The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
10-31-2016, 01:08 PM
#7103
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
basically this:
Gifts From contractor employees to government personnel:
1. Some items are excluded from the definition of a gift, so they may be accepted. The most relevant exclusions are modest food and refreshments, greeting cards, and anything for which market value is paid by the government employee. (5 CFR 2635.203)
2. If the item is not excluded, then government personnel may accept a gift only if it fits an exception. (5 CFR 2635.204)
1. Some items are excluded from the definition of a gift, so they may be accepted. The most relevant exclusions are modest food and refreshments, greeting cards, and anything for which market value is paid by the government employee. (5 CFR 2635.203)
2. If the item is not excluded, then government personnel may accept a gift only if it fits an exception. (5 CFR 2635.204)
- a. $20/$50 exception - The most common exception is the $20/$50 rule. Government personnel may accept unsolicited gifts if they are not cash and are valued at or under $20 per source, per occasion. The aggregate limit from a single source is $50 per calendar year. (5 CFR 2635.204(a))
Reply
0
0
10-31-2016, 01:23 PM
#7104
TL;DR: It's ok for federal employees to accept gifts from foreign governments or their officers, provided that they report having received the gift. Gifts of large value are considered to have been accepted on behalf of the United States, and under some circumstances, must be handed over to the employing agency whereupon they become property of either the agency or of the US government as a whole.
Suitcases full of money from foreign embassies / governments / royal families would likely fall under this provision, though it would appear to exclude bribes from drug cartels provided that they are acting in their own interest, rather than on behalf of a foreign government in an official capacity.
Suitcases full of money from foreign embassies / governments / royal families would likely fall under this provision, though it would appear to exclude bribes from drug cartels provided that they are acting in their own interest, rather than on behalf of a foreign government in an official capacity.
I'm not able to keep the whole thing straight in my head but it seems like at the very least there are some really grey areas separating pay/donations/gifts specifically as to what is prohibited and allowed.
Reply
0
0
10-31-2016, 01:41 PM
#7106
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,026
Total Cats: 6,592
If these were "wages or fees" for service though, would these have to follow the same guidelines? Say i'm an actor and my day rate to act in a movie is $5k a day for movies made in the U.S. and the Government of China wants to cast me in a movie and pay me my $5k/day, am I prohibited from doing so if my wife works in the state department?
Americans are routinely employed by agencies of foreign governments in film & television productions. BBC is probably the most common example, though an argument could be made that American employees of Al Jazeera also fall under this category, as media ownership in Quatar is kind of semi-nationalized, and the network is state-funded.
I'm not sure if there's a Federal Code which would bar your wife from accepting the same job, that's the sort of thing which I'd assume to be handled contractually at the agency-level, and I know little about Dept of State employee guidelines. Have her ask HR about whether she's allowed to accept part-time employment from the Chinese government, and let us know how it goes.
Reply
0
0
10-31-2016, 02:50 PM
#7107
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
SCHOOL FORCES WHITE STUDENT TO REMOVE BRAIDS, LETS BLACK STUDENTS KEEP THEM
Darren’s daughter, Chenise Benson, 14, got the braids as a birthday gift. She was inspired by the hair style of one of her favorite singers, Beyoncé, but found herself in tears when school officials refused to grant her entry.
...
The official school dress code policy states “we do not allow extreme, unnatural hairstyles or coloring” and that any accessories used in the hair must be practical and not decorative.
However, irrespective of any interpretations of the dress code policy, the father makes a valid point: why are black students with braids and red stripes allowed to attend class?
...
The official school dress code policy states “we do not allow extreme, unnatural hairstyles or coloring” and that any accessories used in the hair must be practical and not decorative.
However, irrespective of any interpretations of the dress code policy, the father makes a valid point: why are black students with braids and red stripes allowed to attend class?
Dear Minorities,
Use a phone?
You're appropriating white culture. Stop.
Drive a car?
You're appropriating white culture. Stop.
Have air conditioning?
You're appropriating white culture. Stop.
Fly in airplanes?
You're appropriating white culture. Stop.
