Tag Archives: january

How Obama Handled the Conflict-of-Interest Issue Trump Now Faces

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Unless something drastic changes, Donald Trump, the self-proclaimed “King of Debt,” will enter the White House on January 20 with about $713 million in debt. He carries mortgages for all his prized properties—including Trump Tower, the Doral golf course in Miami, and his swanky new Washington, DC, hotel—and this does not count another $2 billion in debt (including massive loans from the state-owned Bank of China) that finances partnerships in which he participates.

These loans create significant conflicts of interest. For instance, his biggest lender, Deutsche Bank, is in the middle of negotiations with the Justice Department over how many billions of dollars in civil penalties it should pay for its role in the 2008 financial crisis. Yet as Trump has recently tweeted, the celebrity mogul has no plans to sell his mortgaged assets. Instead, he says, he will let his adult children manage his business and deal with these properties. (Trump postponed a press conference scheduled for this week in which he was supposed to unveil the details of his plan for separating himself from his business empire.) But according to ethics experts, divestiture is the only way Trump can truly address the conflicts.

As Trump has pointed out, there is no law that requires him to sell these assets. But since the 1970s, presidents have taken steps to minimize their conflicts of interest—even if only to avoid the appearance of a conflict. One good example for Trump: President Barack Obama. In 2013, as home mortgage interest rates plummeted, Obama publicly urged Americans to take advantage of the falling rates and save themselves a bundle of money. Alas, Obama told a town hall audience in 2013, he couldn’t follow his own good advice.

“Well, not to get too personal, but our home back in Chicago—not the White House, which, as I said, that’s a rental—our home back in Chicago, my mortgage interest rate, I would probably benefit from refinancing right now, I would save some money,” Obama said. “When you’re President, you have to be a little careful about these transactions, so we haven’t refinanced.”

Be careful—by that, Obama meant he did not want to get close to a conflict of interest by negotiating a deal with any bank. And that entailed a personal sacrifice.

Obama’s mortgage, which he took out in 2005, carries a 5.62 percent interest rate—significantly higher than the current rates that are around 4 percent for a 30-year mortgage. In 2015, USA Today estimated that Obama could save almost $2,100 a month by refinancing. But though he was not prevented from taking advantage of the lower rates, he chose not to do so. He had learned his lesson. Years earlier, when he first entered office, his 5.62 percent mortgage was heavily scrutinized, with the question being whether he had received a below-market rate as an act of favoritism. A Federal Election Commission investigation determined that Obama had obtained a discounted rate but that it was legal because it was within the range offered by Obama’s bank to customers who may provide the bank with additional business.

Before entering the White House, Obama sold his stock portfolio and invested all his personal assets in Treasury notes with some smaller investments in broadly held mutual funds. Once again, he was not compelled to do this by any law—federal conflict-of-interest laws and rules do not apply to the president—but he took this step to remove any taint of possible conflict.

So far, Trump is taking a different approach. He says he has sold off his stocks—without offering any documents to confirm this. But he has not publicly addressed the conflicts posed by his massive borrowing or by his connections to his family business. His transition team now says he will hold a press conference in January to present his plan to deal with potential business conflicts. Yet he certainly has not yet met the standard followed by the man he is succeeding.

Visit source:  

How Obama Handled the Conflict-of-Interest Issue Trump Now Faces

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How Obama Handled the Conflict-of-Interest Issue Trump Now Faces

BREAKING: Ivanka Out, Eric & Don Jr. to Take Reins of Trump Biz

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

It looks like Ivanka has been fired:

In a pair of tweets sent after 11 p.m., Trump wrote: “Even though I am not mandated by law to do so, I will be leaving my businesses before January 20th so that I can focus full time on the Presidency. Two of my children, Don and Eric, plus executives, will manage them. No new deals will be done during my term(s) in office.”

….Trump’s tweets omitted reference to daughter Ivanka, who, like her brothers, currently works at the Trump Organization. However, Ivanka is expected to step away from the business to serve in an advisory capacity to her father; her husband Jared is a key and trusted aide.

Then again, maybe she’s been promoted. Which is better: being a co-CEO of a crippled Trump Organization, or being acting First Lady because apparently your stepmother doesn’t want the job? That’s a ticklish question. Where’s the chief of protocol when you need him?

More:

BREAKING: Ivanka Out, Eric & Don Jr. to Take Reins of Trump Biz

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on BREAKING: Ivanka Out, Eric & Don Jr. to Take Reins of Trump Biz

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon increased by a whopping 29 percent this year — but there’s a way to slow it.

