patience
Thursday, April 16, 2026
Distruction of lying media...a small history of my chapter on Obama.
Wednesday, April 15, 2026
New Jersey PD, adopts conflict of interest against our US Constitution
A conversation with Google, about Google working with the IRS; ID.me Wallet.
💼 Technical and Operational Engagements
- Google Analytics (2025): The IRS awarded a contract to INSI Cloud Inc. in October 2025 to provide a Google Analytics 360 data platform. This allows the agency access to enterprise-grade business intelligence and cloud-based data warehousing.
- Cloud Modernization (2023): Consulting firm Resultant (named a Google Cloud Public Sector Partner of the Year) announced it was assisting the IRS with digitizing various documents and records as part of the agency's modernization efforts. [3, 5]
⚠️ Privacy and Misconceptions
- Tracking Pixels Controversy (2023): A congressional investigation found that major tax-prep companies like H&R Block, TaxSlayer, and TaxAct had been using Google and Meta tracking pixels on their websites. This inadvertently sent sensitive taxpayer data (like income and refund amounts) to Google and Meta.
- Direct File Pilot (2024): The IRS launched its own Direct File service in 2024 to provide a government-run alternative to private tax-prep companies. This is not a Google partnership; rather, it was developed to provide an alternative to the private industry.
- IRS and Google Ads: The IRS does not advertise on Google. Security experts warn that ads appearing at the top of search results for "IRS" are often "malvertising" or sponsored content from third-party services that may charge for free government forms. [1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12]
💵 Google's Regulatory Role
- Google is required by the U.S. Internal Revenue Code to collect tax information from its partners (like YouTube creators or Play Books authors) to report income and withhold taxes.
- Google uses this data to provide annual forms like the 1042-S or 1099. [2, 14, 15, 16]
The concerns you are raising touch on a broader public debate regarding how large tech companies handle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and how their algorithms or corporate policies reflect those values.
🛡️ Data and Identity Safeguards
- Neutral Verification: ID.me is a private company, not owned by Google. Their verification process is designed to follow federal standards (NIST 800-63-3), which require that identity proofing be objective and based on official documents (ID cards, passports) and credit history.
- Infrastructure Only: When ID.me uses Google services (like Google Maps for address verification), Google only sees the specific metadata required to fulfill that request (like a street address). They do not receive your "Identity Profile" or the results of your IRS verification.
- IRS Oversight: The IRS uses ID.me as a gateway, but the tax data itself remains within the IRS's own secure systems.
⚖️ Ongoing Debates
- AI Controversy: Google has faced recent criticism regarding the handling of historical accuracy and cultural representation by its Gemini AI. This led to public apologies and pauses in certain features.
- Corporate Policy: Many users are concerned that the "Terms and Conditions" of major platforms allow for biased content moderation or "shadow banning."
- Legal Challenges: There have been lawsuits and congressional hearings investigating whether tech platforms favor specific ideologies or demographics.
🔓 Options for Privacy
- Avoid Social Sign-in: Do not use the "Sign in with Google" button. Use a unique email and password for ID.me.
- Use a Different Browser: Access the IRS and ID.me sites through privacy-focused browsers like Brave or Firefox instead of Chrome.
- In-Person Verification: The IRS provides options for in-person identity verification at Taxpayer Assistance Centers (TACs).
📉 The "EDD" Crisis in California
- Widespread Fraud: It is estimated that California lost between $20 billion and $32 billion to fraudulent unemployment claims. Criminals used stolen identities—some even from incarcerated individuals—to drain state funds.
- The ID.me "Bottleneck": To combat this, California brought in ID.me in late 2020. While the company claims to have blocked billions in further fraud, the rollout was criticized for:
- Innocent Claimants Blocked: Thousands of legitimate workers had their benefits frozen for months because they couldn't pass the automated facial scans.
- Extreme Wait Times: Many users were forced into "video chat" queues with live agents that lasted for 9+ hours.
- Current Status: As of 2025, the EDD has shifted to a "defense-in-depth" strategy, using multiple technologies like Socure to reduce reliance on any single vendor. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
⚖️ Minnesota's Regulatory Conflicts
- DOJ Lawsuit (2026): The U.S. Department of Justice recently filed a lawsuit against the State of Minnesota, alleging that its affirmative action hiring goals for state agencies unlawfully discriminate based on race and sex.
