SEE
Thursday, April 01, 2021
TODAY'S FOOL
DOJ investigation into Matt Gaetz looking at allegations he paid women, who were recruited online, for sex, NYT reports
Kelsey Vlamis and Azmi Haroun
Sources told The Times Gaetz and a political ally connected with the women online.
Gaetz is currently being investigated over possible sex trafficking.
A Justice Department investigation into GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida is looking into money he and a political ally paid directly to women via apps, The New York Times reported Thursday. According to the report, which cited several unnamed sources familiar with the case, the women said they were paid for sex.
Sources told The Times that Joel Greenberg, the former tax collector in Seminole County, Florida, who has been indicted on multiple counts including those related to sex trafficking, connected with women online.
Gaetz has denied ever paying for sex.
"Matt Gaetz has never paid for sex," his office said in a statement to The Times. "Matt Gaetz refutes all the disgusting allegations completely. Matt Gaetz has never ever been on any such websites whatsoever. Matt Gaetz cherishes the relationships in his past and looks forward to marrying the love of his life."
Read more: Republicans are unloading on Rep. Matt Gaetz in gossipy texts and snide asides amid reports of a DOJ sex investigation: 'He's the meanest person in politics'
On Thursday, The Times, citing four people familiar with the investigation, reported that Gaetz and Greenberg are both being investigated for potentially having illegal sexual relationships with the same 17-year-old woman, as well as with other women who they allegedly paid to have sex.
The report claims that Greenberg introduced Gaetz to several women via websites like SeekingArrangements.com, where wealthy people and members can seek "sugar daddy" relationships, oftentimes sex and intimacy in exchange for gifts.
According to The Times report, Gaetz and Greenberg met various women at hotels in Florida and paid for sexual encounters.
Gaetz offered MDMA to at least one woman and used the drug himself during one sexual encounter, according to people familiar with the meetups and with the Justice Department interviews, The Times reported.
The Times reviewed Cash App transactions between Greenberg, Gaetz, and several women mentioned in the interviews.
In August 2020, Greenberg was indicted on fourteen counts, including sex trafficking charges related to a minor between the age of 14 and 17. According to the Orlando Sentinel, prosecutors allege that Greenberg used his access as an elected official to seek information on women via the Florida Driver and Vehicle Information Database and engage relationships with them.
On Tuesday, an explosive report from The New York Times revealed that Gaetz is under federal investigation for potentially violating federal sex trafficking laws. The Times reported that the investigation into Gaetz stemmed from the federal investigation into Greenberg.
The Times wrote that the Department of Justice is looking into "whether he had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old and paid for her to travel with him," possibly violating federal sex-trafficking laws. The investigation was opened by the Department of Justice in the final months of former President Donald Trump's administration, according to The Times.
Since news of the sex-trafficking probe broke, the story has taken many turns.
Gaetz immediately denied the allegations and claimed that he and his family are victims of an extortion scheme. Hours after Tuesday's story in The Times, Gaetz appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News, vehemently denying the allegations and repeating the extortion claims.
Gaetz said the extortion scheme started weeks ago, but the sex-trafficking investigation started last year.
On Thursday, separate from the investigation, CNN also reported that Gaetz showed House colleagues nude photos of women he had slept with, and bragged openly about his sex life.
Insider reached out to Gaetz's office for additional comment.
Kelsey Vlamis and Azmi Haroun
Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz
Ngan-Pool/Getty Images
A DOJ inquiry into Matt Gaetz is looking into direct payments he made to women, The New York Times reported.
A DOJ inquiry into Matt Gaetz is looking into direct payments he made to women, The New York Times reported.
Sources told The Times Gaetz and a political ally connected with the women online.
Gaetz is currently being investigated over possible sex trafficking.
A Justice Department investigation into GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida is looking into money he and a political ally paid directly to women via apps, The New York Times reported Thursday. According to the report, which cited several unnamed sources familiar with the case, the women said they were paid for sex.
