The digital director of Donald Trump’s presidential election campaign has revealed how he helped get the businessman elected.

Brad Parscale, a man who’s been described as “the genius who won Trump’s campaign,” by The Washington Post, said that Facebook had helped spread Trump’s message to voters.

Speaking at the Web Summit in Lisbon, Portugal, on Wednesday, Parscale said that his background in advertising and marketing helped him see that Trump was a “great product” who was easy to promote to the American public.

“I think I had come from a consumer world for a long time and America and eyeballs were moving to social media in huge numbers, especially on mobile phones and devices. And when Donald Trump asked me to work on the campaign I also knew I had a great piece of product that would resonate with Americans,” he said.

“You want a great product, you want things that resonate with people and make them dance.”

The election of Trump to the US presidency a year ago was largely credited to an internet campaign led by Parscale that utilized social media platforms such as Facebook to spread his political views, a strategy first employed with success by his predecessor Barack Obama.

In October, Parscale credited Facebook with helping to fuel Trump’s win last November, saying during an interview with CBS News that the Trump campaign had Facebook employees “embedded inside our offices” to explain how to use the platform to target voters. Facebook said in a statement that it had offered both the Trump and Clinton campaigns “identical support.”

Brad Parscale: Trump team used Facebook to help win the White House from CNBC.

HOW FACEBOOK HELPED

Parscale said Wednesday that the Facebook campaign had enabled Trump to “raise a lot of money” from grassroots supporters – up to US$280 million, he said. But, in turn, a lot of money had been spent on advertising on the social media platform, allowing the Trump campaign to compete with Hillary Clinton’s Democratic campaign.

“When Donald Trump became the (Republican) candidate we didn’t have any money other than Mr Trump’s money and I don’t think he wanted to write that check all himself… We needed to create a grassroots campaign and we needed to go out and find millions of people to be our supporters and Facebook allowed us to do that in alarming numbers, very fast,” Parscale said.

Brad Parscale: Trump team used Facebook to help win the White House Brad Parscale: Trump team used Facebook to help win the White House

He said social media platforms queued up to help the Trump campaign, wanting a share of its advertising spending: “If you’re going to spend US$100 million on social media, a lot of people show up at your office wanting to help you spend that money on their platforms, so Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Google – they were all wanting to have that money.”

Facebook had helped to provide advice on how best to use its platform to engage with a wider audience, Parscale said: “They have lots of products, they’re a very big company and said, ‘Please educate me and my staff in everything that you can,'” something he claimed the Hillary Clinton campaign had not taken advantage of.

Parscale’s interview at the Web Summit came a day after the Republican party was dealt a blow Tuesday, when Democrat Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam won the race for governor of Virginia, defeating Republican Ed Gillespie. Parscale responded to the Democrat victory by saying there were “always ebbs and flows” in politics and that he thought “the Republican Party is in a great place for 2018 and I think Americans will continue to support the Trump agenda.”

Asked whether Trump had let down voters by not following through on some of his promises, such as a pledge to fix infrastructure in the US, Parscale said Trump had “three more years to fix infrastructure” and that he wasn’t disappointed in his presidency so far.

“I think he’s done a ton, I think he’s done more than any other US president we’ve had in a long time. Right now he’s focused on tax reform and that’s a thing to put more money in the pockets of middle-class Americans and that’s what they want,” he said.

This article was first published in CNBC.

Only one judge said ex-premier did not have ill intent in rice-pledging scheme

The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders on Tuesday published the full combined verdict as well as individual judgements of nine judges in the case against fugitive former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra regarding her government’s rice-pledging scheme.

The full 95-page verdict was read on September 27 in absentia after Yingluck fled the country before the scheduled first reading of the verdict on August 25. She was subsequently found guilty of malfeasance and sentenced to five years in prison.

Of the nine judges, Pison Pirun was the only one who ruled that she was not guilty. The eight others provided similar reasons that Yingluck had been aware of extensive corruption in the rice-pledging scheme.

As prime minister at the time, she had received notice from relevant agencies, such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and the Office of Auditor-General, warning of possible negative impacts, particularly to the national treasury, the eight judges wrote.

An aggravating factor was the motion of no confidence that the opposition party had raised to expose irregularities in the flagship scheme.

However, Yingluck had allowed the scheme to proceed even though she, as head of government, had the necessary authority and resources to end the programme before it hurt the country, the judges concluded.

Each of the eight judges who ruled Yingluck guilty provided judgments individually, with the verdicts ranging from 80 to 120 pages. Pison’s verdict was relatively concise at 14 pages.

He said the Attorney-General had prosecuted Yingluck for negligence or misconduct, but according to the law the offence must be accompanied by ill intentions to cause loss to others.

