|
ReidRansom posted:Probably sadly real answer? Some convoluted reason bought and paid for by the fossil fuel lobby. Or...here me out...each post office has a budget and would need to be outfitted to do so. The BIL has a lot of electrification funding in it and Biden is pushing electrification for the federal fleet, so my guess is that this is happening sooner rather than later anyways.
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
selec posted:Likelihood of Trump Indictment in Manhattan Fades as Grand Jury Wraps Up Is this the SDNY that everyone was talking about or is that a different jurisdiction?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Nothing is going to happen to Trump. Trump will win the popular vote too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 23:42
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Trump will win the popular vote too. Probably not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 23:48
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:When they finally did try to take him down in an organized way, they went all in on family values, abortion, and infidelity to try and sink him with evangelicals. But, they apparently didn't know their base well enough to realize that evangelicals really cared a lot more about the racism and "saying what we're all thinking" than they cared about family values, religion, and infidelity. And once Jerry Falwell endorsed Trump and Trump swore up and down he was as pro-life as they come, the abortion single-issue voters ended up on his side. I'm going to assume you meant Pat Robertson but I think Jerry Falwell sending messages to the RNC from hell makes alot of sense. edit: or Falwell Jr.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 23:50
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Is this the SDNY that everyone was talking about or is that a different jurisdiction? No. The SDNY is a federal court district. This is a county DA in New York State
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 23:58
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:I'm going to assume you meant Pat Robertson but I think Jerry Falwell sending messages to the RNC from hell makes alot of sense. Yes, famous literal cuckold, cocaine user, and evangelical leader Jerry Falwell Jr.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 23:59
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Probably not. I might take this bet and doxx on it as we get closer. But right now against Biden? I'd push my cards in on that one if that election were held next week. But even if I do, how can we settle that bet with all the rampant voter fraud going on?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 01:09
|
|
|
Speaking of famous cokehead failsons, I thought this was particularly lol:quote:Joe Biden wrote to his son Hunter and others close to him using the pseudonym “Peter Henderson” – a fictional Soviet Union-era spy in several Tom Clancy novels who infiltrated the US government, emails show.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 01:12
|
|
|
Elon musk: man my dad knew how to work a slave
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Speaking of famous cokehead failsons, I thought this was particularly lol: doesn't speak well to biden's reading habits, he should read more lesbian necromancer escape-room novels
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 04:00
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Elon musk: man my dad knew how to work a slave Show me the tweet plz
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 04:20
|
|
|
Great security to invent a pseudonym and a burner email account to send messages to Hunter Biden ending in "Love, Dad."
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 04:37
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Probably not. He is definitely going to make a go of it, if these holds past the mid-terms. https://twitter.com/Cavalewis/status/1520095372949049346?s=20 They probably will not, but who knows this is coming after all from a GOP operative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 04:56
|
|
|
Majin posted:Show me the tweet plz You won't have to look far in about 6 months. His personal tweets won't be the racist poo poo it's the people he is replatforming
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 05:11
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Speaking of famous cokehead failsons, I thought this was particularly lol: *deep groan from kif on futurama*
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 05:41
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:doesn't speak well to biden's reading habits, he should read more lesbian necromancer escape-room novels Can't wait until Fox is spending 12 hours a day speculating on who "Gideon" and "Harrow" are
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 05:44
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I might take this bet and doxx on it as we get closer. But right now against Biden? I'd push my cards in on that one if that election were held next week. Even if so, it's not like the popular vote matters. I don't think Trump even remembers he technically didn't get it. He loving obliterated Hillary from the public mind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 06:22
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Even if so, it's not like the popular vote matters. I don't think Trump even remembers he technically didn't get it. He loving obliterated Hillary from the public mind. No, I can guarantee you that is one of those petty rejection grievances that will stick with him until his final second on this earth. The big lie and the January 6th coup attempt each had their genesis in the fact that Trump never got over the fact that he lost the popular vote in 2016 and spent his entire presidency trying to figure out ways to ratfuck his way into staying in power with or without the popular vote. It's one of those forever wounds on his psyche, like that time that Spy Magazine said he had small hands, so he still to this day mails photos of his hands to former editor of it with SEE, NOT SMALL! scribbled all over them in black sharpie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 08:04
|
|
|