Sources told The Times that Joel Greenberg, the former tax collector in Seminole County, Florida, who has been indicted on multiple counts including those related to sex trafficking, connected with women online.
Gaetz has denied ever paying for sex.
"Matt Gaetz has never paid for sex," his office said in a statement to The Times. "Matt Gaetz refutes all the disgusting allegations completely. Matt Gaetz has never ever been on any such websites whatsoever. Matt Gaetz cherishes the relationships in his past and looks forward to marrying the love of his life."
Read more: Republicans are unloading on Rep. Matt Gaetz in gossipy texts and snide asides amid reports of a DOJ sex investigation: 'He's the meanest person in politics'
On Thursday, The Times, citing four people familiar with the investigation, reported that Gaetz and Greenberg are both being investigated for potentially having illegal sexual relationships with the same 17-year-old woman, as well as with other women who they allegedly paid to have sex.
The report claims that Greenberg introduced Gaetz to several women via websites like SeekingArrangements.com, where wealthy people and members can seek "sugar daddy" relationships, oftentimes sex and intimacy in exchange for gifts.
According to The Times report, Gaetz and Greenberg met various women at hotels in Florida and paid for sexual encounters.
Gaetz offered MDMA to at least one woman and used the drug himself during one sexual encounter, according to people familiar with the meetups and with the Justice Department interviews, The Times reported.
The Times reviewed Cash App transactions between Greenberg, Gaetz, and several women mentioned in the interviews.
In August 2020, Greenberg was indicted on fourteen counts, including sex trafficking charges related to a minor between the age of 14 and 17. According to the Orlando Sentinel, prosecutors allege that Greenberg used his access as an elected official to seek information on women via the Florida Driver and Vehicle Information Database and engage relationships with them.
On Tuesday, an explosive report from The New York Times revealed that Gaetz is under federal investigation for potentially violating federal sex trafficking laws. The Times reported that the investigation into Gaetz stemmed from the federal investigation into Greenberg.
The Times wrote that the Department of Justice is looking into "whether he had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old and paid for her to travel with him," possibly violating federal sex-trafficking laws. The investigation was opened by the Department of Justice in the final months of former President Donald Trump's administration, according to The Times.
Since news of the sex-trafficking probe broke, the story has taken many turns.
Gaetz immediately denied the allegations and claimed that he and his family are victims of an extortion scheme. Hours after Tuesday's story in The Times, Gaetz appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News, vehemently denying the allegations and repeating the extortion claims.
Gaetz said the extortion scheme started weeks ago, but the sex-trafficking investigation started last year.
On Thursday, separate from the investigation, CNN also reported that Gaetz showed House colleagues nude photos of women he had slept with, and bragged openly about his sex life.
Insider reached out to Gaetz's office for additional comment.
‘Proclivity for younger women’: Matt Gaetz’s colleagues say he has a ‘love of alcohol and illegal drugs’: report
David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement
April 01, 2021
www.rawstory.com
The Daily Beast has published a profile of U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) who is reportedly under investigation by the DOJ for possibly having a sexual relationship with a 17-year old girl and for possible child sex-trafficking.
The profile was less-than-flattering, with The Beast reporting Gaetz's "less-than-sterling reputation among his colleagues has many Republicans questioning the wisdom of jumping to his defense" – although none have jumped to condemn him either.
"Republicans on and off Capitol Hill on Wednesday largely kept their mouths shut," The Beast reports, while offering up a disturbing revelation about the Florida GOP Congressman.
"Gaetz—the Trump-loving, Fox News-grinning, 38-year-old Florida Republican—has a less-than-sterling reputation among his congressional colleagues," The Beast says, with those colleagues indicting him over alcohol, drugs, and women.
"More than a half-dozen lawmakers have spoken to these reporters about his love of alcohol and illegal drugs, as well as his proclivity for younger women," The Beast reports. "It's well-known among Republican lawmakers that Gaetz was dating a college student—one over the age of consent—in 2018. She came to Washington as an intern."
