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.

   PoliticsPolitics for Pros- moderated


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: Neeka who wrote (753669)12/7/2021 3:17:00 PM
From: i-node
   of 762993
 
The hiring of Nunez suggests a solid rightward tilt, which doesn't surprise me.

But if they think it is okay to block the left-leaning, I'm out.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: PineValley who wrote (753675)12/7/2021 3:34:33 PM
From: TimF
   of 762993
 
Apparently he faced no penalty for his actions. It seems to be accepted practice in that police force.

The cop in the video below however did -

Good Cop Gets Bad Cop Fired and Arrested

youtube.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: Neeka12/7/2021 4:08:18 PM
   of 762993
 
Senate attorney asks appeals court to keep Arizona audit records secret
  • Howard Fischer Capitol Media Services
  • Dec 1, 2021 Updated Dec 1, 2021





    An attorney for the Senate warned the Court of Appeals on Wednesday that if the judges force public disclosure of records related to the audit of the 2020 election it will undermine the ability of lawmakers to do their jobs. Kory Langhofer told the court it should void a ruling by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Kemp who rejected broad claims that "legislative privilege'' shields communications between and among Republican lawmakers and others involved in what was billed as a "forensic audit'' of the election results.

    Matt York, Associated Press
    PHOENIX — An attorney for the Senate warned the Court of Appeals on Wednesday that if the judges force public disclosure of records related to the audit of the 2020 election it will undermine the ability of lawmakers to do their jobs.

    Kory Langhofer told the court it should void a ruling by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Kemp who rejected broad claims that “legislative privilege’’ shields communications between and among Republican lawmakers and others involved in what was billed as a “forensic audit’’ of the election results.

    Langhofer argued that it would open up to public scrutiny the discussions that lawmakers had about the audit. And that, he said, would undermine what he said is a constitutional recognition that legislators are entitled to have private conversations and communications because that is part of their job.

    But attorney Keith Beauchamp said the flaw in Langhofer’s argument is that the records he is seeking on behalf of American Oversight — the ones that the Senate has refused to disclose — have nothing to do with the role of legislators in crafting laws.

    He said the record shows that Senate President Karen Fann, R-Prescott, said she ordered the audit and contracted with Cyber Ninjas not to consider proposed new laws.



    Instead, Beauchamp said, Fann said she was responding to concerns of Arizona residents about the accuracy of the tally where Democrat Joe Biden outpolled incumbent Donald Trump in Maricopa County. That margin of victory in the state’s largest county was enough to give the state’s popular vote — and its 11 electors — to Biden.

    More to the point, Beauchamp said, is that the audit was not part of some investigation launched by lawmakers to review the adequacy of state election laws or craft new ones.

    Even after it was produced, Fann turned it over to Attorney General Mark Brnovich to see if any existing laws had been broken. And it was only at that point, Beauchamp said — after the audit was produced and after all of the communications sought by American Oversight — that there was a discussion of whether existing statutes need to be amended.

    Beauchamp told the judges there is a role for legislative privilege. For example, he said if Fann now wants to communicate with colleagues about changes to state law based on audit findings, that would be protected.

    But what’s at issue here, he said, are the communications that Fann and others had with Cyber Ninjas and others both in deciding to conduct the audit and then on how the review was being done. None of that, Beauchamp said, is related to the business of legislators, which is crafting laws.



    “They can’t make a showing that there was any deliberative or communicative process underway, much less of any impairment of that process,’’ he said.

    Hanging in the balance are perhaps tens of thousands of emails, texts and other documents possessed not only by the Senate but also those in the possession of Cyber Ninjas, the private firm Fann retained to conduct the review.

    In his earlier ruling, Kemp acknowledged that lawmakers are entitled to certain constitutional protections. He said that is part of ensuring that the “deliberative and communicative process’’ about proposed laws or other matters within the jurisdiction of lawmakers is not impaired by public disclosure of their deliberations.

    The problem, said Kemp, is the Senate wants to extend that to all the communications involving Fann, Sen. Warren Petersen who chairs the Judiciary Committee, the liaisons Fann chose to interact with Cyber Ninjas and even communications with that company and its own subvendors. And none of that, he said was “an integral part of deliberations or communications regarding proposed legislation.’’

