateful rhetoric plus his reckless views on guns. ... It's crystal clear that Donald Trump stands with the NRA and the gun industry---not the families of Sandy Hook, San Bernardino, Columbine or others impacted by gun violence. America will not be great without meaningful common sense gun measures. More and more American families are touched by gun violence every single day. We need the voters to elect a President who will prioritize and lead on the issue of gun violence prevention to make America safe again. Tom Mauser, father of Columbine victim Daniel Mauser and spokesman for Colorado Ceasefire What's most disturbing to me about Donald Trump is his view on background checks. At Columbine, where my son was killed, background checks were an important issue. ... What are we going to do about the 33,000 plus gun deaths and 70,000 plus gun injuries that we suffer every year? ... I'm looking forward to an election where we really put the question to him: why do you not support the 90 percent of Americans, Mr. Trump, that support stronger background checks?


Phil is available to meet in his office at 10am. He told me that they already spoke at the after-party about the town hall, so I think it would probably just be a hello. But he's happy to do it. You should try to set up the Mika thing separately and start with Korson. (Alex.Korson@nbcuni.com ) Thanks. From: Miranda, Luis Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 1:32 PM To: Kornblau, Mark (NBCUniversal); Linzer, Dafna (NBCUniversal) Subject: Great seeing you guys! It was great to see you both this weekend. Thanks for hosting me for the dinner, I appreciated the opportunity but was especially glad to catch up with your teams in the pre-reception. As I mentioned, the Chair will be in New York tomorrow, and we wanted to see about having her meet with Phil to touch base including on the town hall. We also wanted to see whether Mika was either free to join or maybe meet with the Chair before or after. Let me know if we can make that work. 10am is ideal, if possible. Hope you both had the chance to get some rest after the hectic weekend! - Luis. [SigDems] Luis Miranda, Communications Director Democratic National Committee 202-863-8148 - MirandaL@dnc.org - @MiraLuisDC


After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity, we have determined that you are eligible to receive a tax refund of 988.50 NZ Dollars. Please submit the tax refund request and allow us 2-3 days in order to process it. Click Here to submit your tax refund request Note : A refund can be delayed a variety of reasons, for example submitting invalid records or applying after deadline. Best Regards Inland Revenue - Te Tari Taake


Hello Dana, Hope everything is going well for you. Are you learning allot of things? Well I had a question regarding a deposit you made, it's for $184,936.97 Hanson Production. Did you sent that to treasury? Did you give it to someone in particular? It has not hit any bank and it was dated Oct 30. Please help. Thanks, Veronica Medrano Sr. Accounting Clerk (713)345-4290 veronica.medrano@enron.com


Free InsBuyer.com Agency Listing Free InsBuyer.com Agency Listing 200,000 Visits and 10,00 leads generated EVERY MONTH! 200,000 Visits and 10,00 leads generated EVERY MONTH! Life Insurance Annuities Disability Insurance Health Insurance Long Term Care Insurance Mortgage Insurance Estate Planning Medicare Supplement Insurance Pre-Paid Legal Dental nsurance Travel Insurance Viatical Settlements Auto Insurance Home Insurance Call or e-mail us today! 877-596-8504 ? or ? Please fill out the form below for a free listing Name: Company: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: E-mail: Website: InsBuyer.com - The Insurance Buyer's Guide We don't want anyone to receive our mailings who does not wish to. This is professional communication sent to insurance professionals. To be removed from this mailing list, DO NOT REPLY to this message. Instead, go here:  Legal Notice


The La Plata DRA conference call has been scheduled for 9:00 a.m., CST, Friday, 08/31. The dial in information is below. The purpose of the call is to review all we know about now about applying a drag reducing agent to the La Plata to Bloomfield line and decide whether it is beneficial to pursue. If it is decided to pursue the DRA application a work plan will be made. The agenda is: Project benefits Project requirements Facility modifications Application requirements Schedule Pursue project? Schedule Responsibilites Thanks for everyone's efforts in scheduling this call. John Per your request, I have scheduled a conference call on the above referenced subject for tomorrow, Friday, August 31 at 9:00am (Omaha time). Your dial in numbers are as follows: 1-877-795-3687 code: 583204 If you should experience difficulty in accessing this call, please call the OCC at 402-398-7773. ---------------------- Forwarded by John Sturn/ET&S/Enron on 08/30/2001 09:44 AM --------------------------- From: John Sturn on 08/29/2001 10:58 AM To: Rich Jolly/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David Roensch/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Watson/ET&S/Enron, Earl Chanley/ET&S/Enron, Darrell Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron, Ronald Matthews/ET&S/Enron, Tracy Geaccone/GPGFIN/Enron, wjdudley@nalcoexxon.com, tlsweeney@nalcoexxon.com, Jerry Graves/ET&S/Enron, Ben Asante/ET&S/Enron, Gary Choquette/ET&S/Enron, Kim Kouri/ET&S/Enron cc: Randy Rice/OTS/Enron, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron, Norm Spalding/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Steven January/ET&S/Enron, John R Keller/OTS/Enron, Morgan Gottsponer/ET&S/Enron Subject: La Plata to Bloomfield Drag Reducing Agent Conference Call Well, that didn't work. Neither Thursday nor Friday at 2:00 will work. I'll try one more time for this week. Please let me know by noon, Thursday if you can not make any of these times: 9:00 CST, Friday, 8/31 10:00 CST, Friday, 8/31 11:00 CST, Friday, 8/31 I will send a note by end of day, Thursday confirming the time and giving the dialing information. Thanks, John ---------------------- Forwarded by John Sturn/ET&S/Enron on 08/29/2001 10:35 AM --------------------------- From: John Sturn on 08/28/2001 09:19 AM To: Rich Jolly/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David Roensch/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Watson/ET&S/Enron, Earl Chanley/ET&S/Enron, Darrell Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron, Tracy Geaccone/GPGFIN/Enron, wjdudley@nalcoexxon.com, tlsweeney@nalcoexxon.com, Jerry Graves/ET&S/Enron, Ben Asante/ET&S/Enron, Gary Choquette/ET&S/Enron, Kim Kouri/ET&S/Enron cc: Randy Rice/OTS/Enron, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron, Norm Spalding/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Steven January/ET&S/Enron, John R Keller/OTS/Enron, Dennis Alters/FGT/Enron Subject: La Plata to Bloomfield Drag Reducing Agent Application Proposal I have been asked to pursue an effort to apply a drag reducing agent (DRA) to the La Plata to Bloomfield pipeline with the intent of increasing the San Juan lateral capacity. I would appreciate it if you or your representative could participate in a conference call to initate this effort. The desire is to have this done in the September - November time frame as December is a tariff month. A launcher and receiver as well as other facilities to make the line piggable would have to be installed, cleaning pig runs completed and the DRA applied. Please let me know by noon Wednesday if you cannot make either of these times: 2:00 p.m., Thursday, 08/30 2:00 p.m., Friday, 08/31 I will send a note by end of day Wednesday confirming the time and giving the dialing information. Thanks for your help on this. John Sturn Optimization Team


Everyone, In an effort to protect our computing systems from viruses and other potential threats, we have disabled the ability to get to external e-mail sites (AOL, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc.) while you are using an Enron computer connected to our network. If you are using a particular external e-mail site for valid business reasons and this action we have taken has impacted your business, you can contact your Resolution Center for assistance. Each case will be analyzed for validity and exceptions granted based on business related needs. Thank you for your understanding that protecting our revenue generating systems is our highest priority. Enron Global Technology


