SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Sdgla who wrote (1250397)7/29/2020 9:18:49 AM
From: Land Shark1 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1577883
 
ROTFLMAO! Ya think criminal consigliere Barr has something on Biden???? I watched that Faux News shite and it is pure unmitigated crap.



To: Sdgla who wrote (1250397)7/29/2020 9:27:52 AM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 1577883
 
CORRUPTION BOMBSHELL: tRUMP MAKING ILLEGAL SECRET PAYMENTS, INCLUDING TO HIS OWN FAMILY
huffpost.com
So far, $216.6 million of spending by Trump’s campaign and related committees has flowed through just two firms, with no disclosure of how that money was spent.
By S.V. Date

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s campaign is violating federal election law by funneling close to a quarter-billion dollars to date through private companies in order to hide the ultimate recipients of the money, including the wife of one of his sons and the girlfriend of another, a watchdog group charged in a complaint filed Tuesday.

“The money is being laundered through corporations run by top Trump campaign officials,” said Brendan Fischer, a lawyer with the Campaign Legal Center. “That has the effect of keeping the public in the dark as to a big chunk of Trump campaign spending.”

The group’s complaint with the Federal Election Commission asks for an investigation to put an end to the practice and to punish the campaign with fines.

How quickly any of that might happen, though, is an open question, given that the commission currently does not have a quorum to take official actions. Even with one in place, investigations can last for several years.

According to the complaint, both Trump’s reelection campaign and a related fundraising group, the “Trump Make America Great Again Committee,” are breaking federal campaign law by running payments through former Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale’s private firm as well as American Made Media Consultants, a company created specifically to place ads and buy related services for the campaign.

Parscale’s companies have already received $39 million from Trump’s campaign, the Republican National Committee and their joint fundraising committees, according to a HuffPost analysis of FEC filings from Jan. 20, 2017, through the end of June 2020. American Made Media Consultants has been paid $177.6 million from those same committees through that time period.

Among those payments: $180,000 a year each to Kimberly Guilfoyle, the girlfriend of Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., and to Lara Trump, the wife of his second son, Eric Trump.

In April, Parscale acknowledged paying them through his firm, Parscale Strategy. “I can pay them however I want to pay them,” he told HuffPost.

Other secretly paid vendors appear to include those belonging to a Parscale associate, Gary Coby, that send out the ubiquitous mass fundraising text messages to many hundreds of thousands of Trump supporters multiple times per day.

One of the basic concepts behind federal campaign finance law is that Americans have a right to know how candidates, parties and political action committees raise money and spend it.

“This scheme violated the law and undermines the public’s right to know. What precisely is being hidden is unknown. We don’t know for sure,” Fischer said.

Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh denied that the payments broke any laws.

“AMMC is a campaign vendor responsible for arranging and executing media buys and related services at fair market value,” Murtaugh said. “AMMC does not earn any commissions or fees. It builds efficiencies and saves the campaign money by providing these in-house services that otherwise would be done by outside vendors. The campaign reports all payments to AMMC as required by the FEC.”

The Republican National Committee, which also benefits from the work of Guilfoyle and Lara Trump, said in a statement from communications director Michael Ahrens: “The RNC and its joint fundraising committees comply with all FEC regulations and campaign finance laws.”

The Campaign Legal Center’s complaint says that previous rulings from the FEC make clear that paying vendors to perform services without itemizing sub-contractors and employees is only permissible when those payments are made in “arms-length” transactions. But when campaign officials are involved with a vendor’s business — such as Parscale’s clear involvement with his own private firm — then the vendor’s payments to contractors and employees must be itemized, the complaint said.

Under the Trump campaign’s theory that it can pay a lump sum to a private company like Parscale’s, there is nothing stopping it from funneling all of its spending that way each month, with the public getting zero details on how any of it is being spent, Fischer said.

He acknowledged that previous campaigns have used similar entities in the past — the presidential campaign of Republican Mitt Romney in 2012 created a firm, American Rambler, to buy all of its television advertising — but nothing on this scale.

“The Trump campaign has taken it to another level,” Fischer said.

Parscale was recently demoted from campaign manager to the head of digital strategy, the same job he had in Trump’s 2016 campaign, during which his firms were paid $93.9 million. Trump, according to informal advisers close to the White House, was unhappy with how much money Parscale had made for himself, even as the campaign and the RNC together spent close to a billion dollars and Trump himself slid in the polls.

Thanks to his newfound wealth, Parscale, who just a few years ago was designing websites in San Antonio for Trump’s properties, has been able to buy a $2.4 million waterfront house in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a pair of million-dollar condos, a brand new $400,000 boat, and another half-million dollars in luxury cars, including a Range Rover and a Ferrari.



To: Sdgla who wrote (1250397)7/29/2020 9:41:45 AM
From: sylvester80  Respond to of 1577883
 
CRIMINAL: POS Republicans Really Want To Block You From Suing Companies If You Get Covid-19 Sick Even When Forced Back To Work
huffpost.com
Any company doing a poor job of protecting people from COVID-19 would want to see this legislation become law.
By Dave Jamieson and Igor Bobic

The latest stimulus package proposed by Senate Republicans to address the coronavirus pandemic would dramatically limit the ability of consumers and workers to sue corporations that fail to protect them from the disease.

The GOP effort to grant businesses, schools and hospitals special liability protections is so extreme that consumer and worker advocates say it would do more than just hinder access to the courts ? it would undercut one of the main incentives companies have for trying to limit the spread of the virus.

“They will know they won’t be held accountable,” said Remington Gregg, a lawyer with the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. “They’ll cut more corners. They’ll pack more people into meatpacking plants. This would be a disaster for assuring any sort of corporate accountability for workers and consumers and patients.”