Then, there's a "cartoonishly scandalous perception of Gaetz [which] is so commonplace that sometimes it's visible, literally, in the halls of Congress. A Hill source sent The Daily Beast a photo of a trash bin outside Gaetz's office as lawmakers cleared out their offices at the end of a recent session. At the top of the heap was an empty Costco-size box of 'Bareskin' Trojan condoms
REPORT: Matt Gaetz Showed Other Lawmakers Photos Of Nude Women On House Floor, Talked About Having Sex With Them
HOW OLD IS THIS GUY? RHETORICAL Q?
Alex Wong/Getty Images
JORDAN LANCASTERREPORTERApril 01, 2021
Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz reportedly showed other lawmakers, including while on the House floor, photos and videos of nude women and talked about having sex with them, according to CNN.
The report cites multiple anonymous sources, including two people who claim to have been shown the photos directly. The sources alleged that Gaetz talked about having sex with the women whose photos he displayed on his phone. One source claimed that a video showed a naked woman with a hula-hoop.
One of the sources said “it was a point of pride” for the representative, CNN reported. (RELATED: Wednesday Morning Dispatch: The Latest On The Matt Gaetz Sex Trafficking Accusations)
Gaetz said Tuesday he is the subject of a federal sex trafficking investigation that reportedly involves a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl. The congressman denied any allegation of wrongdoing and said he is a victim of a $25 million extortion plot.
There is no evidence to suggest the photos are connected to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) investigation into the sex trafficking allegations, CNN reported.
The DOJ opened the investigation into Gaetz at the end of the Trump administration, The New York Times reported, citing three people familiar with the matter.
“Over the past several weeks, my family and I have been victims of an organized criminal extortion involving a former DOJ official seeking $25 million while threatening to smear my name,” Gaetz said in a press release. “We have been cooperating with federal authorities in this matter and my father has even been wearing a wire at the FBI’s direction to catch these criminals.”
Gaetz alleged that a former federal prosecutor named David McGee who was “a top official in the leadership in the northern district of Florida as a prosecutor” was trying to extort him Tuesday night on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”
“The planted leak to the New York Times tonight was intended to thwart that investigation,” the press release continued. “No part of the allegations against me are true, and the people pushing these lies are targets of the ongoing extortion investigation. I demand the DOJ immediately release the tapes, made at their direction, which implicate their former colleague in crimes against me based on false allegations.”
Gaetz’s office did not immediately respond to The Daily Caller’s request for comment.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
JORDAN LANCASTER
JORDAN LANCASTER
REPORTER
April 01, 2021
Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz reportedly showed other lawmakers, including while on the House floor, photos and videos of nude women and talked about having sex with them, according to CNN.
The report cites multiple anonymous sources, including two people who claim to have been shown the photos directly. The sources alleged that Gaetz talked about having sex with the women whose photos he displayed on his phone. One source claimed that a video showed a naked woman with a hula-hoop.
One of the sources said “it was a point of pride” for the representative, CNN reported. (RELATED: Wednesday Morning Dispatch: The Latest On The Matt Gaetz Sex Trafficking Accusations)
Gaetz said Tuesday he is the subject of a federal sex trafficking investigation that reportedly involves a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl. The congressman denied any allegation of wrongdoing and said he is a victim of a $25 million extortion plot.
There is no evidence to suggest the photos are connected to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) investigation into the sex trafficking allegations, CNN reported.
The DOJ opened the investigation into Gaetz at the end of the Trump administration, The New York Times reported, citing three people familiar with the matter.
“Over the past several weeks, my family and I have been victims of an organized criminal extortion involving a former DOJ official seeking $25 million while threatening to smear my name,” Gaetz said in a press release. “We have been cooperating with federal authorities in this matter and my father has even been wearing a wire at the FBI’s direction to catch these criminals.”