Shall I go on?
Signed,
Racist Braineack.
PS. I also think it's deplorable the amount of Blacks that play white sports like Basketball and Football.
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 06:47 AM
#7108
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
Remember that time that its seemed Hillary got all the debate questions in advance in impressed everyone with how well she did?
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/cnn-parts-w...040000691.html
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/cnn-parts-w...040000691.html
CNN has severed ties with Donna Brazile, the interim chair of the Democratic National Committee and a longtime contributor on the network, after hacked emails revealed Brazile provided questions in advance to Hillary Clinton's campaign during the Democratic primary debates on CNN.
Brazile actually resigned on Oct. 14, a CNN spokesperson confirmed. Her deal had been suspended in July when she took over for ousted DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Brazile actually resigned on Oct. 14, a CNN spokesperson confirmed. Her deal had been suspended in July when she took over for ousted DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 06:59 AM
#7110
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
$10 says this paper has something to hide:
The media, the election and bias - News - Daily Commercial - Leesburg, FL
The media, the election and bias - News - Daily Commercial - Leesburg, FL
Here's the mea culpa: The Daily Commercial hasn't done enough to mitigate the anti-Trump wave in the pages of this paper. We've tried to be circumspect about the stories we run, the headlines we put on them, the political cartoons we publish (we recently abandoned our usual cartoonists in favor of a service that is not so unrelentingly anti-Trump). Our editors have even re-edited some wire stories that we thought used loaded language to describe Trump. But in retrospect, we haven't gone far enough.
To be clear, this is not an endorsement of Trump, a candidate whose brutish, sometimes childish antics are responsible for his sizable deficit in the polls. Rather, it is a recognition that you, the voter, deserve better than we in the media have given you.
You deserve a more balanced approach to the coverage of elections and other weighty issues.
To be clear, this is not an endorsement of Trump, a candidate whose brutish, sometimes childish antics are responsible for his sizable deficit in the polls. Rather, it is a recognition that you, the voter, deserve better than we in the media have given you.
You deserve a more balanced approach to the coverage of elections and other weighty issues.
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 07:12 AM
#7111
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
I love how crazy liberals get when their unethical, immoral way of life gets exposed:
Carville Melts Down: Asserts FBI, GOP, and KGB in Cahoots | LifeZette
Carville Melts Down: Asserts FBI, GOP, and KGB in Cahoots | LifeZette
Famed Democratic strategist James Carville may be the first Clinton surrogate to have officially lost his mind over the FBI’s decision to reopen its investigation into Clinton’s private email server.
In an appearance on MSNBC on Monday, Carville relentlessly — and repeatedly — attacked the FBI’s decision to reopen the investigation, asserting it is part of a conspiracy to subvert American democracy.
“This is in effect an attempt to hijack an election,” Carville claimed. “It’s unprecedented … the House Republicans and the KGB are trying to influence our democracy,” he said.
In an appearance on MSNBC on Monday, Carville relentlessly — and repeatedly — attacked the FBI’s decision to reopen the investigation, asserting it is part of a conspiracy to subvert American democracy.
“The House Republicans and the KGB are trying to influence our democracy.”
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 08:04 AM
#7112
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
Remember that time that its seemed Hillary got all the debate questions in advance in impressed everyone with how well she did?
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/cnn-parts-w...040000691.html
https://www.yahoo.com/tv/cnn-parts-w...040000691.html
OMG GUYS. CNN HAS DELIVERED A BOMBSHELL!!!!!
Trump said in 2005 that he voted for George W. Bush. In 2009, he claimed he never did - CNNPolitics.com
In a 2009 radio interview with Don Imus uncovered by CNN's KFile, Donald Trump claimed he did not vote for President George W. Bush. Four years earlier, in an interview on Fox News following the 2004 presidential election, Trump said the exact opposite: that he did vote Bush despite his opposition to the Iraq War.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 08:37 AM
#7114
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
back to exactly the shitty healthcare liberals want to force on you so they can pretend they are good people:
Physicians' Participation in Obamacare Plummets 20 Percent | MRCTV
Physicians' Participation in Obamacare Plummets 20 Percent | MRCTV
The number of physicians who say they’re accepting health insurance plans offered on Obamacare’s federal and state marketplaces has plummeted nearly 20 percentage points, creating yet another crack in the president's rapidly buckling health care law.
