Hasta La Gadget!

Montana Republican Greg Gianforte, who was elected to Congress last month, issued a letter of apology on Wednesday for an incident in which he physically attacked Guardian journalist Ben Jacobs. 

“I had no right to respond the way I did to your legitimate question about health care policy. You were doing your job,” he wrote.

Gianforte is accused of body-slamming Jacobs after the reporter asked a question about health care policy. It was reported that Gianforte grabbed Jacobs by the neck and broke his glasses. Gianforte was charged for misdemeanor assault that evening and won Montana’s lone congressional seat the next morning.

Jacobs accepted the congressman-elect’s apology shortly after it was released. Gianforte is expected to appear in court on or before June 20. He faces a maximum punishment of six months in jail and a $500 fine for his behavior.

Experts agree that apologies, private and public alike, should contain several elements to be considered effective, according to Roy Lewicki, an apology expert and a professor emeritus of management and human resources at the Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business. 

“The tone of the letter conveys a certain amount of sincerity and genuineness,” Lewicki said. “There’s multiple expressions of regret.”

What makes an apology effective

Research by Lewicki suggests that there are six elements to an effective apology. They are, in order of importance, an acknowledgement of responsibility; an offer of repair; an expression of regret; an explanation of what went wrong; a declaration of repentance and a request for forgiveness. The more elements an apology includes, the more likely the apology is to be accepted, Lewicki said.

Gianforte’s letter is well-rounded based on these standards. Lewicki, who has analyzed prior public apologies, reviewed what makes Gianforte’s note stand out. Below is the letter to Jacobs, re-typed, with annotations of where these apology elements come into play:

Dear Mr. Jacobs: 

I write to express my sincere apology for my conduct on the evening of May 24. My physical response to your legitimate question was unprofessional, unacceptable, and unlawful [acknowledgement of responsibility]. As both a candidate for office and a public official, I should be held to a high standard in my interactions with the press and the public [acknowledgement of responsibility]. My treatment of you did not meet that standard [expression of regret].

Notwithstanding anyone’s statements to the contrary, you did not initiate any physical contact with me, and I had no right to assault you. I am sorry for what I did and the unwanted notoriety this has created for you [expression of regret]. I take full responsibility [acknowledgement of responsibility]

I understand the critical role that journalists and the media play in our society. Protections afforded to the press through the Constitution are fundamental to who we are as a nation and the way government is accountable to the people. I acknowledge that the media have an obligation to seek information. I also know that civility in our public discourse is central to a productive dialogue on issues. I had no right to respond the way I did to your legitimate question about healthcare policy [declaration of repentance]. You were doing your job. 

In the hope that perhaps some good news can come of these events, I am making a $50,000 contribution to the Committee To Protect Journalists, an independent non-profit organization that promotes press freedom and that protects the rights of journalists worldwide [offer of repair].

I made a mistake and humbly ask for your forgiveness [request for forgiveness]. 

Sincerely, 

Greg Gianforte

Gianforte’s apology repeatedly accepts responsibility and shows remorse over his actions. That matters, according to Lewicki.  

“One of the things we found in our research was that acknowledgements of responsibility were probably one of the most important components of an apology and he comes back to that several times,” Lewicki said.

Lewicki said Gianforte’s request to repair ― aka, the $50,000 donation to the Committee to Protect Journalists ― is somewhat remarkable and does a good job of expressing genuine concern. 

“That’s not chump change,” he said. 

How the apology is being received

Gianforte’s expression has received mixed results, from praise to criticism. Some believe the apology is genuine:

Others denounce the apology for glossing over the initial statement released by Shane Scanlon, a spokesperson for the Gianforte team. Immediately after the body-slamming incident, Scanlon blamed Jacobs for initiating the altercation. 

The apology letter says, “you did not initiate any physical contact with me,” but does not go into detail about the original effort to cover up what happened. 

But Lewicki says what’s more critical now is the apology Gianforte is making directly to Jacobs. However, one letter cannot determine if Gianforte is truly sorry. For that, Lewicki says time is the ultimate decider on whether the contrition sticks.

“You’ll have to look now at how Gianforte handles himself in the future,” he explained.

A solid apology is a good first step.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

When it comes to accessorizing your MacBook Pro or iMac, there are plenty of accessories out there in the market for you to choose from. However, it is all too easy to be spoilt for choice, so if you are working with a limited budget, it would be far wiser to choose your battle, so to speak. Belkin has long been a trusted name when it comes to rolling out accessories for the computing workspace, and this time around it is no different, either, with the availability of the Belkin Thunderbolt 3 Express Dock HD.

The Belkin Thunderbolt 3 Express Dock HD is best described to be a single cable all-in-one docking solution, where it claims to offer 40 Gbps data transfer rates, dual 4K video support and 85 Watts of power delivery. In other words, this is the total single-cable docking solution that one would ever need, at least for the moment, in order to enjoy connectivity as well as power to the updated MacBook Pro or iMac. Just what kind of features does the Belkin Thunderbolt 3 Express Dock HD come ith?