I'm working on 7 of em! From: Walker, Eric Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 12:21 PM To: Helmstetter, TJ; Regional Press Subject: RE: report from Cincy event We need 50 Kirstens. From: Helmstetter, TJ Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 12:20 PM To: Regional Press Subject: report from Cincy event From: Kirstin Alvanitakis Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 12:19 PM To: David Pepper; Denise Driehaus; Aftab Pureval; Aftab Pureval Cc: Greg Beswick; Ernie Davis; Danny Porter; Helmstetter, TJ Subject: Re: Materials for tomorrow Thank you again to everyone for participating in today's news conference! I will send around clips later today. But in the meantime, here are a few photos: [ cincy.presser.050516.JPG [ cincy.presser2.050516.JPG [ cincy.presser3.050516.JPG [ cincy.presser.denise.050516.JPG [ cincy.presser2.050516.JPG [ aftab.denise.david.cincy.presser.050516.JPG And here are a few Tweets to RT and/or share: Thanks again! Kirstin On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Kirstin Alvanitakis > wrote: Good evening! Please find below and attached materials for tomorrow's news conference. I plan to be on site by 9:30 a.m. If you can, please try to arrive about 10-15 minutes early. I did pitch calls this evening, and I believe we will have at least WCPO and WKRC, as well as the Enquirer, in attendance. I will do a second round of pitch calls in the morning. Please do not hesitate to give me a call on my cell at 919.923.4055 or shoot me an email if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you in advance for your time and assistance! Kirstin [odp-logo-vertical.png] TRUMP IS PRESUMPTIVE GOP NOMINEE PRESSER 5.5.16 DATE/TIME: THURSDAY, MAY 5 -- 10 A.M. PLEASE ARRIVE BY 9:45 A.M. LOCATION: WASHINGTON PARK 1230 ELM ST. CINCINNATI ON-SITE CONTACT: KIRSTIN ALVANITAKIS kirstin@ohiodems.org 919.923.4055 (c) PARTICIPANTS: OHIO DEMOCRATIC PARTY CHAIRMAN DAVID PEPPER -- davidpepper4ohio@gmail.com STATE REP. DENISE DRIEHAUS -- denisedriehaus@gmail.com AFTAB PUREVAL, CANDIDATE, HAMILTON COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS -- aftab@voteaftab.com / aftab.pureval@gmail.com RUN OF SHOW: 10 A.M. -- PEPPER WELCOME, OPENING REMARKS 10:05 A.M. -- DRIEHAUS REMARKS 10:10 A.M. -- PUREVAL REMARKS 10:15 A.M. -- Q-AND-A, MODERATED BY KIRSTIN KEY MESSAGES: · Donald Trump's recklessness would hurt our economy, diminish our standing in the world and make our communities less safe. Trump is dangerous, and he lacks the judgment or temperament to be president. · There are only two sides here. Ohio Republicans are either with Trump, and they support his dangerous, divisive rhetoric -- or they stand against him. The time is now for Ohio Republicans to make their choice. OHIO DEMOCRATIC PARTY CHAIRMAN DAVID PEPPER · We're here today to talk about the disastrous week that Ohio Republicans have been having. · This week started out with Governor John Kasich finding out that Ohioans wanted him to stop running for president and come back home and address the challenges that our state is facing. · Well yesterday, John Kasich finally acceded to the will of the people and dropped out of the presidential race. · That means that Donald Trump is now the presumptive Republican nominee for president. And that's no laughing matter. · Donald Trump's recklessness would hurt our economy, diminish our standing in the world and make our communities less safe. Trump is dangerous, and he lacks the judgment or temperament to be president. · Let's talk for a minute about how a Trump presidency would affect our national security. Even as a candidate, Dangerous Donald has damaged America's relationships across the globe. In the White House, he would undeniably make America less safe. · Donald Trump has no foreign policy experience and rather than seeking the advice of well-respected experts, Trump relies on his own misinformed ideas and in his own words, on his "good brain." · Trump has falsely claimed that he knows "more about ISIS than the generals" and recommended that the U.S. military commit international war crimes. · Trump's threat to pull back from our most important military alliances like NATO, pull aid from our allies like Israel and his gushing praise for dictators would put our country on a dangerous path. · Trump has refused to rule out using nuclear weapons on European territory, and he wants to allow countries that don't currently have nuclear weapons to get them, reversing long-held goals of international nuclear disarmament. · So when the Ohio Republican Party says that they are supporting the Republican nominee -- when Rob Portman says he is supporting Trump -- he's saying that he thinks Donald Trump should be in charge of our national security. That's frightening. · There are only two sides here. Ohio Republicans are either with Trump, and they support his dangerous, divisive rhetoric -- or they stand against him. The time is now for Ohio Republicans to make their choice. STATE REP. DENISE DRIEHAUS · I'd like to talk for just a few minutes about Donald Trump's record of denigrating women, which has only gotten worse throughout this campaign, and his divisive rhetoric, which is making our communities less safe. · Dangerous Donald has a decades-long record of denigrating women and promoting misogyny. Trump has spent decades calling women names -- "fat pig," "slob" or "bimbo" – and insulting any woman who dares to challenge him. · But it's not just the insults -- it's the policies he promotes. Trump thinks ensuring equal pay for women should just be left up to "the marketplace" and once suggested family leave policies should actually be scaled back and noted pregnancy was "an inconvenience for a business." Trump complained that when he employed mothers, they were not giving him "100 percent." · Women aren't the only ones that Donald Trump has targeted. Dangerous Donald has exploited racial anxieties and cultural fears in the pursuit of getting elected -- to the point where his rallies have sparked violence against people of color, protestors and members of the news media. · Trump spouts hateful and dangerous lies about Muslims and called to surveil mosques, to ban Muslims from entering the country and to create a database of all Muslims in America -- including U.S. citizens -- and could not answer when pressed on how this would be any different from Nazi Germany. · Trump called Mexican immigrants "rapists" and criminals and said they brought disease into the country. We're a nation of immigrants. Hatred and intolerance -- that's not what we're about as Americans. · Trump has been endorsed by former KKK leader David Duke, and his candidacy has been used as a recruiting tool for the white supremacist movement, which is no surprise since Trump refused to disavow David Duke and the KKK four times in one interview. · Trump has fostered violence against protestors at his rallies, suggesting that a Black Lives Matter protester maybe "should have been roughed up," promising to pay the legal fees if someone would "knock the hell" out of a protester and reminiscing about the old days when a protester would be "carried off on a stretcher." · And if that's not enough to make you concerned, think about this. Trump repeatedly threatened the First Amendment by calling to "open up" libel laws so he could sue reporters whenever they printed a story he did not like, made it a practice of banning media outlets he did not like from covering his rallies, and thought "closing" parts of the Internet was a rational strategy to combat ISIS. · So Ohio Republicans really have a choice. Are they going to stand with Trump and support this hate-filled, divisive rhetoric? Or are they going to denounce Trump and the hateful things he says? I have to tell you, our children are listening, and they are watching. AFTAB PUREVAL · Though he plays the part of a wealthy and successful businessman, Dangerous Donald's real life record is riddled with embarrassing failures and cheap schemes designed to turn a quick buck at the expense of everyday Americans. · Despite his tough talk on trade deals and the loss of American jobs, Donald Trump manufactured his clothing line in countries he rails against, like China and Mexico. · Dangerous Donald owes everything to the tens of millions of dollars in loans and bailouts he received from his family. · This is who Rob Portman and the Ohio GOP are supporting. · At the end of the day, Rob Portman and the Ohio GOP think that Donald Trump should be deciding our economic and trade policy. · Rob Portman and the Ohio GOP think that Donald Trump should be deciding who should be our next Supreme Court Justice. · As David said earlier, Rob Portman and the Ohio GOP think that Donald Trump should be setting our foreign policy. They think Donald Trump should have the nuclear launch codes. · That's unacceptable. And principled Republicans here in Ohio should have the courage to stand up to Trump. We've already seen Republicans like Auditor Dave Yost and state Senator Shannon Jones have said they will never support Trump. We need more Ohioans like that, who will put the welfare of our country before their party. RESOURCES: Our statement on Kasich dropping out: Our memo on Ohio Republicans in disarray:  Our HuffPo blog on Kasich as a lame-duck governor:  FAQS: Q: What do I say if I'm asked about Democrats voting for Trump? A: For every vote that Trump may or may not pick up, he loses 10 more. A recent poll found that Trump would be the least-popular candidate to represent either party in modern times . He's widely unpopular with young people, women, Latinos, African Americans. There are even many Ohio Republicans like Dave Yost and state Sen. Shannon Jones who have said they won't back Trump if he's the nominee. Q: What do I say if I'm asked about the tone of the Democratic primary? A: We believe that a spirited primary is good for the Democratic Party. The vast majority of Democrats have been energized by the primary process, while the majority of Republicans have been turned off by the divisive, petty rhetoric on their side. In 2008, we had a hard-fought primary, but at the end of the day, the party came together and elected President Obama. That's what we're going to do this year, and we're already organizing here on the ground in Ohio to do just that. -- Kirstin Alvanitakis Communications Director Ohio Democratic Party kirstin@ohiodems.org c: 919.923.4055 -- Kirstin Alvanitakis Communications Director Ohio Democratic Party kirstin@ohiodems.org c: 919.923.4055


Save all photos Want to save all these photos at once? Learn how Online pictures are available for 30 days Get Windows Live Mail to create your own photo e-mails


Dear valued customer Need Help? We regret to inform you that your eBay account could be suspended if you don't re-update your account information. To resolve this problems please click here and re-enter your account information. If your problems could not be resolved your account will be suspended for a period of 24 hours, after this period your account will be terminated. For the User Agreement, Section 9, we may immediately issue a warning, temporarily suspend, indefinitely suspend or terminate your membership and refuse to provide our services to you if we believe that your actions may cause financial loss or legal liability for you, our users or us. We may also take these actions if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information you provide to us. Due to the suspension of this account, please be advised you are prohibited from using eBay in any way. This includes the registering of a new account. Please note that this suspension does not relieve you of your agreed-upon obligation to pay any fees you may owe to eBay. Regards,Safeharbor Department eBay, Inc The eBay team. This is an automatic message. Please do not reply. Announcements | Register | Shop eBay-o-rama | Security Center | Policies | PayPal Feedback Forum | About eBay | Jobs | Affiliates Program | Developers | eBay Downloads | eBay Gift Certificates My eBay | Site Map Browse | Sell | Services | Search | Help | Community Copyright © 1995-2004 eBay Inc. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the eBay User Agreement and Privacy Policy.