According to a recent survey by SERMO, a social network for physicians, about 57 percent of doctors said they won’t be taking new patients insured by the plans next year. That’s down about four percentage points from last year, when 61 percent of physicians said the same, Forbes reported Monday.
But a similar survey conducted by the Medical Group Management Association back in 2014 showed that at the time, 76.5 percent of physicians said their practice were accepting insurance plans offered on the state and federal marketplaces.
Based on these two surveys and a little basic math, we find the number of physicians accepting ACA plans has fallen an astounding 19.5 percentage points heading into Obamacare’s fourth enrollment period – a pretty remarkable decline, considering it’s been just three years since the exchanges were first opened.
According to a recent survey by SERMO, a social network for physicians, about 57 percent of doctors said they won’t be taking new patients insured by the plans next year. That’s down about four percentage points from last year, when 61 percent of physicians said the same, Forbes reported Monday.
But a similar survey conducted by the Medical Group Management Association back in 2014 showed that at the time, 76.5 percent of physicians said their practice were accepting insurance plans offered on the state and federal marketplaces.
Based on these two surveys and a little basic math, we find the number of physicians accepting ACA plans has fallen an astounding 19.5 percentage points heading into Obamacare’s fourth enrollment period – a pretty remarkable decline, considering it’s been just three years since the exchanges were first opened.
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 08:41 AM
#7115
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
back to non-existent voter-fraud:
Watchdog Alleges Virginia Prepping to Accommodate Mass Voter Fraud | LifeZette
Watchdog Alleges Virginia Prepping to Accommodate Mass Voter Fraud | LifeZette
...But George said the provisional ballot printing doesn’t make sense even for contingencies. And it doesn’t compare to demand in 2012.
“The claim that it is for contingency planning is bogus,” George said in an email. “In 2012, Stafford County used less [sic] than 500 provisional ballots — in 2016 they received 30,000. In 2012, Loudoun County used 700 provisional ballots. In 2016, they received 84,000. In 2012, Fairfax used 2,500 provisional ballots; in 2016, they received over 265,000. This is ridiculous.”
...
The decision to print so many provisional ballots comes after an April announcement by Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat and a key ally of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. McAuliffe said he would allow more than 200,000 released felons to vote on Nov. 8.
“The claim that it is for contingency planning is bogus,” George said in an email. “In 2012, Stafford County used less [sic] than 500 provisional ballots — in 2016 they received 30,000. In 2012, Loudoun County used 700 provisional ballots. In 2016, they received 84,000. In 2012, Fairfax used 2,500 provisional ballots; in 2016, they received over 265,000. This is ridiculous.”
...
The decision to print so many provisional ballots comes after an April announcement by Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat and a key ally of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. McAuliffe said he would allow more than 200,000 released felons to vote on Nov. 8.
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 08:46 AM
#7116
Comey must answer to the Senate Judiciary Committee by Friday:
1. Has anyone at the FBI had the ability to read any of the content of the newly discovered emails? If not, then how do you know that they appear to be pertinent to the FBI’s inquiry? If so, does any of the content upon initial review suggest obstruction of or false statements to Congress or the FBI by Secretary Clinton or her senior aides? Please explain.
2. What time frame do the newly discovered emails cover and approximately how many are there?
3. Is there any preliminary information to suggest that a significant number of the newly discovered emails are duplicates of emails already reviewed by the FBI?
4. Did the FBI obtain the device(s) through which it learned of the existence of new emails mentioned in your letter on Friday through compulsory process? If so, please describe the nature and scope of the process in detail. If not, then how did the FBI learn of the existence of the new emails mentioned in your letter?
5. At any point in the Clinton email investigation, did the FBI request use of a grand jury from the Justice Department? If not, why not? If the Department declined, please describe the circumstances in detail. Who at the Justice Department made that decision and what grounds were given for the denial?