For starters, you will be able to daisy-chain up to five Thunderbolt devices from the dock, now how about that? In terms of Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) ports, there will be two of those, which will certainly come in handy. If you have plenty of USB 3.0 devices and accessories, the Belkin Thunderbolt 3 Express Dock HD is able to welcome three of those thanks to a trio of USB-A 3.0 ports that also offer 1.5A charging each. To round it all off, the Belkin Thunderbolt 3 Express Dock HD will also carry a single DisplayPort, one Audio In/Out port, one Audio Out port, and one Gigabit Ethernet port. It will be accompanied by a 170W power adapter that delivers enough power to support attached peripherals, all the while channeling 85W of power to your computer via included Thunderbolt 3 cable.

It might be rather pricey at first glance, but the Thunderbolt 3 Express Dock HD’s $349 price tag will certainly pay dividends many times over.

Press Release
[ Belkin Thunderbolt 3 Express Dock HD is now available copyright by Coolest Gadgets ]

Researchers have made an incredible discovery in Malaysia, where they harvested a piece of amber dating back to the Cretaceous era. Within this amber is a small bird that has been preserved in incredible detail, making it possible for scientists to recreate what this particular critter looked like…and helping shed light on the type of birds that existed long ago … Continue reading

WASHINGTON ― Summer theater means different things in different parts of America. In the suburbs, it’s dinner theater. In New York, it’s Shakespeare in the Park. In New England, it’s summer stock.

In Washington, it’s gavel-to-gavel investigative hearings on Capitol Hill.

After a series of low-level tryouts, “Trump” opened big Thursday on D.C.’s version of Broadway ― a packed Senate hearing room ― with the earnest but venomous testimony of the former FBI director, James Comey.

Within minutes of being sworn in, he’d called the man who fired him, President Donald Trump, a congenital liar; accused the president of trying to pressure him into shutting down probes into possible campaign collusion with Russia; and hinted that, while Trump was not originally an investigative target, he might end up being one, if for no other reason than he may be obstructing justice.

The semicircle of senators in the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing room were largely in the background, framing the scene like the kicking chorus line in a boffo opening number.

They asked soft, obvious, or beside-the-point questions of a literally towering figure (he stands 6 foot 8), who is self-righteous and too clever for his own good, but who could and did easily make them look foolish when they meekly tried to nail him.

Meanwhile, across town, an uncharacteristically subdued Trump spoke to a roomful of Christian political conservatives, while keeping fingers away (for a few minutes) from his Twitter account. Without mentioning Comey, Russia, Senate hearings or special counsels, the president declared that he would fight and always win, and that America’s future was great.

No one expects this meek silence to continue, no matter how gravely Trump’s New York lawyer and friend, Marc Kasowitz, admonishes him.

No, this was just the opening scene of a many-act play that will unfold over coming months or even years, and that is now a permanent feature of the Trump years, however long they last.

It’s the way of Washington now. 

In the Clinton years, a real estate controversy called Whitewater morphed into the Lewinsky scandal, and then metastasized into an impeachment and trial. The whole process consumed seven years, during which Bill Clinton won election and re-election.

This time, there are five investigations underway about Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential campaign, and whether Trump or what he calls his “satellites” knew about or colluded with efforts that U.S. intelligence officials have traced directly to Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

Probes are being conducted by the FBI; the larger intelligence “community,” including the National Security Agency; the Senate Intelligence Committee; the House Intelligence Committee; the House Oversight Committee, and, of course the new special counsel, jut-jawed Robert Mueller.

All of these entities have subpoena power, or can get it through others, and all have long and overlapping lists of witnesses they want to investigate in private and in public.

They can and ultimately will, at the end of the play, answer the fateful question, one of the most serious that can be asked here: Did a foreign power, a malevolent and hostile one at that, have witting and willing partners in Trump or his circle?

And there are the other urgent final questions in any Washington drama: Did the president try to cover up what he and others knew and did, and did he obstruct justice in a way that could get him impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate?

Trump and Comey together insured this production would go big-time because of mutual distrust.

On Jan. 6 in Trump Tower, the then-FBI director stayed behind after a security briefing to warn the president-elect about the existence of a soon-to-be published FBI source memo with “salacious” but uncorroborated accusations about him. Comey wanted to be candid and helpful, and not come off as a “J. Edgar Hoover” clone threatening others, he testified.

Trump furiously denied the accusations in the FBI source’s memo ― and almost certainly immediately concluded that Comey was a serious threat. Comey, for his part, said he went into that meeting knowing that he had to memorialize it afterward, because of what he already knew about Trump’s character. 