The act of negligence alone did not count as an offence in light of the laws cited by the Attorney-General, Pison argued. Although the prosecutor had proven the rice-pledging scheme was plagued with corruption, there was no evidence that Yingluck had benefited, Pison wrote.

Although the prosecutor and Yingluck had argued extensively about whether the rice-pledging scheme had caused losses or been beneficial to the economy, Pison wrote that those arguments were irrelevant in the context of the law.

He also rejected Yingluck’s arguments regarding judicial power as irrelevant. Pison summed up his verdict by ruling that the case against Yingluck should be dismissed.

Cheep

It is true that the (former) prime minister had the duty to direct the grand policy, but overseeing the implementation was equally important, especially in regard to the graft-combating and prevention policy, which had also been declared before Parliament.

The defendant [Yingluck] should not have relied solely on reports from relevant agencies. When they reported that irregularities had not been found, Yingluck was negligent and took no further action.

This was despite the fact that she had legal and economic advisers.

If Yingluck had not been negligent of her duty, the huge loss incurred by corruption could have been prevented.

Yingluck also had authority and sufficient time to put a halt to the delivery of the rice in the fake G2G (government-to-government) deals, but failed to do so.

This demonstrated Yingluck was negligent, and appeared to intend to help people in the fake G2G case to gain profit.

Thanarirk

Yingluck, as the prime minister and head of the national rice policy committee, had the responsibility to oversee all the heads of the subcommittees she had appointed.

But … she allowed those people to commit fraud.

Also, despite the fact that anti-corruption agencies and no-confidence motions had alerted her to the case, Yingluck failed to stop the corruption, which resulted in losses.

Such an action was malfeasance. When Yingluck was aware of the corruption, and failed to stop it, this meant that she had a motivation to incur losses to the national treasury and the country.

Ubonrat

The fact that the national rice policy committee resolved to continue pledging prices regardless of the huge deficit showed the scheme was completely political, rather than in the national interest.

At the time, the programme was facing a serious liquidity crunch and needed a way out.

As the committee refused to reduce the pledged prices, the government did not have the money to pay farmers.

Consequently, the rice growers were affected greatly. Although the committee later limited the amount of rice in the scheme, a huge loss had already been incurred.

Yingluck may argue she had appointed other officials to be in charge of the matter. But she could not deny or be free from the duty and responsibility.

When she learned of the loss and did nothing to stop it, she was guilty of negligence.

Thanasit

After it had been exposed that the supposed G2G rice deals was involved with a local company owned by Sia Piang, Yingluck did not do anything to pursue the truth.

Her negligence contradicted with the policy she had laid out before the parliament that she would prevent and suppress corruption.

So, the illegal trades in the fake G2G continued as Yingluck did not do anything to stop it. 

This was anormal especially as Yingluck was the prime minister and the head of the national rice policy committee who had the direct responsibility to direct and scrutinise the scheme and ensure transparency.

Sophon

Yingluck’s excuse that the distribution of the rice in the fake G2G rice deals had been confidential and she had no knowledge of it could not be true.

Yingluck had given interviews at least twice, demonstrating that she acknowledged the results of the fake deals.

That included the distribution, the payment and the amount of the rice involved.

This meant that Yingluck was aware that there had been fraud in the distribution process in the fake G2G rice deals.

Or at least, she must have been aware when the issue was raised in a censure motion.

Yingluck, as prime minister, was the head of all government agencies.

In such a case, Yingluck should have exercised her power and stopped the distribution of rice to prevent damages to the national budget.

Wiroon

In the prevention of corruption, the national rice policy committee agreed to set up subcommittees to scrutinise the existing committees.

As it turned out, Yingluck appointed the same people to these panels to scrutinise themselves. Of course, no irregularities were found as a result.

This showed that Yingluck was negligent, failing to inspect the implementation of the rice-pledging scheme to ensure transparency.

Although later the irregularities were exposed in a censure motion in parliament, nothing had been done to stop further transactions and the delivery of the rice.

This was regardless of her responsibility, authority and resources to scrutinise the scheme and put an end to the corruption.

Even when Boonsong Teriyapirom, then commerce minister, had been accused of fraud in the scheme, Yingluck still went on and allowed him to make more rice deals.

Thanit

Yingluck said she had already sacked Boonsong. But that was after a huge loss had already been incurred.

Such an argument could not be used to defend the case.

Her argument that the distribution of the rice had not been under her responsibility, and she could not possibly intervene without going against the administrative principal, was also unreasonable.

Yingluck was the person who appointed Boonsong into the position; she had all the authority to order scrutiny of him.

As the prime minister and head of the national rice policy committee, Yingluck had the authority to oversee implementation and measures in the scheme directly.