Gregg called the proposal “pretty shameful.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has made a legislative priority of shielding companies from coronavirus-related lawsuits, despite the economic recovery showing signs of stalling and millions of jobless workers facing the loss of their extra unemployment benefits. The bill rolled out Monday in the Senate as part of a broader coronavirus package would give companies plenty of immunity, though it will face strong opposition in the Democratic-controlled House.

McConnell has warned of an “avalanche” of litigation stemming from the pandemic that could throttle the economy, but so far it hasn’t materialized. According to a COVID-19 complaint tracker from the law firm Hunton Andrews Kurth, around 3,800 complaints related to the pandemic have been filed in court since March. But only 257 are classified as consumer-related, and only 342 as employment-related. The largest category, with 932, involves insurance.

“There is no flood of lawsuits. It’s a figment of the imagination of Sen. McConnell and [Texas Sen. John] Cornyn and K Street,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Tuesday, referring to the authors of the bill and lobbyists in Washington.

Nonetheless, the GOP bill would raise the bar for almost anyone trying to take a company to court over coronavirus exposure. A plaintiff would have to prove that a company was grossly negligent in their handling of the virus, and that it had failed to take even “reasonable” steps to follow government guidelines on the pandemic.

David Muraskin, a lawyer with the nonprofit Public Justice, said a company could avoid a lawsuit even if it didn’t take basic precautions. In the case of meatpacking, he noted, the federal government has not told employers they must meet certain social distancing measures ? only that they should try where possible. With few mandatory rules to follow, Muraskin said, there are not many requirements a company has to meet to demonstrate it was being reasonable.

“I would need to show that you had this almost purposeful intent to be unreasonable and prove it, and that is a very high standard,” said Muraskin, whose group filed a lawsuit on behalf of workers against the meat processor Smithfield. “But the defendants only have to show that they [took] reasonable steps to comply with some set of guidelines.”

For those who can successfully sue, the GOP bill puts a cap on noneconomic damages, like pain and suffering. It also helps companies move lawsuits out of state courts and into the federal system, an arena plaintiffs lawyers say is more business-friendly.

Most illnesses and deaths stemming from work end up in the workers compensation system as opposed to state or federal courts. But Muraskin said that if the legislation became law, it would impact cases where a worker contracted coronavirus on the job and then took it home to family members who became sick and died.

“It shows such a lack of concern for human beings, and [lack of] an appreciation for what people on the ground are going through,” he said.

The bill would also exempt businesses from being fined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, so long as they were “generally following” coronavirus guidelines and “attempted to satisfy” them. Despite thousands of complaints, OSHA has only issued a small handful of citations related to the coronavirus so far, suggesting employers have little to fear in terms of a crackdown.

Debbie Berkowitz, a former OSHA official and a workplace safety expert at the National Employment Law Project, called the proposal “insane.”

“It’s essentially exempting employers from OSHA enforcement, because the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] guidelines are so vague that they don’t really require anything,” Berkowitz said. “It’s very easy to say you complied with them. This is tying OSHA’s hands.”

If employers can meet that low bar, the legislation also protects them from claims under several other federal labor laws ? the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Federal Labor Standards Act, which includes minimum wage and overtime protections ? in cases involving the coronavirus.

The liability protections would be in place until at least the fall of 2024.

Cornyn defended the proposed liability changes on Tuesday, saying it’s “not true” that family members of essential workers who die from coronavirus wouldn’t be able to get justice if the proposal is made into law.

“We want to make sure people can go safely back to work. … One of the disincentives for people to do that is the threat of litigation,” Cornyn told reporters at a weekly press conference.

The GOP’s insistence that liability protections be included in the next coronavirus relief package sets up another showdown with top Democrats, who have called the proposal a giveaway to big corporations. The two sides are also far apart on the extension of added unemployment benefits, aid for states and localities, and food assistance, among other things.

McConnell has a weaker hand in this round of negotiations than he did in March when Congress passed the $2.5 trillion CARES Act with nearly unanimous support, however. Many of his GOP colleagues, for example, now say they are opposed to passing any additional stimulus, citing its impact on the deficit. The cost of the proposed GOP package, $1 trillion, will likely only grow in order to win the necessary support of congressional Democrats, they say.

“It’s a mess,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said Tuesday. “I can’t figure out what this bill’s about ... this is not going to be the bill. They’re going to go negotiate with [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi. We have no idea what the final bill will be.”

Democrats, meanwhile, accused Republicans of seeking to scuttle the negotiations by taking a hard-line stance on their liability proposal. Emerging from a meeting with top White House officials on Tuesday afternoon, Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) took aim at McConnell after he told reporters, “We’re not negotiating over liability protections.”

“It sounds like a person who has no interest in getting an agreement,” Pelosi said. “That wasn’t a good way for us to start the discussion.”



To: Sdgla who wrote (1250397)7/29/2020 10:26:24 AM
From: bruwin1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Mick Mørmøny

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1577883
 
In "COUPS", such as we see the Upper Echelon of the Democratic Party indulging in, and Plotting, at the current time, there will always be the VILE, VINDICTIVE, COWARDLY "SNAKES" Masterminding, Influencing and Controlling the PROCESS.

They are the ones who will "Stay in the Shadows", "Stay in the Background", "Push others to do their DESIRED DIRTY WORK FOR THEM", "Put on an air of 'Caring' for the Masses", "Display their BENIGN, but FAKE, smiles", .... and other "SMOKE SCREENING, DEVIOUS ACTIVITIES" .....

I suggest that they are the ones I've circled in RED below ------>



And I would suggest that the rest are JUST USEFUL IDIOTS !!!



To: Sdgla who wrote (1250397)7/29/2020 11:21:16 AM
From: puborectalis1 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1577883
 
Louie Gohmert, who refused to wear a mask, tests positive for coronavirus

jackass