That memo-writing habit helped Comey make the opening act such a smash hit. He’s not a choir boy, though he would like to meet that standard, even if playing bureaucratic hardball is the only way to do it.  

He disclosed in the hearing that he had leaked word of Trump’s pressuring him so that Attorney General Jeff Sessions would have no choice but to appoint a special counsel to take over. Mission accomplished.

But Comey is only the first of many potential antagonists likely to appear. Other potential main characters include:

• Sessions, who recused himself from the Russia probe because of his own contacts with the Putin crowd, and who, in doing so, earned Trump’s enmity and suspicions. Does Sessions leave, and if so, what will he then say?

• Former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn, a Putin pal and Russophile whom everyone but Trump distrusted, and whose financial dealings may make him vulnerable.

• The “Satellites.” These are the people Trump views as his aides, advisers and hangers-on. They are people he depends on, but from whom he keeps legal and functional distance. It’s the operating method of spies and the mob. As Comey vividly explained Thursday, if you “turn over rocks” in an FBI or other investigation, you may find that people have committed crimes unrelated to the main issue at hand, in this case Russia collusion. These perps can then be “flipped and squeezed” to tell what they know.

• Putin. He has denied all, and recently in Moscow somehow managed to work conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination into his answer. The world troll of democracy is eager to play in the American media, and is enjoying his role as defender of due process for his beleaguered comrade in authoritarian arms, Trump.

• Republicans. GOP members of the Senate Intelligence Committee for the most part went meekly before Comey. They didn’t attack him much, and they did not defend Trump much, either. Will that change, in one direction or the other, and if so, when? We’ve got months to go to get a real answer – perhaps even until after the 2018 midterm elections.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

On Thursday, Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho) complimented former FBI Director James Comey on the detailed memos in which Comey documented, among other things, President Donald Trump’s request that he stop a federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“I find it concise, and having been a prosecutor for a number of years and handling hundreds, maybe thousands of cases and read police reports, investigative reports, this is as good as it gets,” Risch said during Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. “Not only the conciseness and the clearness of it, but also the fact that you have things that were written down contemporaneously when they happened.”

If you want to remember something accurately, writing out a description of it immediately after it happens is the most reliable way to do so.

In Comey’s case, his status as onetime leader of the FBI makes those notes even more valuable. The New York Times noted in May that “an F.B.I. agent’s contemporaneous notes are widely held up in court as credible evidence of conversations.” 

Still, human memory is imperfect.

Writing down memories is a form of what psychologists call rehearsal ― a way to retain information and solidify it in memory by repeating and revisiting it. But the technique has its drawbacks. While you can strengthen your recollection of certain details by writing them out, the details you don’t focus on can end up fading from your memory faster ― a psychological phenomenon known as retrieval-induced forgetting. 

“If you see some event and you rehearse parts of it, those parts you rehearse are strengthened in memory, but at the same time, the non-rehearsed parts are weakened in memory,” Elizabeth Loftus, a cognitive psychologist and expert on memory formation at the University of California, Irvine, told HuffPost.

And while it’s standard for FBI employees to keep detailed logs, typically to preserve evidence, according to psychology experts, it’s not necessarily a habit that non-federal agents should incorporate into their lives. 

“The world in which we all have to keep memos is a sad world,” Eli Finkel, a social psychology professor at Northwestern University, told HuffPost. “But if you believe that you can’t trust the people around you, the people that you work with, then you need to set all sorts of safeguards in place to protect yourself.”

Notably, Comey did not document his interactions with former Presidents Barack Obama or George W. Bush. 

“When trust is badly damaged or compromised, it’s sensible ― in fact, it’s a very good idea ― to put mechanisms in place to protect yourself,” Finkel said.

Sensible, yes ― but it could also be a sign of an unhealthy situation.

In fact, if you find yourself documenting negative interactions with your boss or your partner, or even just thinking that you need to do so, it could be a sign that you should find a new job or think critically about your relationship.

“I think it’s a sufficient cue that trust is badly damaged,” Finkel said. “If you are doing that with your partner, I would say that you should get help in your marriage.”

To be sure, there’s a time and a place for keeping written records. Journaling, for instance, has been shown to help manage anxiety and reduce worry. And group note-taking, such as recording official minutes for a work meeting, can ensure productivity and help an organization run more smoothly. 

But those instances are very different from “surreptitiously ensuring that you have your ducks in a row,” as Finkel put it.

Loftus, meanwhile, is worried that all the attention given to Comey’s memos might have a backfiring effect.

“What is it going to teach people?” she asked. “Is it going to teach people to make up notes soon afterwards, in anticipation of somebody telling a different story later on?”

Loftus stressed that she doesn’t think that’s what Comey did. “But,” she said, “I think this whole experience invites us to think about that potential.”

This reporting is brought to you by HuffPost’s health and science platform, The Scope. Like us on Facebook and Twitter and tell us your story: scopestories@huffingtonpost.com. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.