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/29/politics/hannity-text-messages-meadows-trump-white-house/index.html New text messages reveal Fox’s Hannity advising Trump White House and seeking direction quote:Communications show Hannity’s evolution from staunch supporter of former President Donald Trump’s election lies to being “fed up” with the “lunatics” hurting Trump’s cause in the days before January 6. Sort of ties into some of the stuff we were discussing yesterday. Whole thing is worth a read
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 12:04
|
|
|
Also, this is something I can definitely get behind https://apnews.com/article/business-elections-jeff-merkley-congress-79c2449c353a55242c3003afa029e464 Dems hone populist appeal with proposed stock trading ban quote:WASHINGTON (AP) — When Rep. Abigail Spanberger first introduced a bill banning stock trading by members of Congress and their families, the Virginia Democrat managed to get only eight co-sponsors. So far this session, 62 — or about one out of every seven House members — have signed on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 13:57
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Also, this is something I can definitely get behind Unless this passes, it means nothing. Like really, I don't think Democrats and their remaining loyalists realise how empty gestures are without material actions. Money in accounts, food in mouths, people in suits with blue named Wikipedia articles being frogmarched into prison. Anything less than that and they might as well have been sitting around filling their pants with poo poo. Ghost Leviathan fucked around with this message at 14:26 on Apr 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 14:21
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Unless this passes, it means nothing. Oh, I know and realize it won't pass. Just nice to see anyone at all even bringing it up
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 14:26
|
|
|
DeeplyConcerned posted:don't forget the Fulton County DA is looking into pressing charges as well. any day now! Her grand jury started this week.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 17:19
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Unless this passes, it means nothing. The public is correct and this is how politics should work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 18:36
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Oh, I know and realize it won't pass. Just nice to see anyone at all even bringing it up I'm absolutely with you in supporting this poo poo, but how would it actually work in a practical sense? First off, what is the working definition of family here? Household? Spouse? Adult children? Parents? Siblings? Friends with benefits? And please understand that I'm not looking to shoot it down, but most restrictions or rules for jobs really only apply to the employee - I work for a federal contractor, I'm not allowed to smoke cannabis (even though it's legal here). My wife on the other hand can smoke as much as she wants. So can my dad or my brothers for that matter. If that rule were to change to include my family, how in the hell would I prevent my family from smoking cannabis? Furthermore, they could rightly argue that their ability to smoke shouldn't be hampered just because of a job I took. So back to members of congress and stocks. Yeah, obviously a spouse shouldn't be allowed to trade because they're basically a legal unit. But what happens if that spouse get tired of it, starts a separation and just goes wild trading securities? The member of congress can't forcibly stop that from happening? What in the case of "family" being extended further? If it's easy for a MoC to tell their spouse what they should trade, they can (and have!) pick up the phone and call their parents, siblings, cousins, children and share that same insider info. At the same time, why should I suddenly be unable to trade securities simply because a family member gets elected to congress? What happens to my 401k? I guess what I'm trying to ask here is what exactly are the best practices here? How do we balance the absolute need for and end to legalized insider trading with the fact that affected family members likely have no agency in entering into these restrictions in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I'm absolutely with you in supporting this poo poo, but how would it actually work in a practical sense? First off, what is the working definition of family here? Household? Spouse? Adult children? Parents? Siblings? Friends with benefits? This is a bunch of gish gollop since you can just look at the actual bill being discussed in that article, Spanberger’s. It's spouse and dependent children. The working definition of family in most legislature would follow that and you'd just define it in the bill. It wouldn't make sense to put the same rules on any extended family since that would just be straight insider trading if they traded because of confidential information provided to them by a relative in Congress. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I'm absolutely with you in supporting this poo poo, but how would it actually work in a practical sense? First off, what is the working definition of family here? Household? Spouse? Adult children? Parents? Siblings? Friends with benefits? The article is badly mischaracterizing the bill by saying "and their families". The bill covers spouses and dependent children. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr336/text e: to summarize an already short bill, it requires them to put covered investments in a blind trust and keep them there until they've been out of office for six months. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Apr 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