Furthermore, she also had the authority over all government agencies, which would have been sufficient to put a halt to the corruption-plagued scheme.

Salaikate

When it appeared that there could have been irregularities in the distribution of rice, Yingluck did not follow the process closely.

Rather, she appointed the same group of people who had been allegedly involved with fraud to the scrutinising committee.

This was regardless of how these people attempted to conceal the facts concerning the rice distribution.

Yingluck was directly in charge to oversee these people.

Even after the motion of no confidence, when the opposition party proposed that a minister be sacked because of the fake G2G deals, Yingluck appointed that minister to set up a scrutiny committee.

It was obvious that this meant it was difficult to obtain the truth.

Although Yingluck replaced commerce minister Boonsong with another person, it was not in time, as he had already made another four corrupt deals.

Pison’s minority opinion

According to the law, which was also cited by the accusers themselves, the defendant should not be found guilty based on malfeasance alone, but she must have had motivation to do so.

If she was negligent, but had no motivation or intention, it is not sufficient to constitute a crime. Although there was corruption in the distribution of rice in the fake G2G rice deals, it has not been proven that she benefited from it.

Sia Piang, the owner of the company that gained profits illegally through the rice deals, may have had a photograph with Yingluck’s brother Thaksin Shinawatra.

However, that is not sufficient proof that Sia Piang was also connected to Yingluck. It cannot be said that Yingluck was negligent allowing others to gain benefits from the policy.

KOLKATA – A Bangladeshi man who raped an elderly nun was sentenced to life in prison by an Indian court Wednesday, in a case that has fueled anger at high levels of sexual violence.

The 71-year-old nun needed surgery after the attack in March 2015 when a gang of robbers broke into the convent school where she lived in West Bengal state, eastern India.

“What happened to the elderly nun is a blot on West Bengal’s legacy where Mother Teresa worked for the poor,” additional judge Kumkum Singha told a packed court in state capital Kolkata, where church officials and some nuns from the convent were present.

On Tuesday the court found Nazrul Islam guilty of rape and attempted murder, among other offences.

Five others arrested, found guilty of charges unrelated to the sexual assault, were sentenced on Wednesday to 10 years in prison.

The nun, who moved out of the state after the assault, travelled to Ranaghat and identified the accused from a police line up, chief public prosecutor Tamal Mukerjee told AFP.

“She strode straight towards the accused and identified him by touching his hand,” he said.

Thomas D’Souza, the Archbishop of Kolkata, told AFP, “The incident shook the conscience of people. It took the church a long time to recover from the ghastly incident.” The nun, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was attacked after the robbers ransacked the Convent of Jesus and Mary in Ranaghat and stole cash and other items.

A holy scripture was also torn and a statue of Jesus was broken.

Priests and schoolgirls took to the streets demanding justice.

Well-wishers closed shops, shuttered schools and held candlelit vigils outside the hospital where the nun underwent surgery for injuries suffered during the attack.

Police came under fire for perceived inaction after 10 men were detained but no arrests made, despite the faces of some attackers being captured on CCTV footage.

Government data for 2015 shows 34,651 rapes in India were recorded, but campaigners say the true figure is likely to be much higher given the social stigma that still surrounds such cases.

India strengthened its laws on sexual violence after the fatal gang-rape of a Delhi student five years ago caused global outrage, but attacks remain widespread and enforcement is patchy.

The West Bengal attack also sent shockwaves through India’s small Christian community, which was already reeling from a series of attacks on churches in the months before the assault.

The trial was relocated to Kolkata at the request of the assaulted nun, who expressed fear for her safety in Ranaghat where the crime occurred.

YANGON – A 20-year-old American tourist fell to her death while trying to view the sunset from a 20-foot pagoda in Myanmar’s ancient former capital of Bagan, the government said on Wednesday (Nov 8).

The traveller, identified as Kassandra Braun, “accidentally fell from the Bagan pagoda… while looking for the sunset at 4.30pm on Nov 7”, said the Home Affairs ministry.

She died on the way to hospital in Mandalay, the statement said.

Myanmar has tried in vain to keep tourists from scaling Bagan’s temples to watch sunsets fall over its vast plain of more than 2,000 Buddhist monuments.

In 2016, the authorities tried to restrict the daily ritual to five main temples, citing the need to preserve the temples and protect tourists’ safety.

But travellers continue to scamper up many of Bagan’s smaller structures, including the 20-foot Wuttanathaw pagoda from which Braun fell.

Bagan is among Myanmar’s most venerated religious sites and a top attraction for its growing tourism industry.

Major renovations were launched after an August 2016 earthquake damaged hundreds of pagodas.