For the first time in eight years, OPEC — you know, that cartel of 14 oil-rich countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela — made a deal to curb production starting in January.

It’s partially a response to the worldwide glut of oil that has battered crude prices over recent years. OPEC’s profits from oil exports have plunged from a record $920 billion in 2012 to $341 billion this year. This puts countries that depend on oil exports (looking at you, Venezuela) between a shale rock and a hard place.

To push prices back up, OPEC members agreed to slash production, leading to an 8 percent spike in crude prices on Wednesday. Investors raced to buy shares of U.S. shale oil companies. Continental Resources  — founded by Harold Hamm, Trump’s energy advisor — jumped 25 percent after the announcement. Whiting Petroleum soared 32 percent, its biggest one-day jump in 13 years.

This celebration is sure to lead to a hangover. For one, OPEC countries have a hard time sticking to their agreements. And experts predict a long century of decline for oil as demand peaks in the next decade. Of course, those estimates assume countries will keep their pledges to combat climate change.

See original article:  

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon increased by a whopping 29 percent this year — but there’s a way to slow it.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, PUR, Radius, Ringer, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon increased by a whopping 29 percent this year — but there’s a way to slow it.

Marco Rubio Can’t Quit the Senate

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Marco Rubio spent the last year promising that he would not run for re-election to his Senate seat in Florida, and spent the better part of his doomed White House bid bashing the Senate. But on Wednesday, the Washington Post reports, Rubio will announce that he is reversing his pledge and in fact wants to spend another six years in a job he thinks doesn’t achieve anything.

As recently as a month ago, Rubio was unequivocal about his future plans.

In the past month, Republicans have put pressure on Rubio to reconsider. His name recognition could help the GOP hold his seat, and with it control of the Senate. Rubio, who is expected to run for president again, even as early as 2020, apparently has decided he wants to stay in the Senate, even though he really doesn’t like it there. Over the past year, Rubio has made a lot of comments disparaging the “dysfunctional” Senate. When he took flack during his presidential campaign for missing votes, he contended that the votes really didn’t matter anyway. “We’re not going to fix America with senators and congressmen,” he said in January. Perhaps he’s changed his mind.

At least one former foe of Rubio will be cheering his decision:

Original article: 

Marco Rubio Can’t Quit the Senate

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Marco Rubio Can’t Quit the Senate

777 days later, Congress hasn’t lifted a finger for Flint

777 days later, Congress hasn’t lifted a finger for Flint

By on Jun 10, 2016Share

It’s been 777 days since Michigan switched Flint’s water supply from Detroit to Flint River and residents began complaining that it looked, tasted, and smelled wrong; 478 days since a Flint resident informed the Environmental Protection Agency that her water contained high levels of lead; and 157 days since Republican Governor Rick Snyder declared a state of emergency.

The U.S. Congress still hasn’t passed any aid to help Flint, or for any of the other communities that could use it.

Senate Republicans on Thursday abandoned an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would allocate $1.9 billion for lead-free clean water infrastructure across the country and in Flint. Before this bill, the Senate didn’t add aid onto a comprehensive energy package because Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) blocked the amendment.

Not only does the water in Flint still contain lead — which leads to physical and developmental problems in adults and children — it could take up to eight years and more than $200 million to replace the damaged pipes that lead to the crisis. And the water in Flint isn’t just dangerous, it’s also expensive: A report by Food and Water Watch found that the annual water bill for a Flint household was about $910 as of January 2015. That’s compared to $315 in districts where water is a government utility and $500 in districts where water is provided by for-profit entities. Making this all the more chilling, Flint is one of the most impoverished cities in the nation.

More than 2,000 municipal water systems in all 50 states show elevated levels of lead, and yet, the U.S. Congress continues to ignore, to postpone, to deny funding to fix the problem. As John Oliver said, “Flint has become a city whose name is synonymous with disaster.” The same could be said of Congress.

Get Grist in your inbox

Continued:

777 days later, Congress hasn’t lifted a finger for Flint

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 777 days later, Congress hasn’t lifted a finger for Flint

Keystone pipeline still a pain in nation’s butt

Keystone pipeline still a pain in nation’s butt

By on May 11, 2016Share

Will it ever end?

Six months after President Obama nixed the Keystone XL pipeline — a decision it took him seven years to reach — Keystone is back in the news.