    “Under such an expansive view there are few activities in which a legislator engages that could not be somehow related to the legislative process,’’ the judge said. “And the privilege does not extend to all things in any way related to the legislative process.’’



    Langhofer told the appellate court Wednesday that Kemp was off base in saying that only communications related directly to proposed legislation are exempt from the state’s public records law. The key, he said, is whether public disclosure would impair the ability of the Legislature to do its job. That, Langhofer said, includes “the chilling effect that would have on the body.’’

    And he told the judges that upholding what Kemp ruled and accepting his narrow definition of what lawmakers can keep secret would not be fair.

    “That dismissive approach to privilege is not consistent with the way the judiciary has treated its own privilege or executive privilege,’’ he said. “And these exist for a reason: to encourage candor and, frankly, improved results in what is supposed to be a deliberative body.’’

    Beauchamp, for his part, said any effort to shield all those documents the Senate does not want to disclose ignores the fact that they are public records.

    “There’s no dispute about it,’’ he said. “There’s a strong public policy favoring disclosure of records.

    And when there’s a dispute about whether something can be withheld, Beauchamp said the burden is on the agency holding the records to prove it is exempt from being made public, not on the person seeking the documents to prove they are public.



    “And here, the public’s right to know under the public records law to know what their legislators are up to would be restricted by a broad application of legislative privilege,’’ Beauchamp said.

    More to the point, he said if there is a dispute the court has to weigh the interests of the public against claims of privilege.

    Beauchamp told the appellate judges there’s another reason they should reject the Senate’s bid to shield the documents from public view. He said that the Senate, having not only conducted the audit but having a public hearing on the results, waived any claims of privilege.

    Whatever the court rules is likely to affect not just the bid by American Oversight for the records but parallel litigation being pursued by Phoenix Newspapers Inc., the owners of the Arizona Republic.

    The judges gave no indication when they will rule

    tucson.com

    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


    From: garrettjax12/7/2021 4:22:46 PM
    10 Recommendations   of 762993
     
    Omarova withdraws...

    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


    To: i-node who wrote (753676)12/7/2021 4:46:07 PM
    From: skinowski
    2 Recommendations   of 762993
     
    Agree, much of the media suffers from corruption - while they, probably, think they’re working in the name of some greater good. That’s BS - they’re just corrupt liars. That can’t be changed. Trump spent 4 years trying to shame them out if their leftist stupor. What you are doing is the only way to go - refuse to pay attention to them. In time, they’ll be out of business - hopefully, to be replaced by better people.

    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


    To: carranza2 who wrote (753632)12/7/2021 4:54:14 PM
    From: Sdgla
    5 Recommendations   of 762993
     
    Just finished Navarro’s In Trump Time. Excellent insight into his 4 years with DJT. Want proof that the election was stolen then read here : The three volumes of the Navarro Report provide a demonstration that President Trump had a good faith belief that the November 3, 2020 Presidential election results, were, indeed, the poisonous fruit of widespread fraud and election irregularities. Evidence used in the preparation of the Navarro Report includes more than 50 lawsuits and judicial rulings, thousands of affidavits and declarations, testimony in a variety of state venues, published analyses by think tanks and legal centers, videos and photos, public comments, and extensive press coverage.

    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


    To: garrettjax who wrote (753680)12/7/2021 5:00:34 PM
    From: Alan Smithee
       of 762993
     
    Behind a paywall.

    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


    To: Alan Smithee who wrote (753683)12/7/2021 5:29:43 PM
    From: garrettjax
       of 762993
     
    Sorry - Didn't realize I had a subscription for WSJ or I just got lucky...

    MARKETS FINANCIAL REGULATION

    Saule Omarova, Biden’s Nominee to Oversee National Banks, Withdraws
    Opposition from Republicans, moderate Democrats scuttles confirmation chances for comptroller of the currency pick


    Saule Omarova, seen at a recent Senate hearing, is a Cornell University law professor.PHOTO: STEFANI REYNOLDS/BLOOMBERG NEWS

    By
    Andrew Ackerman

    Updated Dec. 7, 2021 4:23 pm ET

    WASHINGTON—Saule Omarova, President Biden’s nominee to oversee large national banks, withdrew from consideration on Tuesday, amid opposition from Republicans and moderate Democrats who had sought to block her nomination, the White House said.