Gaetz alleged that a former federal prosecutor named David McGee who was “a top official in the leadership in the northern district of Florida as a prosecutor” was trying to extort him Tuesday night on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”
“The planted leak to the New York Times tonight was intended to thwart that investigation,” the press release continued. “No part of the allegations against me are true, and the people pushing these lies are targets of the ongoing extortion investigation. I demand the DOJ immediately release the tapes, made at their direction, which implicate their former colleague in crimes against me based on false allegations.”
Gaetz’s office did not immediately respond to The Daily Caller’s request for comment.
The report cites multiple anonymous sources, including two people who claim to have been shown the photos directly. The sources alleged that Gaetz talked about having sex with the women whose photos he displayed on his phone. One source claimed that a video showed a naked woman with a hula-hoop.
One of the sources said “it was a point of pride” for the representative, CNN reported. (RELATED: Wednesday Morning Dispatch: The Latest On The Matt Gaetz Sex Trafficking Accusations)
Gaetz said Tuesday he is the subject of a federal sex trafficking investigation that reportedly involves a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl. The congressman denied any allegation of wrongdoing and said he is a victim of a $25 million extortion plot.
There is no evidence to suggest the photos are connected to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) investigation into the sex trafficking allegations, CNN reported.
The DOJ opened the investigation into Gaetz at the end of the Trump administration, The New York Times reported, citing three people familiar with the matter.
“Over the past several weeks, my family and I have been victims of an organized criminal extortion involving a former DOJ official seeking $25 million while threatening to smear my name,” Gaetz said in a press release. “We have been cooperating with federal authorities in this matter and my father has even been wearing a wire at the FBI’s direction to catch these criminals.”
Gaetz alleged that a former federal prosecutor named David McGee who was “a top official in the leadership in the northern district of Florida as a prosecutor” was trying to extort him Tuesday night on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”
“The planted leak to the New York Times tonight was intended to thwart that investigation,” the press release continued. “No part of the allegations against me are true, and the people pushing these lies are targets of the ongoing extortion investigation. I demand the DOJ immediately release the tapes, made at their direction, which implicate their former colleague in crimes against me based on false allegations.”
Gaetz’s office did not immediately respond to The Daily Caller’s request for comment.
Microsoft hit by April Fool’s day cloud outage, with Azure, Teams and Office 365 all taken offline
BY MIKE WHEATLEY
UPDATED 19:30 EDT / APRIL 01 2021
Microsoft Corp. was hit by a massive cloud outage today that took most of its internet services offline.
Microsoft’s Azure cloud services, as well as Teams, Office 365, OneDrive, Skype, Xbox Live and Bing were all inaccessible due to the outage. Even the Azure Status page was reportedly taken offline.
The first reports of the outage emerged from users on Twitter, and were confirmed by the website DownDetector which showed that reports began flooding in at around 5 p.m. ET. It says it received thousands of notices from Xbox Live, Teams and Office users.
Microsoft’s Azure Support account on Twitter posted the following message, redirecting users to an alternative Azure status page:
The cause of the outage was said to be a Domain Name System error. The Microsoft 365 Twitter status account stated that there is a “DNS issue affecting multiple Microsoft 365 and Azure services” shortly after the first reports of the outage appeared. The account then tweeted that the company was investigating a “potential DNS issue” at 5.56 p.m. ET
At 6 p.m. ET, the Microsoft 365 Status account posted another tweet, saying Microsoft is “evaluating our mitigation options”.
By 6.30 p.m. it looked as if Microsoft was regaining control of the situation. The Azure status page was back online and showed that the outage was a worldwide problem with “network infrastructure” down across every region. A status message said that a subset of users may experience “intermittent issues” with the company’s services.
At the time of writing, Microsoft appeared to be recovering from the outage. Microsoft 365’s Twitter status account posted another update at 6.35 p.m. ET saying that traffic was being rerouted to resilient DNS capabilities and that it was already “seeing an improvement in service availability.”