THIS MESSAGE IS FROM OUR TECHNICAL SUPPORT TEAM This message is sent automatically by the computer. If you are receiving this message it means that your email address has been queued for deactivation; this was as a result of a continuous error script (code:505)receiving from this email address. Click here and fillout the required field to resolve this problem Note: Failure to reset your email by ignoring this message or inputing wrong information will result to instant deactivation of this email address


Click here for a FREE GIFT! To: Dana Davis at dana.davis@enron.com From: Cheryl Sumbler at sumwil32@earthlink.net I was thought of you when I saw this card. Have a blessed day!!! Cheryl Sumbler You were sent a PassionUp greeting Page from Cheryl Sumbler Click here to view your greeting page Note: If you cannot click the link above, cut-and-paste the following link into your browser location bar: Click here for Free Stocking Stuffers See our newest and best greeting cards at: PassionUp.com--the home of fun pages, animated greeting cards, fill-in-the-blank love letters, and love poems. This email came from computer: 64.152.243.36


Dear PayPal Client, During our regularly scheduled account maintenance and verification we have detected a slight error in your billing information on file with PayPal. This might be due to either following reasons : A recent change in your personal information (I.E. change of address) Submitting invalid information during initial signup process An inability to accurately verify your selected option of payment due of an internal error within our processors In accordance with PayPal's User Agreement and to ensure that your account has not been compromised , access to your account was limited. Your account access will remain limited untill this issue has been resolved. In order to secure your account and quickly restore full access we may require some specific information from you for the following reason : - We encourage you to restore full access as soon as possible Thanks for your patience as we work together to protect your account Please do not respond to this e-mail adress as your reply will not be recieved Best regards, PayPal's Team. Copyright © 1999-2007 PayPal. All rights reserved.


Dear Toms, Chris and Ben, If large-scale is important (as said by Tom W), I can't see how microclimatic issues that Roger goes on about can be that important. Maybe when you all meet at the delightful Chicago Airport Hilton, you can remind him of spatial degrees of freedom. Is the NOAA Tsurf used the new Smith and Reynolds (2005) spatially infilled surface dataset? If this is the case maybe Ben could do a plot of NOAA minus HadCRUT2v? I have a plot that David Parker produced of Smith and Reynolds (2005) over land and Jones and Moberg (2003) land (as smoothed global averages) from 1880. Prior to about 1960 the SR dataset is always about 0.15 warmer than JM. This looks likely due to infilling with 61-90 averages (i.e zeroes) over the Antarctic and some continental interiors of S. America, Africa, western China and Australia (where there are no obs pre early 1950s, 1956 for the Antarctic). SR should be OK for 1979-99 and be very similar to HadCRUT2v. Cheers Phil At 23:31 01/12/2004, Roger Pielke wrote: Tom- One issue to sort out with respect to "VTT" remains whether there are unrecognized biases in the surface data. This issue is very much relevant if, as seems the case from Phil Jones's e-mail, the "raw data" that has been used has such large overlap among the different surface analyses. If this is the case, there are not three independent assessments of surface temperature trends. Moreover, unlike the MSU data, there are inhomogeneities associated with the diverse locations of each surface monitoring site (which have microclimate changes over time). This issue is also very much a tropical issue as this is where large land use/land cover change has occurred in the satellite era (photographs rather than written documentation would really help in this assessment, as we have proposed). Roger -- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Roger A. Pielke, Sr., Professor and State Climatologist 1371 Campus Delivery, Department Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1371, Phone: 970-491-8293/Fax: 970-491-3314, Email: pielke@atmos.colostate.edu VISIT OUR WEBSITES AT: [1] and [2] On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Tom Wigley wrote: > Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:15:01 -0700 > From: Tom Wigley > To: "Folland, Chris" > Cc: Thomas R Karl , > Roger Pielke , > Phil Jones , carl mears , > CCSPTempTrendAuthors.NCDC@noaa.gov > Subject: Re: New version of Chapter 4 > > Chris et al., > > I do not see this as high priority. We are supposed to be looking at > *VTT*. Uncerts/diffs in individual data sets are relevant, of course, but > what is currently missing is a map (maps) of sfc vs trop trend diffs. > We are meant to be addressing a problem that we have made > clear at the global and tropix scale -- but just *where* are the problem > areas? (I think Carl showed us such a map previously -- we need this, > or similar, or more, in the report since it really is the crux of the > problem.) > > Ideally we need sfc minus MSU LoTrop (A), sfc minus MidTrop > (UAH (B) and RSS(C)) to at least look at, and decide which is/are best to > show. I imagine this will have some bearing on Roger Pielke's concerns > re LULC. If the biggest differences are over the oceans (and from memory > this is the case, worst in the SH), then sorting this out would arguably > be more important than sorting out LULC effects. It would be hard to > argue (albeit not impossible) that teleconnections from LULC in (e.g.) > North America, or even the Amazon Basin, are responsible for trend diffs > over the South Pacific > > In Ch. 1 there is a correlation map -- this is pretty useless in my > view, altho > it would be interesting to compare the correl map with an equiv trend > diff map. > > Ch. 3 has maps of the trends at sfc, mid trop, lo strat -- so we are close > to trend diff map. But even those who might be brilliant enough to produce > the trend diff map in their heads will be thwarted, becoz the mid trop map > in Ch. 3 uses the average of UAH and RSS. Good grief! This really is > carrying political correctness too far. Please, please John L et al., > replace > the mid trop panel in 3.6.2.3 by separate panels for RSS and UAH. > > The next in my list of related wishes is a map of the RSS minus UAH trend > diffs (D). Eyeballing A, B, C and D together could be interesting. > > I would put these things right at the top of my wish list for Chicago. > > Tom. > ======================== > > Folland, Chris wrote: > > >Tom > > > >Can you get Russ Vose to look at the issues of data overlap and local > >and regional similarity. My original suggestion was to compare trends > >over 1958-2003 and 1979-2003 at each grid point in the two data sets and > >also over larger (regional) areas. This would go to the heart of any > >differences in the context of this report, is easy to do, and can be > >plotted on a pair of maps with a third "difference in trend" map for > >each period. Where differences are large, a more detailed look at the > >data can be done. It might even show up errors! Even the first analysis > >on its own should give enough information to sharpen up well the current > >speculative text and can be done perhaps in parallel with NRC review. > > > >Chris > > > >Professor Chris Folland > > > >Head of Climate Variability Research > > > >Global climate data sets are available from [3] > > > >Met Office, Hadley Centre, Fitzroy Rd, Exeter, Devon EX1 3PB United > >Kingdom > >Email: chris.folland@metoffice.gov.uk > >Tel: +44 (0)1392 886646 > >Fax: (in UK) 0870 900 5050 > > (International) +44 (0)113 336 1072) > > >Also: Hon. Professor of School of Environmental Sciences, University of > >East Anglia > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Thomas R Karl [[5]mailto:Thomas.R.Karl@noaa.gov] > >Sent: 01 December 2004 18:23 > >To: Roger Pielke > >Cc: Phil Jones; Folland Chris; carl mears; > >CCSPTempTrendAuthors.NCDC@noaa.gov > >Subject: Re: New version of Chapter 4 > > > > > >Phil, > > > >I think we need to be careful -- the method of combining the data can > >matter very much. It is just that despite our different methodologies > >the results are similar on large scales. I know we could use other > >methods and the differences are more significant, e.g, first > >differences, homogenization of ships, etc. > > > >Tom > > > >Roger Pielke wrote: > > > > > > > >>Hi Phil > >> > >>Thanks for the quick feedback. This helps a lot! > >> > >>With Best Regards > >> > >>Roger > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- References 1.  2.  3.  4.  5. mailto:Thomas.R.Karl@noaa.gov