6. At any point in the Clinton investigation, did the FBI request an application for a search warrant from the Justice Department? If not, why not? If so, what was the Department’s response? If the Department declined, please describe the circumstances in detail. Who at the Justice Department made that decision and what grounds were given for the denial?
7. According to news reports, the FBI has recently obtained a search warrant for the emails in question. If those reports are accurate, please provide the Committee with copies of the material provided to the court in support of the warrant, including any affidavits executed by FBI personnel.
8. According to news reports, the FBI has also been conducting a criminal inquiry involving the Clinton Foundation. Yet, Justice Department officials reportedly denied the FBI’s request for a grand juryin that matter and pressured senior FBI officials not to pursue the matter through other means. Is it true that the Department denied the FBI’s request for a grand jury in the Clinton Foundation investigation?
9. Press reports also indicate that the Justice Department denied the FBI the ability to search the laptops of senior Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson for information related to the Clinton Foundation inquiry. Is it true that the FBI requested such a search of the Mills and Samuelson laptops, but DOJ denied that request? If the FBI did make such a request, was that request made before or after the Department executed its agreement with Mills and Samuelson for a narrow voluntary search and destruction of the laptops?
10. Please provide the committee with all records related to communications between FBI and DOJ officials regarding: (a) requests for any sort of court-supervised process, such as empaneling a grand jury or applying for a search warrant in connection with the Clinton email or Clinton Foundation investigations, or (b) the Mills and Samuelson laptops that were to subject of limited immunity agreements.
snip
There are some pretty damning questions in these. I wonder if this will be made public?
1. Has anyone at the FBI had the ability to read any of the content of the newly discovered emails? If not, then how do you know that they appear to be pertinent to the FBI’s inquiry? If so, does any of the content upon initial review suggest obstruction of or false statements to Congress or the FBI by Secretary Clinton or her senior aides? Please explain.
2. What time frame do the newly discovered emails cover and approximately how many are there?
3. Is there any preliminary information to suggest that a significant number of the newly discovered emails are duplicates of emails already reviewed by the FBI?
4. Did the FBI obtain the device(s) through which it learned of the existence of new emails mentioned in your letter on Friday through compulsory process? If so, please describe the nature and scope of the process in detail. If not, then how did the FBI learn of the existence of the new emails mentioned in your letter?
5. At any point in the Clinton email investigation, did the FBI request use of a grand jury from the Justice Department? If not, why not? If the Department declined, please describe the circumstances in detail. Who at the Justice Department made that decision and what grounds were given for the denial?
6. At any point in the Clinton investigation, did the FBI request an application for a search warrant from the Justice Department? If not, why not? If so, what was the Department’s response? If the Department declined, please describe the circumstances in detail. Who at the Justice Department made that decision and what grounds were given for the denial?
7. According to news reports, the FBI has recently obtained a search warrant for the emails in question. If those reports are accurate, please provide the Committee with copies of the material provided to the court in support of the warrant, including any affidavits executed by FBI personnel.
8. According to news reports, the FBI has also been conducting a criminal inquiry involving the Clinton Foundation. Yet, Justice Department officials reportedly denied the FBI’s request for a grand juryin that matter and pressured senior FBI officials not to pursue the matter through other means. Is it true that the Department denied the FBI’s request for a grand jury in the Clinton Foundation investigation?
9. Press reports also indicate that the Justice Department denied the FBI the ability to search the laptops of senior Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson for information related to the Clinton Foundation inquiry. Is it true that the FBI requested such a search of the Mills and Samuelson laptops, but DOJ denied that request? If the FBI did make such a request, was that request made before or after the Department executed its agreement with Mills and Samuelson for a narrow voluntary search and destruction of the laptops?
10. Please provide the committee with all records related to communications between FBI and DOJ officials regarding: (a) requests for any sort of court-supervised process, such as empaneling a grand jury or applying for a search warrant in connection with the Clinton email or Clinton Foundation investigations, or (b) the Mills and Samuelson laptops that were to subject of limited immunity agreements.
snip
There are some pretty damning questions in these. I wonder if this will be made public?