    “I have accepted Saule Omarova’s request to withdraw her name from nomination,” President Biden said Tuesday, saying he would look for a new nominee.

    Mr. Biden last month nominated Ms. Omarova, a Cornell University law professor, to be Comptroller of the Currency, which supervises many of the biggest U.S. lenders including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co.

    Ms. Omarova’s earlier calls for shrinking big banks and creating a much bigger role for the Federal Reserve in consumer banking has drawn opposition from industry advocates and Republicans. They have said she envisions an overly large role for the government that they say would crimp business, even at community lenders, a powerful constituency that lobbied against her nomination.

    A group of moderate Democrats privately voiced their opposition to Ms. Omarova in the days after a contentious nomination hearing in November, according to people familiar with the deliberations. Their opposition alone likely scuttled her chances of confirmation through the evenly divided Senate.

    Montana Sen. Jon Tester, Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and Virginia Sen. Mark Warner—all centrist Democrats—conveyed their opposition to Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sherrod Brown (D., Ohio) on a telephone call about two weeks ago, The Wall Street Journal reported last month.

    The conversation came after Messrs. Tester and Warner challenged Ms. Omarova at the Nov. 18 hearing over her past writing and thinking on banking oversight. Mr. Tester also pressed her at the hearing over remarks she made earlier this year calling for smaller oil-and-gas companies to go bankrupt to aid the U.S. in tackling climate change.

    Ms. Omarova responded to Mr. Tester at the hearing by saying she misspoke and that her remarks weren’t well-framed. “My intention was…exactly the opposite,” she said. “We need to help those companies to get restructured.”

    Ms. Omarova didn’t respond to an email on Tuesday seeking comment. In a brief withdrawal letter released by the White House, Ms. Omarova said, “it is no longer tenable for me to continue as a Presidential nominee.”

    White House officials have defended Ms. Omarova but didn’t comment on Democratic opposition. Administration officials have said that Ms. Omarova, who was born in Kazakhstan when it was part of the Soviet Union, has been the target of “red baiting” from Republicans.

    “As a strong advocate for consumers and a staunch defender of the safety and soundness of our financial system, Saule would have brought invaluable insight and perspective to our important work on behalf of the American people,” Mr. Biden said on Tuesday. “But unfortunately, from the very beginning of her nomination, Saule was subjected to inappropriate personal attacks that were far beyond the pale.”

    Ms. Omarova’s defenders also include liberal-leaning Democrats such as Mr. Brown and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. They have said she is an accomplished banking expert who will stand up to the industry. The senators say Washington regulators have been too deferential to big banks in recent years and that Ms. Omarova would work to make the financial system more inclusive for consumers.

    The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is an independent bureau of the Treasury Department. It oversees about 1,200 banks with total assets of $14 trillion, about two-thirds of the total in the U.S. banking system.

    The White House has struggled to find a comptroller nominee who could win support from its Senate allies. Before nominating Ms. Omarova, the White House considered at least three other individuals for the role but never nominated them.

    At present, the agency is run on an interim basis by Michael Hsu, a former Fed staffer. It has been without a Senate-confirmed head since May 2020.

    Write to Andrew Ackerman at andrew.ackerman@wsj.com

    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


    To: Sdgla who wrote (753682)12/7/2021 5:30:52 PM
    From: Hank Scorpio
    2 Recommendations   of 762993
     
    Some people will not accept the obvious because the ramifications of such acceptance are so profound. To the infinitesimal percentage of Republicans that don’t believe the election was rigged the rest of us will simply have to settle for “I told you so”.

    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


    From: i-node12/7/2021 5:31:31 PM
    8 Recommendations   of 762993
     
    Another Musk comment from today that is absolute truth. I'm sure I've posted the same comment here in the past re: capital allocation. 100% correct.

    Including the tag line at the end re: violence.


    Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
    Previous 10 Next 10