The Hill reports that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — along with Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas — filed briefs this week in support of a lawsuit against the Obama administration. Pipeline company TransCanada filed the suit in federal court in January, arguing that Obama exceeded his constitutional authority when he denied a permit for Keystone. (Also in January, TransCanada filed a separate claim under NAFTA arguing that the U.S. should pay the company more than $15 billion to compensate it for “costs and damages that it has suffered” because of Obama’s decision. Boo hoo.)

In the newly filed briefs, the states argue that by rejecting the pipeline, the president dampened employment opportunities. These so-called “employment opportunities” were an oft-cited argument in favor of building the pipeline, but the State Department estimated that Keystone would have created as few as 20 permanent jobs.

Maybe the states could just open one Arby’s and call it even.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Original article:

Keystone pipeline still a pain in nation’s butt

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Oster, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Keystone pipeline still a pain in nation’s butt

There’s Still Slack in the Labor Market—But Not a Lot

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Brad DeLong looks at a chart showing the employment rate of prime-age workers (ages 25-54) compared to January 2000 and says:

Without nominal wage growth of 4%/year or significantly rising inflation, no way I am going to believe that the U.S. economy is in any sense at “full employment” with an essentially zero output gap right now.

It’s not that I disagree, but I think that choosing January 2000 stacks the deck. That’s the absolute peak of the dotcom boom, and there’s no reason to think we’re going to replicate that anytime soon. A better comparison would be the mid-90s, when the economy was strong and growing but not at the peak of a bubble. Here’s what that looks like:

We’re still not at full employment. But we’re getting there: the unemployment rate is low; the expanded unemployment rate is getting close to low; and wages are increasing a bit. Additional inflationary pressure would be yet another sign of a tight labor market, but we haven’t seen that yet.

We still have work to do to get to full employment—and it’s possible we’ll never get back to 1990s levels. That depends a lot on precisely who’s dropped out of the workforce and why. But we’re getting close.

From: 

There’s Still Slack in the Labor Market—But Not a Lot

Posted in alternative energy, FF, GE, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on There’s Still Slack in the Labor Market—But Not a Lot

Donald Trump Is Becoming Less Popular

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Looking for something to cheer yourself up? I don’t have much for you, but I have something: Donald Trump seems to be getting slightly less popular lately. He’s still winning plenty of Republican primaries, but ever since the first week of January his net unfavorables have been drifting upward slowly but fairly steadily.

This won’t help Republicans much, since all their other candidates appear to be getting unpopular even faster than Trump. And although Hillary Clinton is doing a little better than Trump, she’s not going great guns in the favorability race either. In fact, as near as I can tell, everyone is becoming less popular except for Bernie Sanders, who appears to be the only person left in America with a positive favorable rating.

If there’s a difference here, I’d say that Hillary has been getting pilloried ever since Benghazi, while Trump has only barely been attacked at all. Once Democrats really start hammering him, he probably has further to fall. That’s the glass-half-full analysis, anyway. Take it for what it’s worth.

Continue reading: 

Donald Trump Is Becoming Less Popular

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump Is Becoming Less Popular

Why Did Sheldon Adelson Buy Nevada’s Biggest Paper?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In December, journalists at the Las Vegas Review-Journal were told that their paper had been sold—and that they wouldn’t be told who the new owners were.

The move touched off a nationwide guessing game, with speculation soon turning to local billionaire Sheldon Adelson. At first, the casino magnate rebuffed questions, before finally confirming his involvement.

That put an end to that mystery, but plenty of others surrounding the sale remain: How did a group of Review-Journal reporters end up tasked with an unorthodox investigation into a local judge trying a case vital to Adelson? And how did an article critical of that judge end up running in a Connecticut newspaper under a fake name?

But the most important question of all is why, exactly, did the political megadonor made the purchase? His family maintains it was an investment, but hardly anyone would argue the American newspaper industry is a safe financial bet in 2016. Was it to push his agenda in the 2016 presidential race? Or was it to take control of a local watchdog that has often been an irritant?

Adelson and his company, Las Vegas Sands, are major players in the city’s economy and politics, and since the mogul purchased the Review-Journal, the paper has wrestled with how to fairly cover its owner and disclose his many interests. Read all about it below, and make sure read our accompanying cover story on Adelson, too:

Spring 2015

An emissary quietly approaches GateHouse Media, the owners of the 106-year-old daily Las Vegas Review-Journal, on behalf of Sheldon Adelson.