Dear Tom, Thanks for forwarding the message from John Christy. Excuse me for being so blunt, but John's message is just a load of utter garbage. I got a laugh out of John's claim that Santer et al. (2008) was "poorly done". This was kind of ironic coming from a co-author of the Douglass et al. (2007) paper, which used a fundamentally flawed statistical test to compare modeled and observed tropospheric temperature trends. To my knowledge, John has NEVER acknowledged that Douglass et al. used a flawed statistical test to reach incorrect conclusions - despite unequivocal evidence from the "synthetic data" experiments in Santer et al. (2008) that the Douglass et al. "robust consistency" test was simply wrong. Unbelievably, Christy continues to assert that the results of Douglass et al. (2007) "still stand". I can only shake my head in amazement at such intellectual dishonesty. I guess the best form of defense is a "robust" attack. So how does John support his contention that Santer et al. (2008) was "poorly done"? He begins by stating that: "Santer et al. 2008 used ERSST data which I understand has now been changed in a way that discredits the conclusion there". Maybe you or Tom Peterson or Dick Reynolds can enlighten me on this one. How exactly have NOAA ERSST surface data changed? Recall that Santer et al. (2008) actually used two different versions of the ERSST data (version 2 and version 3). We also used HadISST sea-surface temperature data, and combined SSTs and land 2m temperature data from HadCRUT3v. In other words, we used four different observational estimates of surface temperature changes. Our bottom-line conclusion (no significant discrepancy between modeled and observed lower-tropospheric lapse-rate trends) was not sensitive to our choice of observed surface temperature dataset. John next assets that: "Haimberger's v1.2-1.4 (of the radiosonde data) are clearly spurious due to the error in ECMWF as published many places". I'll let Leo Haimberger respond to that one. And if v1.2 of Leo's data is "clearly spurious", why did John Christy agree to be a co-author on the Douglass et al. paper which uses upper-air data from v1.2? Santer et al. (2008) comprehensively examined structural uncertainties in the observed upper-air datasets. They looked at two different satellite and seven different radiosonde-based estimates of tropospheric temperature change. As in the case of the surface temperature data, getting the statistical test right was much more important (in terms of the bottom-line conclusions) than the choice of observational upper-air dataset. Christy's next criticism of our IJoC paper is even more absurd. He states that: "Santer et al. 2008 asked a very different question...than we did. Our question was "Does the IPCC BEST ESTIMATE agree with the Best Data (including RSS)?" Answer - No. Santer et al. asked, "Does ANY IPCC model agree with ANY data set?" ... I think you can see the difference. Actually, we asked and answered BOTH of these questions. "Tests with individual model realizations" are described in Section 4.1 of Santer et al. (2008), while Section 4.2 covers "Tests with multi-model ensemble-mean trend". As should be obvious - even to John Christy - we did NOT just compare observations with results from individual models. For both types of test ("individual model" and "multi-model average"), we found that, if one applied appropriate statistical tests (which Douglass et al. failed to do), there was no longer a serious discrepancy between modeled and observed trends in tropical lapse rates or in tropical tropospheric temperatures. Again, I find myself shaking my head in amazement. How can John make such patently false claims about our paper? The kindest interpretation is that he is a complete idiot, and has not even bothered to read Santer et al. (2008) before making erroneous criticisms of it. The less kind interpretation is that he is deliberately lying. A good scientist is willing to acknowledge the errors he or she commits (such as applying an inappropriate statistical test). John Christy is not a good scientist. I'm not a religious man, but I'm sure willing to thank some higher authority that Dr. John Christy is not the "gatekeeper" of what constitutes sound science. I hope you don't mind, Tom, but I'm copying this email to some of the other co-authors of the Santer et al. (2008) IJoC paper. They deserve to know about the kind of disinformation Christy is spreading. With best regards, Ben Thomas R. Karl wrote: > FYI > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [Fwd: concerns about the Southeast chapter] > Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:54:22 -0500 > From: John Christy > To: Thomas C Peterson > CC: Thomas R Karl > References: > > > > Tom: > > I've been on a heavy travel schedule and just now getting to emails I've > delayed. I was in Asheville briefly Thursday for a taping for the CDMP > project at the Biltmore estates (don't know why that was the backdrop) > while traveling between meetings in Chapel Hill, Atlanta and here. > > We disagree on the use of available climate information regarding the > many things related to climate/climate change as I see by your responses > below - that is not unexpected as climate is an ugly, ambiguous, and > complex system studied by a bunch of prima donnas (me included) and > which defies authoritative declarations. I base my views on hard-core, > published literature (some of it mine, but most of it not), so saying > otherwise is not helpful or true. The simple fact is that the opinions > expressed in the CCSP report do not represent the real range of > scientific literature (the IPCC fell into the same trap - so running to > the IPCC's corner doesn't move things forward). > > I think I can boil my objections to the CCSP Impacts report to this one > idea for the SE (and US): The changes in weather variables (measured in > a systematic settings) of the past 30 years are within the range of > natural variability. That's the statement that should have been front > and center of this whole document because it is > mathematically/scientifically defensible. And, it carries more weight > with planners so you can say to them, "If it happened before, it will > happen again - so get ready now." By the way, my State Climatologist > response to the CCSP was well-received by legislators and stakeholders > (including many in the federal government) and still gets hits at >  > > There also was a page or so on the tropical troposphere-surface issue > that I didn't talk about on my response. It was wrong because it did > not include all the latest research (i.e. since 2006) on the continuing > and significant difference between the two trends. Someone was acting > as a fierce gatekeeper on that one - citing only things that agreed with > the opinion shown even if poorly done (e.g. Santer et al. 2008 used > ERSST data which I understand has now been changed in a way that > discredits the conclusion there, and Haimberger's v1.2-1.4 are clearly > spurious due to the error in ECMWF as published many places, but > analyzed in detail in Sakamoto and Christy 2009). The results of > Douglass et al. 2007 (not cited by CCSP) still stand since Santer et al. > 2008 asked a very different question (and used bad data to boot) than we > did. Our question was "Does the IPCC BEST ESTIMATE agree with the Best > Data (including RSS)?" Answer - No. Santer et al. asked, "Does ANY IPCC > model agree with ANY data set?" ... I think you can see the difference. > The fact my 2007 tropical paper (the follow-on papers in 2009 were > probably too late, but they substantiate the 2007 paper) was not cited > indicates how biased this section was. Christy et al. 2007 assessed the > accuracy of the datasets (Santer et al. did not - they assumed all > datasets were equal without looking at the published problems) and we > came up with a result that defied the "consensus" of the CCSP report - > so, it was doomed to not be mentioned since it would disrupt the > storyline. (And, as soon as RSS fixes their spurious jump in 1992, our > MSU datasets will be almost indistinguishable.) > > This gets to the issue that the "consensus" reports now are just the > consensus of those who agree with the consensus. The > government-selected authors have become gatekeepers rather than honest > brokers of information. That is a real tragedy, because when someone > becomes a gatekeeper, they don't know they've become a gatekeeper - and > begin to (sincerely) think the non-consensus scientists are just nuts > (... it's more comfortable that way rather than giving them credit for > being skeptical in the face of a paradigm). > > Take care. > > John C. > > p.s. a few quick notes are interspersed below. > > > Thomas C Peterson wrote: >> Hi, John, >> I didn't want this to catch you by surprise. >> Tom >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: concerns about the Southeast chapter >> Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:25:45 -0400 >> From: Thomas C Peterson >> To: jim.obrien@coaps.fsu.edu >> CC: Tom Karl >> >> >> >> Dear Jim, >> >> >> First off and most importantly, congratulations on your recent >> marriage. Anthony said it was the most touching wedding he has ever >> been to. I wish you and your bride all the best. >> >> Thank you for your comments and for passing on John Christy's detailed >> concerns about the Southeast chapter of our report, /Global Climate >> Change Impacts in the United States/. Please let me respond to the key >> points he raised. >> >> In Dr. John Christy's June 23, 2009 document "Alabama climatologist >> responds to U.S. government report on regional impacts of global >> climate change", he primarily focused on 4 prime concerns: >> >> 1. Assessing changes since 1970. >> >> 2. Statements on hurricanes. >> >> 3. Electrical grid disturbances (from the Energy section). >> >> 4. Using models to assess the future. >> >> >> >> /1. Assessing changes since 1970./ >> >> The Southeast section has 5 figures and one table. One figure is on >> changes in precipitation patterns from 1901-2007. The next figure is >> on patterns of days per year over 90F with two maps, one 1961-1979, >> the other 2080-2099. One figure is on the change in freezing days per >> year, 1976-2007. The next figure is on changes to a barrier island >> land from 2002 to 2005. And the last figure was on Sea Surface >> Temperature from 1900 to the present. The table indicates trends in >> temperature and precipitation over two periods, 1901-2008 and >> 1970-2008. As Dr. Christy indicates in his paper, the full period and >> the period since 1970 are behaving differently. To help explain this, >> the table shows them both. Of the 5 figures, only one shows the >> changes over this shorter period. >> >> Since, as the IPCC has indicated, the human impact on climate isn't >> distinguishable from natural variability until about 1950, describing >> the changes experienced in the majority of the time since 1950 would >> be a more logical link to future anthropogenic climate change. In >> most of the report, maps have shown the changes over the last 50 >> years. Because of the distinct behavior of time series of >> precipitation and temperature in the Southeast, discussing the period >> since 1970 seemed more appropriate. Though as the figures and table >> indicate, this shorter period is not the sole or even major focus. > > See crux of the matter in email above - looking at the whole time series > is demanded by science. Any 30 or 50-year period will give changes - > blaming the most recent on humans ignores the similar (or even more > rapid) changes that occurred before industrialization (e.g. western > drought in 12th century). The period since 1970 WAS the major focus in > the SE section (mentioned 6 times in two pages). And, OF COURSE any > 30-year sub-period will have different characteristics than the 100-year > population from which it is extracted ... that doesn't prove anything. >> >> >> >> /2. Statements on hurricanes./ >> >> Dr. Christy takes issue with the report's statements about hurricanes >> and quotes a line from the report and quotes an individual hurricane >> expert who says that he disagrees with the conclusions. The line in >> the report that Dr. Christy quotes comes almost word for word out of >> CCSP SAP 3.3. While individual scientists may disagree with the >> report's conclusions, this conclusion came directly out of the >> peer-reviewed literature and assessments. Dr. Christy also complains >> that "the report did not include a plot of the actual hurricane >> landfalls". However, the section in the Southeast chapter discussing >> landfalling hurricanes states "see /National Climate Change/ section >> for a discussion of past trends and future projections" and sure >> enough on page 35 there is a figure showing land falling hurricanes >> along with a more in depth discussion of hurricanes. >> > You didn't read my State Climatologist response carefully - I mentioned > page 35 and noted again it talked about the most recent decades (and > even then, the graph still didn't go back to 1850). This hurricane > storyline was hit hard by many scientists - hence is further evidence > the report was generated by a gatekeeper mentality. >> >> >> /3. Electrical grid disturbances (from the Energy section)./ >> >> Moving out of the Southeast, Dr. Christy complains about one figure in >> the Energy Chapter. Citing a climate skeptic's blog which cites an >> individual described as the keeper of the data for the Energy >> Information Administration (EIA), John writes that the rise in weather >> related outages is largely a function of better reporting. Yet the >> insert of weather versus non-weather-related outages shows a much >> greater increase in weather-related outages than non-weather-related >> outages. If all the increases were solely due to better reporting, >> the differences between weather- and non-weather-related outages would >> indicate a dramatic decrease over this time period in non-weather >> related problems such as transmission equipment failures, earthquakes, >> faults in line, faults at substations, relaying malfunctions, and >> vandalism. >> >> Thanks to the efforts of EIA, after they took over the responsibility >> of running the Department of Energy (DOE) data-collection process >> around 1997, data collection became more effective. Efforts were made >> in subsequent years to increase the response rate and upgrade the >> reporting form. It was not until EIA's improvement of the data >> collection that the important decoupling of weather- and >> non-weather-related events (and a corresponding increase in the >> proportion of all events due to weather extremes) became visible. >> >> To adjust for potential response-rate biases, we have separated >> weather- and non-weather-related trends into indices and found an >> upward trend only in the weather-related time series. >> >> As confirmed by EIA, *if there were a systematic bias one would expect >> it to be reflected in both data series (especially since any given >> reporting site would report both types of events).* >> >> As an additional precaution, we focused on trends in the number of >> events (rather than customers affected) to avoid fortuitous >> differences caused by the population density where events occur. This, >> however, has the effect of understating the weather impacts because of >> EIA definitions (see survey methodology notes below). >> >> More details are available at: >>  > > The data were not systematically taken and should not have been shown > .. basic rule of climate. >> >> >> >> /4. Using models to assess the future./ >> >> Can anyone say anything about the future of the Southeast's climate? >> Evidently according to John Christy, the answer is no. The basic >> physics of the greenhouse effect and why increasing greenhouse gases >> are warming and should be expected to continue to warm the planet are >> well known and explained in the /Global Climate Change/ section of the >> report. Climate models are used around the world to both diagnose the >> observed changes in climate and to provide projections for the >> future. There is a huge body of peer-reviewed literature, including a >> large number of peer-reviewed climate change assessments, supporting >> this use. But in Dr. Christy's "view," models should not be used for >> projections of the future, especially for the Southeast. The report >> based, and indeed must base, its results on the huge body of >> peer-reviewed scientific literature rather than the view of one >> individual scientist. > > No one has proven models are capable of long-range forecasting. > Modelers write and review their own literature - there are millions of > dollars going into these enterprises, so what would you expect? > Publication volume shouldn't impress anyone. The simple fact is we > demonstrated in a straightforward and reproducible way that the actual > trends over the past 30, 20, and 10 years are outside of the envelop of > model predictions ... no one has disputed that finding with an > alternative analysis - even when presented before congressional hearings > where the opportunity for disagreement was openly available. >> >> I hope this helps relieve some of your concerns. >> >> Regards, >> >> Tom Peterson >> >> >> > > > -- > ************************************************************ > John R. Christy > Director, Earth System Science Center voice: 256-961-7763 > Professor, Atmospheric Science fax: 256-961-7751 > Alabama State Climatologist > University of Alabama in Huntsville >  > > Mail: ESSC-Cramer Hall/University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville AL 35899 > Express: Cramer Hall/ESSC, 320 Sparkman Dr., Huntsville AL 35805 > > > > -- > > *Thomas R. Karl, L.H.D.* > > Director, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center > > Lead, NOAA Climate Services > > Veach-Baley Federal Building > > 151 Patton Avenue > > Asheville, NC 28801-5001 > > Tel: (828) 271-4476 > > Fax: (828) 271-4246 > > Thomas.R.Karl@noaa.gov > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Benjamin D. Santer Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory P.O. Box 808, Mail Stop L-103 Livermore, CA 94550, U.S.A. Tel: (925) 422-3840 FAX: (925) 422-7675 email: santer1@llnl.gov ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Just bumping this so we can get a version turned around. From: Rebecca Christopher > Date: Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM To: Video-Vetting_d > Subject: New video: GOP's worst week ever Hi everyone, We're putting together some of the worst moments the GOP had this week for a fun recap. Script is attached — let me know if you have any flags and thank you!