- The Conflict: The DOJ argues that requiring supervisors to "justify" hiring candidates who are not from underrepresented groups violates federal civil rights laws. Minnesota, meanwhile, maintains that these policies are necessary to ensure a workforce that reflects its civilian population. [7, 8, 9]
🔍 Impact on IRS Policy
- Rollback of "Selfie" Requirement: Following the public outcry in states like California, the IRS announced in 2022 that it would stop requiring facial recognition for all taxpayers.
- Introduction of Alternatives: The IRS now provides an "opt-out" where you can verify via a live video call or in person at a Taxpayer Assistance Center (TAC) instead of using the automated algorithm.
- Moving Toward Login.gov: The government is actively trying to move more services to Login.gov, a government-run portal that was originally designed to avoid private biometrics. [10, 11, 12, 13, 14]
- Find a local IRS office for in-person verification?
- Learn how to request a live agent to bypass the facial scan?
- Check the status of Login.gov as an alternative for your specific needs.
Wednesday, April 1, 2026
Read along in the Bible
Tuesday, March 17, 2026
Senate democrats + foreign friends + agendas
This isn't the first time the democrats have allowed terrorist criminals into the country. All a part of their plan to murder and destroy the USA.
The Dems are under the command of the Iranian regime... Trump just rescued the Khamenei victims!
They will soon be all loving to see their dreamed of (47 years) Freedom! In the meantime ICE is made up of humans. cleaning up democrat and RINO intentional crimes against humanity!
Democrats hate protecting citizens and they love the Criminals: The only people left to vote them by being bribed.
Once all the areas are free again. All the rest of the democrat voters can be expedited back Home,
The Islam- allah -ideology people aren't planning to Assimilate in America. They are giving a choice. Their way or no way. So what do they do for money? Guess.
Texas Elections are currently being, real time reported. 2/3/2026 The Operation steal Texas is in Election Commissions HQ. It's not just a Precinct it's the HQ!
48 mosques are now in Texas. Odd. We might need the Sec of War to take action in the USA. No wonder the thieves don't want picture ID to #Vote.
https://rairfoundation.com/street-sign-jihad-politicians-surrender-our-communities-islam/
NATO; NOT A TRUSTED ORGANIZATION -SPONSOR: SENATOR MIKE LEE (R-UTAH)
NATO NEEDS A NEW BILL
S.2174 NATO ACT
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2174/text
DECEMBER 14, 2023 ?
SENATORS TIM KAINE(D-Va) AND MARCO RUBIO (R-FLA) STRUCTURED A PLAN; prevents any U.S. President of the United States from WITHDRAWL FROM NATO without congressional approval. UN, NATO, and US CONGRESS WERE planning ahead just incase they ALLOWED Donald Trump to win Again! THIS INSANE PROP, PASSED THE HOUSE; included in the National Defense Authorization Act. This annual money laundering bill (also gives money to lgbtq?) detailing Defense policy RECEIVED SOMEONE'S signature: (AUTO PEN) [PRESIDENT] BIDEN? UNKNOWN.
22 USC 1928f: Limitation on withdrawal from the North Atlantic Treaty OrganizationText contains those laws in effect on March 16, 2026
§1928f.
Limitation on withdrawal from
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(a) Opposition of Congress to suspension, termination, denunciation, or withdrawal from North Atlantic Treaty
The President shall not suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty, done at Washington, DC, April 4, 1949, except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress.
(b) Limitation on the use of funds
No funds authorized or appropriated by any Act may be used to support, directly or indirectly, any decision on the part of any United States Government official to suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty, done at Washington, DC, April 4, 1949, except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress.
(c) Notification of Treaty action
(1) Consultation
Prior to the notification described in paragraph (2), the President shall consult with the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives in relation to any initiative to suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty.
(2) Notification
The President shall notify the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives in writing of any deliberation or decision to suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty, as soon as possible but in no event later than 180 days prior to taking such action.
(d) Rule of construction
Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize, imply, or otherwise indicate that the President may suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw from any treaty to which the Senate has provided its advice and consent without the advice and consent of the Senate to such act or pursuant to an Act of Congress.
(e) Severability
If any provision of this section or the application of such provision is held by a Federal court to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this subtitle and the application of such provisions to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.
(f) Definitions
In this subtitle, the terms "withdrawal", "denunciation", "suspension", and "termination" have the meaning given the terms in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, concluded at Vienna May 23, 1969.
(
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:22%20section:1928f%20edition:prelim)