David Becker/Zuma Press

September 21

News + Media Capital Group forms as a Delaware corporation. The paperwork lists Michael Schroeder, the publisher of a small chain of Connecticut newspapers, as the company’s manager. It will be three months until Adelson admits his family controls the company.

September

Schroeder offers a freelance reporter $5,000 to write an article on Nevada judges for one of his Connecticut papers. During the meeting, Schroeder mentions Adelson’s name and provides a 40-page “dossier” of court documents and newspaper clips. The reporter turns down the assignment, later telling the Huffington Post that it sounded too unorthodox.

Early November

A GateHouse executive calls a top editor at the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, another GateHouse paper, with a story tip involving Las Vegas judges. The editor refuses to have his reporters investigate. “We just didn’t have the resources,” he later said. “There were too many questions that still needed to get resolved.”

November 4

The Nevada Supreme Court denies Adelson’s push to have Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez removed from former Sands executive Steve Jacobs’ wrongful-termination lawsuit against Adelson. Gonzalez had clashed with Adelson when he refused to answer questions on the stand: “Sir, you don’t get to argue with me,” she said. “Do you understand that?”

Jeff Scheid/AP

November 6

Over editors’ protests, GateHouse orders a group of Review-Journal reporters to drop everything and investigate several Las Vegas judges. The reporters eventually file 15,000 words of notes on three judges, including Gonzalez.

December 1

While none of the team’s reporting ever appears in the Review-Journal, two small Connecticut papers owned by Schroeder publish an article under the byline of Edward Clarkin that excoriates Gonzalez’s handling of the Adelson case.

December 10

GateHouse sells the Review-Journal to News + Media Capital Group for $140 million. The price is two to three times the paper’s estimated value, driving speculation that Adelson is the purchaser. Schroeder tells the newsroom that the new owners “want you to focus on your jobs…Don’t worry about who they are.” That night, according to the Huffington Post, publisher Jason Taylor stops the presses as an article on the sale is revised to deemphasize questions about the mystery buyer.

December 15

Adelson sits in the front section as his Venetian resort hosts a Republican presidential debate. He denies to CNN’s Brian Stelter that he’s bought the paper, saying he has “no personal interest.”

December 16

Adelson and his family are finally revealed as the Review-Journal‘s new owners but insist in an open letter that they always intended to come forward and had bought the paper as an investment with no plans to meddle in its management. Despite these assurances, Taylor requires reporters and editors to get approval before covering Adelson or the sale.

December 18

The Review-Journal publishes an article detailing how its reporters were tasked with the judicial investigation. The article also explores ties between Schroeder, the newspaper group’s manager, and the Edward Clarkin article slamming Gonzalez. It notes that Clarkin’s byline previously only appeared as a restaurant reviewer.

December 22

After five years on the job, the Review-Journal‘s top editor accepts a buyout offer, citing concerns about the new ownership.

December 23

The Hartford Courant reports it can’t find anyone named “Edward Clarkin” in Connecticut, and that sources quoted in his article say they’ve never heard of him. The Courant also reports that major passages in the Clarkin article are “nearly identical to work that previously appeared in other publications.” Another Connecticut journalist tweets that Schroeder’s middle name is Edward and his mother’s maiden name is Clarkin.

Gregor Cresnar/The Noun Project

Around December 28

Schroeder is removed from his post overseeing the Review-Journal. “It just seemed like the right thing to do under the circumstances,” an Adelson spokesman later says. “I’ll leave it at that.”

January 4, 2016

The Review-Journal’s managers bring in an adviser to work out guidelines for covering Adelson’s many interests. An editor live-tweets the contentious meeting. “You’ve got to ease up here just a little,” the adviser says, “so everyone doesn’t blow their cork.”

January 5

Michael Schroeder publishes a note to readers, taking “full responsibility” for the Clarkin article, which he says failed to meet his papers’ standards, and conceding that the byline was a pseudonym.

Stephen Dunn/The Hartford Courant

January 6

Editorial writer Glenn Cook is appointed interim editor. He issues guidelines requiring a standing disclosure on the Adelsons’ interests and ownership of the Review-Journal in the print edition and on the paper’s website, and additional taglines mentioning Adelson’s ownership on “all relevant” stories. The guidelines preserve the publisher’s right to review “significant stories about the newspaper’s ownership.”

January 11

During a deposition, one of Steve Jacobs’ lawyers asks Adelson’s son-in-law, Patrick Dumont, if he discussed Jacobs’ lawsuit with Schroeder or participated in drafting any articles on the trial. Dumont declines to answer.