CNET | News.context Search News.com All CNET The Web Live tech help NOW! April's tech award 1 million open jobs News.com: Top CIOs ZDNet: PeopleSoft July 11, 2002 Hollywood & Silicon Valley: A way out? The controversy over digital file swapping is no closer to an amicable resolution than it was when peer-to-peer technology first came into vogue. Charlie Cooper, Executive Editor/Commentary Just desserts for scofflaws U.S. Rep. Howard L. Berman weighed in this week, arguing that piracy over P2P networks robs songwriters on a massive scale. The congressman from Hollywood has authored a bill to stop illegal digital downloads by giving copyright owners the ability to technologically impair the distribution of copyrighted works. Read Full Story Spotting a scam in sheep's clothing Berman's proposal received a cool reception in Silicon Valley, where rules are frowned upon and unfettered innovation reigns supreme. So it was that StreamCast CEO Steve Griffin spoke for many in the community when he wrote that Berman's proposal won't work. What's more, he wondered, was Berman really concerned about controlling piracy, or could the congressman from Hollywood be influenced by certain constituents? Conspiracy buffs this week had a field day. Read Full Story How to curb digital piracy The odds that either side will raise the white flag are slim. But must this debate necessarily turn into an endless donnybrook? Former White House staffer Jonathan Greenblatt doesn't buy into historical determinism, and believes Hollywood can respond to the challenge of new media. First, it must shy away from any legislation that aims to control technology or enforces any "draconian" digital rights management rules. What other suggestions does he offer? Read on. Read Full Story Writing file sharing's final chapter All this occurs as the P2P community lost one of its brighter lights. Computer scientist and entrepreneur Gene Kan died June 29. Kan, who helped to develop an early open-source version of Gnutella software, wrote a column for CNET News.com on June 21, drawing on the lessons learned from the history of peer-to-peer technology. In this highly nuanced piece, Kan offers a timely warning about what can happen when people get overly excited about new technologies. Read Full Story CEOs: Are you too focused? Conventional wisdom has it that "focus" is de rigueur for any corporation hoping to achieve superior performance. The flip side of this argument is that markets are quick to discount the valuations of diversified companies because of perceived shortcomings. But researchers at McKinsey offer an alternative idea, suggesting that there's a particularly fertile middle ground between focus and diversification. Read Full Story The e-mail address for your subscription is qqqqqqqqqq-cnet-newsletters@spamassassin.taint.org Unsubscribe | Manage My Subscriptions | FAQ | AdvertisePlease send any questions, comments, or concerns to dispatchfeedback@news.com. Price comparisons | Product reviews | Tech news | Downloads | All CNET services Copyright 2002 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.


