HomeMeta11/22 News Roundup – Bernie In Concord, What Tulsi Told Trump, Standing Rock Blackout & More
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
magsview

Theranos Whistleblower Shook the Company—and His Family
Tyler Shultz says he wanted to shield reputation of former Secretary of State George Shultz, a Theranos director and his grandfather; $400,000 in legal fees

Theranos accused him of leaking trade secrets and violating an agreement to not disclose confidential information. Mr. Shultz says lawyers from the law firm founded by David Boies, one of the country’s best-known litigators and who later became a Theranos director, surprised him during a visit to his grandfather’s house.

They unsuccessfully pressured the younger Mr. Shultz to say he had talked to the reporter and to reveal who the Journal’s other sources might be. He says he also was followed by private investigators hired by Theranos.

Whenever I read the name David Boies I think of The Pelican Brief.

The tension opened a rift in the Shultz family. While growing up, Tyler played in the pool at his grandfather’s house, and he often dropped by the elder Mr. Shultz’s home or his office at the Hoover Institution think tank while attending Stanford University.

In the past year and a half, the grandson and grandfather have rarely spoken or seen one another, communicating mainly through lawyers, says Tyler Shultz. He and his parents have spent more than $400,000 on legal fees, he says. He didn’t attend his grandfather’s 95th birthday celebration in December. Ms. Holmes did.

“Fraud is not a trade secret,” says Mr. Shultz, who hoped his grandfather would cut ties with Theranos once the company’s practices became known. “I refuse to allow bullying, intimidation and threat of legal action to take away my First Amendment right to speak out against wrongdoing.”

The elder Mr. Shultz joined Theranos’s board of directors in 2011. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Sen. Sam Nunn, all fellows with Mr. Shultz at the Hoover Institution, joined the Theranos board around the same time. They couldn’t be reached for comment.

The unusually high-profile board gave Theranos an aura of power, connections and gravitas as it raised money from investors and developed the blood-testing devices Ms. Holmes touted as revolutionary.

Benny

Trump Won’t Pursue Further Investigation of Hillary Clinton’s E-mail Server or Clinton Foundation

In an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, Kellyanne Conway, the former Trump campaign manager and a senior adviser to his transition, said the president-elect wanted to “move beyond the issues of the campaign” and confirmed that Mr. Trump did not want his promised Clinton investigations to take place.

Source: NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/us/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-investigation.html

When Clinton conceded so quickly two weeks ago over the phone with Trump, my own thought was that she and the Donald made a deal that he would leave her business affairs alone. Given that Trump is first a businessman, then POTUS-Elect second, he agreed to do so.

I also have wondered if Trump’s money was tied up somewhere with the Clinton Foundation (yes he donated but in exchange for what).

There has been a lot of talk by the Establishment Media (EM) concerning Trump’s selections for his cabinet and advisory, how loyalty is most important qualification. It bothers me that the EM hasn’t reported that this is always the case and Clinton would have been the same in her process, except many of her picks do have more experience with national governing (good and/or bad).

jcitybone

I don’t think Clinton’s choices would have included quite the same number of racists, xenophobes, misogynists, and homophobes that Trump is choosing

Benny

Good point.

joe from Lowell

Jeff. Fucking. Sessions.

Appalling. A man too racist to be confirmed 30 years ago.

phatkhat

Sounds like Obama moving forward instead of going after the Bush/Cheney war crimes. They ALWAYS go forward, because that is what the PTB desire.

jcitybone

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/22/13708648/democrats-won-popular-vote

More Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than for Donald Trump. More Americans voted for Democratic Senate candidates than for Republican Senate candidates. And while we don’t have final numbers yet, it looks likely that more Americans will have voted for House Democrats than for House Republicans.

So why aren’t Democrats acting like it? Why aren’t they trying to force Republicans, the media, and the emergent Trump White House to act like it?

This is not an argument that the election was rigged, or that Trump’s win is somehow illegitimate. The president is chosen by the Electoral College. The Senate is built to favor small states. Gerrymandering is legal. America does not decide national elections by simply tallying up votes.

But the will of the voters still matters, or at least it should. Thus far, Democrats have slipped comfortably into the position of minority party. They aren’t demanding that Trump put forward compromise candidates for key posts. They aren’t laying out a proactive agenda that would serve as their basis for negotiations with Trump and the Republicans. And they aren’t, in their public messaging, emphasizing that most voters opposed Trump’s agenda, and that both Democrats and Republicans need to take that seriously.

Democrats have confused the reality of being out of power with the idea of being in the minority. This lets the Trump administration and the Republican Party confuse the reality of being in power with the idea of having a mandate for their agenda.

jcitybone

The electoral college system stinks! It’s outrageous that a candidate can win the popular vote by 2.5 million votes and not win.

https://twitter.com/Redistrict?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

It looks very likely that by the time we’re done counting, 2016 turnout as % of citizen voting age population will exceed 2012.
Hillary Clinton looks likely to hit 65M votes, roughly on par w/ Obama ’12, and win popular vote by ~2.5M: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/edit#g

Benny

There are good things and bad things about the electoral process. I would like to see more candidates in debates and cut out the superdelegates in all parties (hint the Dems). I’d also like to get rid of the Presidential Debates group and return the debates to the League of Women Voters.

Having said that, the Electoral College should have theoretically kept Bush and Trump out, but gerrymandering is a huge issue.

jcitybone

Of course, any other Dem candidate for President would probably have won by at least 5 million votes, entered the White House and brought along with him or her many other Dems in Congress.

wpDiscuz
Skip to toolbar