January 13

Las Vegas Sands lawyers file a new motion to remove Gonzalez from the Jacobs case, arguing that she showed bias against Sands by giving interviews to the press amid “recent intensified media coverage of the lawsuit.” Gonzalez denies any “bias toward or prejudice against” Las Vegas Sands.

January 27

Press critic Jay Rosen outlines a series of unanswered questions about the Review-Journal transaction. “By failing to address the very serious questions left hanging by the sale,” he writes, “the people who run GateHouse Media are, I believe, playing havoc with its reputation.”

January 28

The Review-Journal announces that Craig Moon, former publisher and president of USA Today and executive vice president of Gannett, will replace Taylor as publisher. Moon immediately removes the standing disclosure statement, calling it “overkill.”

January 28

Las Vegas Sands proposes building a $1.2 billion domed stadium, to be shared by the University of Nevada-Las Vegas football team and a potential NFL franchise. Sands had previously opposed plans to redevelop the site as an improvement project for the Las Vegas Convention Center—a direct competitor with Adelson’s Sands Expo and Convention Center.

January 30

The Review-Journal editorial board praises the plan for a new stadium: “This stadium is the missing piece of tourism infrastructure in Las Vegas, more important than any other proposal, including the expansion of the Las Vegas Convention Center.”

February 4

Gatehouse CEO Mike Reed tells Politico that there was no “specific mandate” for Review-Journal reporters to investigate Las Vegas judges, and he accuses the newsroom of spinning “untruths” about the judicial investigation. Since Moon was hired, Politico reports, stories involving Adelson have been “reviewed, changed or killed almost daily.”

February 5

J. Keith Moyer, a veteran of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the Fresno Bee, and several Gannett papers, is named editor of the Review-Journal. On the same day, sources close to Adelson tell Politico that the billionaire is nearing an endorsement of Marco Rubio, the Review-Journal endorses Rubio. “The Adelsons have detached themselves from our endorsement process, and our endorsement of Sen. Rubio does not represent the support of the family,” the editorial board writes.

February 8

Moyer tells USA Today that Adelson “told me directly he would be staying out of the newsroom,” and shares that the new owners have aspirations to make the Review-Journal “a Western regional powerhouse.”

“People will be watching, and they should be,” Moyer says.

View this article:

Why Did Sheldon Adelson Buy Nevada’s Biggest Paper?

Posted in Anchor, Brita, Everyone, FF, GE, Jason, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Did Sheldon Adelson Buy Nevada’s Biggest Paper?

Oh Great. A Climate Change Skeptic Is Moderating Tonight’s GOP Debate.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The presidential debates have been widely criticized for so far all but ignoring global warming. But Saturday’s Republican debate has the potential to be even more problematic. That’s because one of the moderators is an outspoken climate change skeptic.

In addition to Face the Nation host John Dickerson and White House correspondent Major Garrett, tonight’s CBS debate will feature questions from Kimberley Strassel, a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board.

While not an obsession of Strassel’s, she’s long expressed doubts: in 2007, Strassel said on CNBC that “there isn’t a consensus yet that climate change is actually caused by man or necessarily will be a huge problem,” before adding “it’s real cold out there today.” (It was January.)

In 2009, she deployed scare quotes to claim that a set of leaked emails between climatologists had “blown the lid off the ‘science’ of manmade global warming.”

More recently, Strassel appeared on Fox in 2014 to explain that global warming “became climate change when you couldn’t prove that there was much global warming anymore, you know, as the temperature didn’t change,” going on to suggest that there was something nefarious about the shift to the widely preferred phrase: “we had to have this catch all term…that meant that any change in the weather somehow supported the theory.”

Those statements align pretty closely with the varying degrees of climate change denial espoused by the remaining Republican candidates. It’s not hard to imagine that a debate showcasing the views of Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Strassel could leave viewers extremely misinformed about climate science.

I’ve asked to Strassel to elaborate on her views and have asked her, Dickerson, and CBS how they plan to handle the issue. They haven’t responded.

Still, if the moderators decide to ask the candidates some scientifically accurate questions about global warming, we’ve compiled a pretty good list for them to pick from. My colleague Tim McDonnell asked a bunch of the nation’s leading climate scientists and environmental activists what they’d ask. Read their suggestions here.

Read this article:  

Oh Great. A Climate Change Skeptic Is Moderating Tonight’s GOP Debate.

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oh Great. A Climate Change Skeptic Is Moderating Tonight’s GOP Debate.