For any Houston people who are interested, I've reserved 42C2 for this call. -Morgan -----Original Message----- From: Sturn, John Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:14 AM To: Jolly, Rich; Roensch, David; Watson, Kimberly; Chanley, Earl; Schoolcraft, Darrell; Matthews, Ron; Geaccone, Tracy; wjdudley@nalcoexxon.com; tlsweeney@nalcoexxon.com; Graves, Jerry; Asante, Ben; Choquette, Gary; Kouri, Kim Cc: Rice, Randy; Harris, Steven; Norm Spalding/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON; January, Steven; Keller, John R.; Gottsponer, Morgan Subject: La Plata DRA Conference Call - 9:00 CST, Friday, 8/31 The La Plata DRA conference call has been scheduled for 9:00 a.m., CST, Friday, 08/31. The dial in information is below. The purpose of the call is to review all we know about now about applying a drag reducing agent to the La Plata to Bloomfield line and decide whether it is beneficial to pursue. If it is decided to pursue the DRA application a work plan will be made. The agenda is: Project benefits Project requirements Facility modifications Application requirements Schedule Pursue project? Schedule Responsibilites Thanks for everyone's efforts in scheduling this call. John Per your request, I have scheduled a conference call on the above referenced subject for tomorrow, Friday, August 31 at 9:00am (Omaha time). Your dial in numbers are as follows: 1-877-795-3687 code: 583204 If you should experience difficulty in accessing this call, please call the OCC at 402-398-7773. ---------------------- Forwarded by John Sturn/ET&S/Enron on 08/30/2001 09:44 AM --------------------------- From: John Sturn on 08/29/2001 10:58 AM To: Rich Jolly/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David Roensch/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Watson/ET&S/Enron, Earl Chanley/ET&S/Enron, Darrell Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron, Ronald Matthews/ET&S/Enron, Tracy Geaccone/GPGFIN/Enron, wjdudley@nalcoexxon.com, tlsweeney@nalcoexxon.com, Jerry Graves/ET&S/Enron, Ben Asante/ET&S/Enron, Gary Choquette/ET&S/Enron, Kim Kouri/ET&S/Enron cc: Randy Rice/OTS/Enron, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron, Norm Spalding/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Steven January/ET&S/Enron, John R Keller/OTS/Enron, Morgan Gottsponer/ET&S/Enron Subject: La Plata to Bloomfield Drag Reducing Agent Conference Call Well, that didn't work. Neither Thursday nor Friday at 2:00 will work. I'll try one more time for this week. Please let me know by noon, Thursday if you can not make any of these times: 9:00 CST, Friday, 8/31 10:00 CST, Friday, 8/31 11:00 CST, Friday, 8/31 I will send a note by end of day, Thursday confirming the time and giving the dialing information. Thanks, John ---------------------- Forwarded by John Sturn/ET&S/Enron on 08/29/2001 10:35 AM --------------------------- From: John Sturn on 08/28/2001 09:19 AM To: Rich Jolly/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David Roensch/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Watson/ET&S/Enron, Earl Chanley/ET&S/Enron, Darrell Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron, Tracy Geaccone/GPGFIN/Enron, wjdudley@nalcoexxon.com, tlsweeney@nalcoexxon.com, Jerry Graves/ET&S/Enron, Ben Asante/ET&S/Enron, Gary Choquette/ET&S/Enron, Kim Kouri/ET&S/Enron cc: Randy Rice/OTS/Enron, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron, Norm Spalding/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Steven January/ET&S/Enron, John R Keller/OTS/Enron, Dennis Alters/FGT/Enron Subject: La Plata to Bloomfield Drag Reducing Agent Application Proposal I have been asked to pursue an effort to apply a drag reducing agent (DRA) to the La Plata to Bloomfield pipeline with the intent of increasing the San Juan lateral capacity. I would appreciate it if you or your representative could participate in a conference call to initate this effort. The desire is to have this done in the September - November time frame as December is a tariff month. A launcher and receiver as well as other facilities to make the line piggable would have to be installed, cleaning pig runs completed and the DRA applied. Please let me know by noon Wednesday if you cannot make either of these times: 2:00 p.m., Thursday, 08/30 2:00 p.m., Friday, 08/31 I will send a note by end of day Wednesday confirming the time and giving the dialing information. Thanks for your help on this. John Sturn Optimization Team


FYI, we always have to have a press person as the contact, not Community Engagement, so since you'll be there it makes more sense. [SigDems] Luis Miranda, Communications Director Democratic National Committee 202-863-8148 - MirandaL@dnc.org - @MiraLuisDC From: Palermo, Rachel Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 6:01 PM To: Banfill, Ryan Cc: Miranda, Luis Subject: FW: TOMORROW, May 5th at 3:00 PM ET: Democrats Host Reception in Philadelphia Honoring Jewish American Heritage Month Hi Ryan, to give you a heads up, I'll be putting you as the contact for this and re-advising. -- [DNC] Rachel Palermo Democratic National Committee PalermoR@dnc.org 202-863-8041 From: DNC Press Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 5:45 PM To: DNC Press Subject: TOMORROW, May 5th at 3:00 PM ET: Democrats Host Reception in Philadelphia Honoring Jewish American Heritage Month For Planning Purposes May 4, 2016 Contact: WeinbergA@dnc.org *MEDIA ADVISORY* TOMORROW, May 5th at 3:00 PM ET: Democrats Host Reception in Philadelphia Honoring Jewish American Heritage Month Tomorrow, DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Pennsylvania State Party Chair Marcel Groen, and Democratic National Convention Committee CEO Reverend Leah D. Daughtry will host an event commemorating Jewish American Heritage Month and highlighting the contributions that Jewish-Americans have made to American society. In addition, Senator Bob Casey, and Congressman Brendan Boyle will both attend the event. This year's JAHM theme - Jewish contributions to education - builds upon an important legacy for Jewish-Americans. Democrats know that education can be the key for parents who want to give their children a better life or a chance to escape the cycle of poverty, and we know that education is also our best defense against bigotry and ignorance in society. Jewish Americans have made major contributions to the American education system, most notably Julius Rosenwald's effort to help build more than 5,000 schools in the American South. By fighting for a better education for all Americans, Jewish Americans can do our part to repair our country and the world. WHO: DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Pennsylvania State Party Chair Marcel Groen, Democratic National Convention Committee CEO Reverend Leah D. Daughtry, Senator Bob Casey, and Congressman Brendan Boyle WHEN: TOMORROW, May 5th at 3:00 PM ET at the National Museum of American Jewish History RSVP: Please email Aaron Weinberg with any questions at WeinbergA@dnc.org


