There's more in the OIG report about IJ hiring than just the sexual harassment stuff. In this example, a senior EOIR employee involved in IJ hiring personally intervened for one candidate and replaced one of the judges on her hiring panel "to improve her chances of being hired." https://t.co/SxRD5lYmDu

It was his day off, but he came into the office anyway to intervene in this particular candidate's hiring. He invited her to his office to admire the view, escorted her to the interview room, and then invited her to his apartment afterward to change clothes.
It's alarming how much of this report is redacted - and there are more records they haven't turned over. The OIG said these actions communicated to the hiring panel that she was his close friend and that he "was providing her preferential treatment based on his relationship"
He had already written her a recommendation letter and wasn't supposed to be involved in her hiring process at all.
Aside from the specific individuals the article names, the OIG report says the use of code words to rate attractiveness was so widely known, one person said she had heard it from "enough people that I can't even remember."
One person the OIG interviewed said this group would use their code words about female candidates as a way to "poke at" a female employee because they knew it "bugged" her. Imagine the kind of workplace culture that allows this.
The investigation by @TalKopan named one of them. But the OIG report was broader - it said "senior managers" at EOIR had developed these code words. And one of them, when interviewed by the OIG, had not told the truth about it. The OIG report chalks it up to "poor judgment"
Aside from rating female IJ candidates, a group of EOIR employees made sexual jokes in the workplace.
The OIG said this conduct didn't violate the DOJ's policies because the conduct was not "unwelcome." Just "poor judgment" they said.

More from Society

global health policy in 2020 has centered around NPI's (non-pharmaceutical interventions) like distancing, masks, school closures

these have been sold as a way to stop infection as though this were science.

this was never true and that fact was known and knowable.

let's look.


above is the plot of social restriction and NPI vs total death per million. there is 0 R2. this means that the variables play no role in explaining one another.

we can see this same relationship between NPI and all cause deaths.

this is devastating to the case for NPI.


clearly, correlation is not proof of causality, but a total lack of correlation IS proof that there was no material causality.

barring massive and implausible coincidence, it's essentially impossible to cause something and not correlate to it, especially 51 times.

this would seem to pose some very serious questions for those claiming that lockdowns work, those basing policy upon them, and those claiming this is the side of science.

there is no science here nor any data. this is the febrile imaginings of discredited modelers.

this has been clear and obvious from all over the world since the beginning and had been proven so clearly by may that it's hard to imagine anyone who is actually conversant with the data still believing in these responses.

everyone got the same R
Two things can be true at once:
1. There is an issue with hostility some academics have faced on some issues
2. Another academic who himself uses threats of legal action to bully colleagues into silence is not a good faith champion of the free speech cause


I have kept quiet about Matthew's recent outpourings on here but as my estwhile co-author has now seen fit to portray me as an enabler of oppression I think I have a right to reply. So I will.

I consider Matthew to be a colleague and a friend, and we had a longstanding agreement not to engage in disputes on twitter. I disagree with much in the article @UOzkirimli wrote on his research in @openDemocracy but I strongly support his right to express such critical views

I therefore find it outrageous that Matthew saw fit to bully @openDemocracy with legal threats, seeking it seems to stifle criticism of his own work. Such behaviour is simply wrong, and completely inconsistent with an academic commitment to free speech.

I am not embroiling myself in the various other cases Matt lists because, unlike him, I think attention to the detail matters and I don't have time to research each of these cases in detail.

You May Also Like

@franciscodeasis https://t.co/OuQaBRFPu7
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the


chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project

starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".

P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!

https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?