eviltastic posted:The article is badly mischaracterizing the bill by saying "and their families". The bill covers spouses and dependent children. Thanks, I looked three times for the text of the bill and couldn't find it. Gumball Gumption posted:This is a bunch of gish gollop since you can just look at the actual bill being discussed in that article, Spanberger’s. It's spouse and dependent children. The working definition of family in most legislature would follow that and you'd just define it in the bill. It wouldn't make sense to put the same rules on any extended family since that would just be straight insider trading if they traded because of confidential information provided to them by a relative in Congress. You doing ok, buddy? This is a little much for a Saturday afternoon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I'm absolutely with you in supporting this poo poo, but how would it actually work in a practical sense? First off, what is the working definition of family here? Household? Spouse? Adult children? Parents? Siblings? Friends with benefits? All members liquidate their stocks put into a blind trust and administered by OMB and an independent OMB commission. If you refuse, you can't be seated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 20:41
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:This is a bunch of gish gollop since you can just look at the actual bill being discussed in that article, Spanberger’s. It's spouse and dependent children. The working definition of family in most legislature would follow that and you'd just define it in the bill. It wouldn't make sense to put the same rules on any extended family since that would just be straight insider trading if they traded because of confidential information provided to them by a relative in Congress. Gishsh galloping (with an "a") would be too much info/questions to respond to but somehow you were able to respond to it* succinctly so you used the term incorrectly. *not that I agree with your response. The Sean fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Apr 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:All members liquidate their stocks put into a blind trust and administered by OMB and an independent OMB commission. If you refuse, you can't be seated. As long as they’re held to a fiduciary standard, that seems fine to me. I presume they would anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 23:03
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Thanks, I looked three times for the text of the bill and couldn't find it. No problem, I found it a little annoying to track down as well. It'd be nice if articles like that would at least give the name of the dang bill. fwiw the referenced bill banning stock trades is here: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s564/text To respond to your actual post, I'd quibble a bit with your premise. It doesn't seem to me like the concern is legalized insider trading so much as it is (1) an unwillingness or inability to prosecute activity that's already illegal but that we believe is happening regardless, and (2) trying to reign in the basic conflicts of interest from legislators with financial interests that are impacted by the decisions they're making. I don't think analogies to other jobs work. It makes sense to have uniquely firm or broad rules for congresscritters, because they've got a unique privilege: US Constitution posted:Article I, Section 6, Clause 1:
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 23:07
|
|
|
FDA is moving to ban all menthol cigarettes and all flavored cigars. There will be online public listening sessions on June 13 and 15; information on how to access them will be posted here. There's also going to be a chance to submit comments on both rulemakings, but the dockets seem not to be open yet. I'll link the access info when it's posted if I get the chance; it should be, ah, very interesting. I didn't get any responses last time, but BATF has also redefined "receiver" for the purpose of gun regulation. The full 98 page rule, which is very complex, is here. The major definitions (as far as I can tell) are below. quote:(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the term “frame or receiver” means the following—
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 00:14
|
|
|
I know it's complicated and next to impossible to enforce but so much of what congress does and where they get their donation money, to me, falls under the very definition of insider trading. I don't see where there's much to be done about it because to get elected in the first place, you have to be in bed with this poo poo to start with. But, fundamentally, if you're passing laws and regulations that effect business, negotiate terms behind closed doors and have a vested interest in any of that poo poo, well...gently caress. I don't even know what to say about that. It breaks my brain. I'm not sure that putting it investments in a trust would do much either because you can always cut deals that will pay off down the road anyway and just roll poo poo into someone else's portfolio until you can cash in. And who's going to loving enforce it? You can freeze investment accounts but that won't stop Joe Congressman from Maryland taking the long look at poo poo that will benefit him down the road after he becomes a lobbyist or a consultant. The only thing that makes sense is a 100% across the board ban on really moving any stock at all if you're in office but good loving luck with that.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 00:25
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:FDA is moving to ban all menthol cigarettes and all flavored cigars. Can you elaborate on how this is different from the previous definition and why that’s significant?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Can you elaborate on how this is different from the previous definition and why that’s significant? Not easily, I'll need to go through the regs basically from scratch. I was hoping there was anyone else with actual BATF and gun regulation experience. I know the definition of receiver is very important, and subject to a lot of abusive circumvention.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 00:42
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Also, this is something I can definitely get behind If this doesn't also prevent spouses from trading, this does nothing
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 00:54
|
|
|
Dpulex posted:If this doesn't also prevent spouses from trading, this does nothing I believe this is the House bill discussed in the article, I don't have time to check the senate one atm. It covers spouses and dependent children.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
My Kools! 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2022 01:38
|
|