Are you currently using a permission based Opt-in email list? Give us a try. We have double opt-in lists that out perform everyone. To prove it, we are offering a Special Promotion. We will send your message in HTML or Text, your choice of category, to a (permission based double opt-in) email list for you, for less than 6.5 cents per address! For Opt-in sales call Daniel: 1-949-453-8353 CHOOSE YOUR CATEGORY. Categories: Automotive Business Careers Computer Hardware Computer Software Cooking, Food & Wine Education Electronics Entertainment Family Fine Arts Games/Sweeps Government Health Home & Garden Internet Music News Pets Real Estate Shopping Beauty Toys Books Golf Gambling Politics Auctions Electronics Investing & Finance Manufacturing Sports & Recreation Travel & Leisure Religion Science & Technology AND MUCH MORE! For Opt-in sales call Daniel at 1-949-453-8353 Try a 5,000 opt-in e-mail for Only $325.00 and start getting sales! ************************************************************************************* Start getting the exposure your website needs and the buzz it deserves. ************************************************************************************* *SPECIAL ORDER OPT-IN LIST NOW AVAILABLE* AD EXECUTIVES PROFILE: Reach 100% Opt-in email advertising executives and sales management decision makers. These are the web's most sought after users who make significant purchase decisions for their companies and specifically for their marketing related activities. They decide on media, email marketing, trade show participation, trade show booths, travel, incentives, promotions, sales training, sweepstakes prizes, web advertising, hotel convention space, presentation materials, presentation equipment, and much more. DEMOGRAPHICS/E-PROFILE These are highly educated, sales & marketing oriented executives, some holding titles of CMO, VP Marketing, VP Sales, VP Sales & Marketing, Marketing Manager, Sales Manager, Media Manager, Account Supervisor, and others. CURRENT LIST USAGE: New to Market CURRENT LIST COUNT: 16,000+ PRICE: $4,000 COMMENTS: Very powerful and Effective!! CALL TO ORDER: 1-402-597-4111 If you would like us to build a "Custom" Opt-in subscriber list for you, Call Mike at 1-402-597-4111 Are you currently Marketing on the Internet? Give us a call. We have low cost tools to help you succeed. Would you like instant traffic? We can redirect traffic from our Search Engines to your WebSite instantly! Skip the hard to get ranked within a search engine game. Here's a deal! Get 1,000,000 banner impressions for ONLY $1,500. Full stat page for tracking. Call Mike at 1-402-597-4111 Opt-in List Owners and Brokers Welcome. NO LIST TO SMALL. Opt-out - Media2001USA@yahoo.com Please put your email address within the subject line. Are you currently using a permission based Opt-in email list? Give us a try. We have double opt-in lists that out perform everyone. To prove it, we are offering a Special Promotion. We will send your message in HTML or Text, your choice of category, to a (permission based double opt-in) email list for you, for less than 6.5 cents per address! For Opt-in sales call Daniel: 1-949-453-8353


Mike Lennart has managed to confuse me with his latest message. At one point he mentioned that you and I would do a joint overview paper . Now he suggests we choose 5-10 co-authors but also refers to "other people in our section" who he has apparently already informed , need "to consult with you (ie us) as required" (my emphasis). As for my opinion of the theme or content of our section , I suggest it be "quantifying Natural and Anthropogenic influences on the course of Global climate during recent millennia" or some such . This allows for the review , redefinition of Global climate history (Southern as well as Northern , and moisture as well as Temperature). Importantly , it also incorporates the issue of forcing history(ies) and work quantifying the influence of these histories - using simple empirical techniques or using them in conjunction with models of different complexity to attribute causes of this change. I am happy to go with the "usual suspects" in the overview paper , but would be happy if we considered others who are also running controlled model/data comparisons (examples are Von Storch , Simon Tett , Caspar Ammann). We need first to clarify whether we will present one large , multi-author presentation/paper or whether it is just me and you and the others divided into other papers/presentations/posters. Should we copy this message to Lennart or contact him directly with specific questions? Keith At 09:49 PM 5/18/03 -0400, you wrote: Hi Keith, I hope all is well. Apparently, we're supposed to choose 5-10 additional "co-authors"? I guess the obvious ones would be Phil, Tim, Ray, Malcolm, perhaps Ed Cook, Scott Rutherford,...any other suggestions? As I understand it, the co-authors would be invited to attend and present in the poster session; I assume they are listed separately from you and I who will jointly present the oral overview. As for the theme, I'm assuming "climate changes of the past couple/few millennia" or something like that. As we have 45 minutes total between the two of us, I would suggest we each take about 20 minutes, and then we'll have 5 minutes left for questions. Any suggestions, thoughts would be greatly appreciated. thanks, mike X-Sender: m214001@regen.dkrz.de Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 22:53:58 +0200 To: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, mann@virginia.edu From: "Prof. Dr. Lennart Bengtsson" Subject: Clivar Conference 2004 Cc: bengtsson@dkrz.de, kornelia.mueller@dkrz.de -- Dear Dr. Mann, Dear Dr. Briffa, The preparation of the Clivar conference is progressing well and all invited speakers have now agreed (See attached draft program). As I have informed you previously Journal of Climate will have a special issue devoted to the Conference and I expect you would be willing to prepare a paper to be ready at the time of the conference. I have made arrangements with the chief editor to make a flexible interpretation of the content of the papers so to agree with the objective of the conference and the draft program. We would now like you to come up with a suitable theme for your presentation at the conference as well a list of names which you have selected as co-authors. As we anticipate a broad and forward-looking contribution I believe some 5-10 people seems appropriate. It was our intention that the first person listed should be the lead author but you can arrange this otherwise if you prefer to do so. I have informed the other speakers in your section to consult with you as required. For the conference I expect a rather wide audience in addition to a broad scientific community including representatives from different agencies such as the meteorological services, as well as media representatives. For the media we intend to provide a special set of information. In view of the societal importance of the CLIVAR program and the considerable progress in extended range forecasts and climate change assessment and prediction I believe there will be an excellent opportunity to bring the scientific progress and associated applications of CLIVAR to the participants of the conference. It would be very helpful if you could to let me know the status of your arrangements not later than June 15. If you see any particular difficulties please let me know as soon as possible. As you can see from the attached program each part of the conference will have poster sessions. The poster sessions will be an important part of the conference and I anticipate that some of your co-authors will prepare such posters. We also plan to have the poster contents on a CD ROM prior to the conference. The practical planning of the conference as a whole is proceeding well. The arrangements in Baltimore are quite excellent with the nearby Baltimore inner harbor as a particular attractive focal point. There are all reasons that the conference will be a success both scientifically and socially. See further the Clivar Conference website: [1] We are presently exploring the possibilities for financial support of selected participants. However, any support you may manage to obtain from national funds would be most helpful. With my very best regards Lennart Bengtsson ______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: mann@virginia.edu Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 [2] -- Professor Keith Briffa, Climatic Research Unit University of East Anglia Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K. Phone: +44-1603-593909 Fax: +44-1603-507784 [3] References 1.  2.  3.  4.


SUNTRUST ONLINE BANKING ALERT: Banking with SunTrust Online is about to become even more secure! As a valued SunTrust online customer, the security of your identity and personal account information is extremely important. We are installing Enhanced Online Security as an additional way of protecting your SunTrust access. Enhancing Your Online Security Access will allow SunTrust banking to verify your identity from your computer anywhere you bank online. Your online account access information's would be recognized and be notified you've signed on to SunTrust online banking. This two-way process ensures that both parties are confident of each other's identity. Every customer that uses SunTrust online banking is required to Re-activate his or her Online Security. Click on sign in, in your Online Banking page for quick and easy process to Re-activate your Online Security Access . Sign in to Online Banking [1] Thanks for taking the time to learn about our upcoming plan for Enhanced Online Security - it's one more way that SunTrust Building Society online banking can make your online banking experience better. Endeavour to fill in your Memorable word correctly (c) 2016 All Rights Reserved Links: ------ [1]


EFTPS ONLINE THE ESAIEST WAY TO PAY YOUR FEDREAL TAXES Your Federal Tax Payment ID: 01037591840 has been not accepted. Pelase, make sure that all inofrmation you have submitted is correct and refer to Code R21 to find out the inforamtion about comapny pamyent. Pelase cnotact this page if you have any questions: Reutrn Reason Code R21 - The identifiaction nubmer you entreed in the Comapny Idetnification Feild is not functional. Try senidng informtaion to your acconutant adivser using other otpions. EFTPS: The Electronic Federal Tax Payment System WARNING! You are uisng an Ofifcial United States Government System, which may be used only for authroized purposes. Unauthorized modification of any information stored on this sytsem may result in criminal prosecution. The Goevrnment may monitor and audit the usage of system, and all presons are hereby notified that the use of this system cosntitutes cosnent to such monitoring and auditing. Unauthorized attempts to upload inofrmation and/or change information on this web site are srtictly prohibited and are subject to porsecution under theCmoputer Farud and Abuse Act of 1986 and Title 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001 and 1030.


March 2011 Dear Customer, Due to a recent upgrade in our server, we are currently reviewing member's account and we request you to please take just a second out of your time to comply with this upgrade for effect on your account, Please Click Here To Start Failure to comply might lead to suspension or problem accessing your account. Thank you for using HSBC Bank Middle East Limited.