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 01:36 PM
#7117
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
In Today's episode of: Things you don't write in emails
Podesta To Mills: "We Are Going To Have To Dump All Those Emails" | Zero Hedge
Podesta To Mills: "We Are Going To Have To Dump All Those Emails" | Zero Hedge
We gotta zap Lanny out of our universe. Can't believe he committed her to a private review of her hard drive on TV.
Suggest Philippe talk to Josh or Eric. They know POTUS and HRC emailed. Josh has been asked about that. Standard practice is not to confirm anything about his email, so his answer to press was that he would not comment/confirm. I recollect that Josh was also asked if POTUS ever noticed her personal email account and he said something like POTUS likely had better things to do than focus on his Cabinet's email addresses.
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 01:46 PM
#7118
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
it's bad when the NY Times is defending Trump against Hillary's ridiculous claims:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us...rump.html?_r=3
Meanwhile, the Clinton Foundation has still yet to be shut down.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us...rump.html?_r=3
Supporters of Mrs. Clinton have argued that Mr. Trump’s evident affinity for Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — Mr. Trump has called him a great leader and echoed his policies toward NATO, Ukraine and the war in Syria — and the hacks of leading Democrats like John D. Podesta, the chairman of the Clinton campaign, are clear indications that Russia has taken sides in the presidential race and that voters should know what the F.B.I. has found.
...
F.B.I. officials spent weeks examining computer data showing an odd stream of activity to a Trump Organization server and Alfa Bank. Computer logs obtained by The New York Times show that two servers at Alfa Bank sent more than 2,700 “look-up” messages — a first step for one system’s computers to talk to another — to a Trump-connected server beginning in the spring. But the F.B.I. ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts.
The most serious part of the F.B.I.’s investigation has focused on the computer hacks that the Obama administration now formally blames on Russia. That investigation also involves numerous officials from the intelligence agencies. Investigators, the officials said, have become increasingly confident, based on the evidence they have uncovered, that Russia’s direct goal is not to support the election of Mr. Trump, as many Democrats have asserted, but rather to disrupt the integrity of the political system and undermine America’s standing in the world more broadly.
The hacking, they said, reflected an intensification of spy-versus-spy operations that never entirely abated after the Cold War but that have become more aggressive in recent years as relations with Mr. Putin’s Russia have soured.
...
F.B.I. officials spent weeks examining computer data showing an odd stream of activity to a Trump Organization server and Alfa Bank. Computer logs obtained by The New York Times show that two servers at Alfa Bank sent more than 2,700 “look-up” messages — a first step for one system’s computers to talk to another — to a Trump-connected server beginning in the spring. But the F.B.I. ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts.
The most serious part of the F.B.I.’s investigation has focused on the computer hacks that the Obama administration now formally blames on Russia. That investigation also involves numerous officials from the intelligence agencies. Investigators, the officials said, have become increasingly confident, based on the evidence they have uncovered, that Russia’s direct goal is not to support the election of Mr. Trump, as many Democrats have asserted, but rather to disrupt the integrity of the political system and undermine America’s standing in the world more broadly.
The hacking, they said, reflected an intensification of spy-versus-spy operations that never entirely abated after the Cold War but that have become more aggressive in recent years as relations with Mr. Putin’s Russia have soured.
Reply
0
0
11-01-2016, 02:41 PM
#7120
I'll try and squeak this in...
Interesting read anyway.
The Case Against Democracy - The New Yorker
THE CASE AGAINST DEMOCRACY
If most voters are uninformed, who should make decisions about the public’s welfare?
If most voters are uninformed, who should make decisions about the public’s welfare?
Roughly a third of American voters think that the Marxist slogan “From each according to his ability to each according to his need” appears in the Constitution. About as many are incapable of naming even one of the three branches of the United States government. Fewer than a quarter know who their senators are, and only half are aware that their state has two of them.
The Case Against Democracy - The New Yorker
Reply
0
0
