Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SiouxPal who wrote (770234)	2/19/2014 9:08:12 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Respond to of 1576974

You two are a perfect fit ;)

To: SiouxPal who wrote (770234)	2/19/2014 9:29:38 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 1576974

Go back to your shithole of a thread, siouxpill--with your fellow commies.

To: SiouxPal who wrote (770234)	2/19/2014 10:37:12 PM
From: steve harris	3 Recommendations Recommended By Broken_Clock Tenchusatsu TideGlider Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576974

SooPal, what are you doing posting over here? You ban yourself accidently from your own thread?

To: SiouxPal who wrote (770234)	2/21/2014 1:28:30 AM
From: Broken_Clock	Respond to of 1576974

and Obama's a liar. Turns out as CIC he can close a base anytime he wants to, including Guntanamo….which is what I told you clowns 5 years ago. But you fell for his lying excuses. ___ Report: DoD Can Close Bases Without Congress Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on google_plusone_share Share on more 1 9 comments Stars and Stripes \| Feb 20, 2014 The tug of war between the Pentagon and Congress about base closures might have gotten a little more interesting. According to a story published Wednesday in the online defense magazine Breaking Defense, largely forgotten laws give the Defense Department authority to close facilities without the Base Realignment and Closure process -- without DOD even getting permission from Congress. Speaking at the Association of the U.S. Army's winter conference in Huntsville, Ala., House Armed Services Committee staffer Vickie Plunkett said Wednesday that buried in Title 10 -- the chapter of the US Code that governs the Defense Department -- is Section 2687, which, she said, "does give the services authority to do closures, and it only requires notification to Congress," Breaking Defense reported. If the Pentagon and the White House were willing to take the political risk, they could shut down facilities and dare a gridlocked Congress to undo it. "It's notification with time for Congress to act" before the closure is carried out, the magazine reported her saying. But, the veteran staffer went on -- emphasizing her opinions were her own, not committee policy -- "Congress is basically dysfunctional right now. "The authorities only require notification. Take your chances," she said to an eruption of laughter, "because it's going to require us to get our act together to stop it." The Army has recommended to the Office of the Secretary of Defense and Congress that a new round of BRAC is needed for 2017. More than 350 installations have been closed in five BRAC rounds in 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995 and 2005. No one is suggesting that the Pentagon should try to slip something past Capitol Hill, Breaking Defense stressed. As a matter of constitutional law, any such actions need to be included in the annual budget, which has to be passed by Congress. As a matter of practical politics, the military informs Congress when it lets go even a handful of arsenal or depot employees, even people fired for misconduct, because it just takes one angry person to call their congressman to bring all sorts of hell down on the Army's head. The Pentagon is in an even stronger position when it comes to the Army's arsenals, the government-owned manufacturing facilities for military equipment. Section 4532 of Title 10 -- portions of which predate the Civil War -- is the Arsenal Act, which Plunkett pointed out contains this language: "The Secretary may abolish any United States arsenal that he considers unnecessary." And that's not even the Secretary of Defense, because the Act was written before that job existed: It's the Secretary of the Army. "The Secretary of the Army," Plunkett emphasized "has unilateral authority -- standing, statutory, Title 10 authority -- to close arsenals. Unilateral. "Now the issue is," she said, "will the services ... take advantage of those statutes?"

To: SiouxPal who wrote (770234)	2/21/2014 5:58:12 AM
From: Broken_Clock	Respond to of 1576974

A bid nail in all our economic coffins. ---- POSTED AT 9:00 AM BY LEE FANG Officials tapped by the Obama administration to lead the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade negotiations have received multimillion dollar bonuses from CitiGroup and Bank of America, financial disclosures obtained by Republic Report show. Stefan Selig, a Bank of America investment banker nominated to become the Under Secretary for International Trade at the Department of Commerce, received more than $9 million in bonus payas he was nominated to join the administration in November. The bonus pay came in addition to the $5.1 million in incentive pay awarded to Selig last year. Michael Froman, the current U.S. Trade Representative, received over $4 million as part of multiple exit payments when he left CitiGroup to join the Obama administration. Froman told Senate Finance Committee members last summer that he donated approximately 75 percent of the $2.25 million bonus he received for his work in 2008 to charity. CitiGroup also gave Froman a $2 million payment in connection to his holdings in two investment funds, which was awarded “in recognition of [Froman's] service to Citi in various capacities since 1999.” Many large corporations with a strong incentive to influence public policy award bonuses and other incentive pay to executives if they take jobs within the government. CitiGroup, for instance, provides an executive contract that awards additional retirement pay upon leaving to take a “full time high level position with the U.S. government or regulatory body.” Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, the Blackstone Group, Fannie Mae, Northern Trust, and Northrop Grumman are among the other firms that offer financial rewards upon retirement for government service. Froman joined the administration in 2009. Selig is currently awaiting Senate confirmation before he can take his post, which collaborates with the trade officials to support the TPP. The controversial TPP trade deal has rankled activists for containing provisions that would newly empower corporations to sue governments in ad hoc arbitration tribunals to demand compensation from governments for laws and regulations they claim undermine their business interests. Leaked TPP negotiation documents show the Obama administration is seeking to prevent foreign governments from issuing a broad variety of financial rules designed to stem another bank crisis. A leaked text of the TPP’s investment chapter shows that the pact would include the controversial investor-state dispute resolution system. A fact-sheet provided by Public Citizen explains how multi-national corporations may use the TPP deal to skirt domestic courts and local laws. The arrangement would allows corporations to go after governments before foreign tribunals to demand compensations for tobacco, prescription drug and environment protections that they claim would undermine their expected future profits. Last year, Senator Elizabeth Warren warned that trade agreements such as the TPP provide “a chance for these banks to get something done quietly out of sight that they could not accomplish in a public place with the cameras rolling and the lights on.” Others have raised similar alarm. “Not only do US treaties mandate that all forms of finance move across borders freely and without delay, but deals such as the TPP would allow private investors to directly file claims against governments that regulate them, as opposed to a WTO-like system where nation states (ie the regulators) decide whether claims are brought,” notes Boston University associate professor Kevin Gallagher. - See more at: republicreport.org