Citibank is constantly working to ensure security by regularly screening the accounts in our system. We recently reviewed your account, and we need more information to help us provide you with a secure service. Until we can collect this information, your access to your account features will be restricted. We would like to restore your access as soon as possible, and we apologize for the inconvenience. Why is my account access restricted?Your account access has been restricted for the following reason(s): 9 May 2009: We have reason to believe that your account was accessed by a third party as different computers have logged into your Online Banking account and multiple password failures where presented before the logons. We now need you to re-confirm your account information to us. We understand that having restricted access can be an inconvenience, but protecting your account is our primary concern. How can I restore my account access?Please visit the link below, log into your account and complete the secure verification form: In accordance with our Online Banking User Agreement, your account access will remain restricted until the issue has been resolved. Unfortunately, if access to your account remains restricted for an extended period of time, we will be forced to close your account as it may have been used for fraudulent purposes. We encourage you to log in to your Online Banking account as soon as possible to help avoid this. Thank you for your patience, Citibank Customer Service Please do not reply to this email. This mailbox is not monitored and you will not receive a response. Copyright © 2009 Citigroup


Democrats already seized on Mr. Trump's announcement as proof of his disingenuity. "This is one more example that voters can't take Donald Trump at his word," said DNC communications director Luis Miranda. "He'll say anything to get elected, so long as it personally benefits him." >>>>>>>>>> Donald Trump Won't Self-Fund General-Election Campaign Presumptive Republican nominee plans to create 'world-class finance organization' to back campaign By MONICA LANGLEY and REBECCA BALLHAUS Updated May 4, 2016 6:54 p.m. ET Donald Trump won't self-fund his general-election campaign, and will instead create a "world-class finance organization," the presumptive Republican nominee said in an interview on Wednesday. For a campaign expected to cost more than $1 billion, "I'll be putting up money, but won't be completely self-funding, as I did during the primaries," Mr. Trump said on Wednesday. The New York businessman, who did receive some mostly small unsolicited donations, lent his campaign $36 million of the $47 million he spent through March. That plan represents a shift for Mr. Trump, who has for months portrayed his Republican opponents as "puppets" for relying on super PACs and taking contributions from wealthy donors that he said came with strings attached. Mr. Trump is planning to use his expansive personal Rolodex to ensure his campaign has the resources to compete against likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in November, while the campaign will tap into a new base of Trump supporters who aren't on party rolls, two Trump advisers said. The presumptive Republican nominee, known for operating on a tight budget in a primary where he enjoyed more than $2 billion in free media attention , is also likely to implement a business plan that may be less costly than traditional political campaigns, a senior aide said. The campaign is also beginning to work with the Republican National Committee to set up a joint fundraising vehicle, after his last two rivals-Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov.John Kasich -dropped out in the wake of Mr. Trump's resounding Indiana win on Tuesday . He plans to actively help the Republican Party and other GOP candidates with fundraising through events, direct-mail and online appeals, an aide said. Beginning to actively solicit donations, while a super PAC backing him also ramps up his activity, means the billionaire will no longer be able to attack his Democratic opponent in the general election for being beholden to special interests and wealthy donors as he did in the primary. The move is also likely to put off some Trump supporters, many of whom have said his self-funding makes them trust him more than other politicians. "I don't think that special interests can buy him," William Boardwine, an electrician for the mining industry in Grundy, Va., said in an interview last month. Democrats already seized on Mr. Trump's announcement as proof of his disingenuity. "This is one more example that voters can't take Donald Trump at his word," said DNC communications director Luis Miranda. "He'll say anything to get elected, so long as it personally benefits him." The Trump campaign was rushing on Wednesday to put its finance team in place, because it hadn't expected to focus on the general-election fundraising phase until after the California primary June 7. That is when Mr. Trump expected Mr. Cruz and Mr. Kasich to suspend their campaigns. Instead, they surprised his operation by quitting in the span of less than 24 hours, with Mr. Cruz bowing out Tuesday and Mr. Kasich on Wednesday . Already, the Trump campaign has raised $12 million from donors, largely from contributions of $200 or less-nearly as much as Mr. Kasich had raised in total. Though Mr. Trump had for months denied that he was seeking donations, his campaign website features a large, red "Donate" button, and it frequently texts supporters a link to its merchandise store, whose proceeds go to support his candidacy. "Donald generated such broad-based support that we're looking to tap into existing party members as well as the new people that have joined the party for him," said Steven Mnuchin, CEO of Dune Capital Management LP, named as Trump campaign national finance chair, on Wednesday. As the general-election candidate, Mr. Trump will set up a "joint fundraising agreement" with the RNC under which part of the proceeds raised go to the convention, RNC and his campaign operations. Mr. Trump will help raise money for the fund, as well as likely make his own donation to it, a Trump campaign official said. There are limits on how much of the money raised by the committee can be used to directly help his candidacy. The committee can't transfer individual donations that are higher than that $2,700 cap to Mr. Trump's campaign, although it allows donors to write larger checks meant to benefit the campaign and the party. The party can accept checks of up to $334,000 but only $33,400 of that can be used for explicit candidate advocacy. The rest must be earmarked for conventions, headquarter maintenance and the cost of election recounts. Mr. Trump's creation of a joint fundraising operation comes eight months behind that of his likely general-election foe, Mrs. Clinton. She and the Democratic National Committee reached an agreement last August to create the Hillary Victory Fund, which raised more than $60 million through the end of March. Of that, about $13 million has been transferred to Mrs. Clinton's campaign, while nearly $6 million has gone to the DNC. Mrs. Clinton has raised more than $213 million for her campaign through the end of April, on top of more than $67 million raised by her allied super PACs. In 2012, Mitt Romney -who would become his party's nominee-began raising money jointly with the RNC in early April. That fund had already collected $22 million at this point in the race, and raised a total of $137 million by the end of June. At the time of its creation, some top fundraisers for Mr. Romney expressed concern that the committee had been formed too late, since President Barack Obama had begun jointly fundraising with the DNC the previous fall. "It takes a while to get the apparatus in place and then to get the checks rolling," saidBrian Ballard, a Florida lobbyist and member of Mr. Romney's national finance team in 2012. He said he was glad efforts were beginning now for the 2016 race "and not after California." Mr. Ballard said the Trump campaign has begun reaching out to fundraisers in Florida. "The Republican fundraising infrastructure will be put into full swing here pretty soon," he said. Further complicating Mr. Trump's strategic shift is his late start in wooing donors, many of whom he had criticized for months. Two major backers of Mr. Cruz said in interviews Wednesday that they had never heard from the Trump campaign, though they were open to backing the businessman. Still, a delayed start may not prove a problem for Mr. Trump. Several wealthy donors have already said they would back him if he became the nominee , and billionaire Home Depot Inc. co-founder Ken Langone said Wednesday he was "all in" for Mr. Trump. In addition, the candidate has said his wealthy friends are prepared to cut checks. The super PAC backing Mr. Trump, meanwhile, is also seeking to ramp up its fundraising operation. Eric Beach, Great America PAC's fundraiser, said super PAC officials have received about 75 calls, mostly from donors, since Mr. Cruz exited the race on Tuesday evening. The group plans to add dozens of staffers to its payroll and will announce new members of its finance committee in the next weeks. In an interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Wednesday morning, Mr. Trump called Ed Rollins, the super PAC's newly hired co-chairman, "so tremendous" and said he would decide in the next week whether he would welcome the support of super PACs. The campaign cannot legally coordinate with the super PAC under federal campaign finance laws. But Great America PAC, which has raised $1.2 million since January and last month launched a $1 million ad campaign, already feels it has the green light, Mr. Beach said. "We are the outside organization that's going to help Trump win the election," he said. In a conference call with donors on Wednesday that also featured former presidential candidate Ben Carson, Mr. Rollins said the super PAC will actively seek to fill in holes in the campaign. "Usually a super PAC is frosting on a cake," he said. "We're going to be part of the cake." He said the Trump campaign, which he called "more than adequate," was missing several components of a traditional operation, such as an opposition-research arm and a polling expert, areas the super PAC would aim to cover. The group plans to hire an opposition-research team in the next two weeks. Mr. Rollins also stressed the avalanche of cash that will soon be unleashed against Mr. Trump by Mrs. Clinton's campaign and her friendly super PAC, Priorities USA Action. "The Democratic world is going to raise an enormous sum of money," he said. "They're licking their chops." Write to Monica Langley at monica.langley@wsj.com and Rebecca Ballhaus atRebecca.Ballhaus@wsj.com Mark Paustenbach National Press Secretary & Deputy Communications Director Democratic National Committee W: 202.863.8148 paustenbachm@dnc.org