It appears Microsoft has dealt with the issue rapidly, but the outage is nonetheless a big embarrassment for the company, coming just two weeks after a similar incident. On March 15, Microsoft Azure was also hit with an outage, resulting in Office 365, Teams and Xbox Live all being taken offline for around four hours.
Microsoft blamed that issue on “a recent change to an authentication system”.
Image: geralt/pixabay
BY MIKE WHEATLEY
UPDATED 19:30 EDT / APRIL 01 2021
Microsoft Corp. was hit by a massive cloud outage today that took most of its internet services offline.
Microsoft’s Azure cloud services, as well as Teams, Office 365, OneDrive, Skype, Xbox Live and Bing were all inaccessible due to the outage. Even the Azure Status page was reportedly taken offline.
The first reports of the outage emerged from users on Twitter, and were confirmed by the website DownDetector which showed that reports began flooding in at around 5 p.m. ET. It says it received thousands of notices from Xbox Live, Teams and Office users.
Microsoft’s Azure Support account on Twitter posted the following message, redirecting users to an alternative Azure status page:
The cause of the outage was said to be a Domain Name System error. The Microsoft 365 Twitter status account stated that there is a “DNS issue affecting multiple Microsoft 365 and Azure services” shortly after the first reports of the outage appeared. The account then tweeted that the company was investigating a “potential DNS issue” at 5.56 p.m. ET
At 6 p.m. ET, the Microsoft 365 Status account posted another tweet, saying Microsoft is “evaluating our mitigation options”.
By 6.30 p.m. it looked as if Microsoft was regaining control of the situation. The Azure status page was back online and showed that the outage was a worldwide problem with “network infrastructure” down across every region. A status message said that a subset of users may experience “intermittent issues” with the company’s services.
At the time of writing, Microsoft appeared to be recovering from the outage. Microsoft 365’s Twitter status account posted another update at 6.35 p.m. ET saying that traffic was being rerouted to resilient DNS capabilities and that it was already “seeing an improvement in service availability.”
It appears Microsoft has dealt with the issue rapidly, but the outage is nonetheless a big embarrassment for the company, coming just two weeks after a similar incident. On March 15, Microsoft Azure was also hit with an outage, resulting in Office 365, Teams and Xbox Live all being taken offline for around four hours.
Microsoft blamed that issue on “a recent change to an authentication system”.
Image: geralt/pixabay
Study: U.S. using fewer pesticides, but harming pollinators more
A crop duster sprays a field in Alabama in this Aug. 4, 2009,
file photo. (AP/Dave Martin)
American farmers are using smaller amounts of better targeted pesticides, but those chemicals are harming pollinators, aquatic insects and some plants far more than the pesticides of decades ago, a new study finds.
Toxicity levels have more than doubled since 2005 for important species, including honeybees, mayflies and buttercup flowers, as the country switched to a new generation of pesticides. But dangerous chemical levels in birds and mammals have plummeted at the same time, according to a paper in Thursday’s journal Science.
“The bottom line is that these pesticides, once believed to be relatively benign and so short-lived that they would not damage ecosystems, are anything but,” said Dr. Lynn Goldman, a former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency assistant administrator for toxic substances who wasn’t part of the study and is now dean of George Washington University’s school of public health
German scientists examined 381 pesticides used in the United States between 1992 and 2016, combining EPA data that calculates toxic dosage effects for eight types of animals and plants with U.S. Geological Survey data on how much of the chemicals were used year by year for dozens of agricultural crops. The scientists calculated a new measurement they call total applied toxicity for the eight groupings of species and trends over time.
“Very often politicians, media, scientists just talk about amounts. They always argue ‘OK, the amount [of] pesticides we use is reduced, so things are getting better,’ and this is not necessarily true,” said lead author Ralf Schulz, a professor of environmental sciences at the University of Kolenz-Landau. “It’s sometimes true, but not always.”
Industry keeps developing new pesticides and “very often these new compounds are more toxic,” Schulz said. They include neonicotinoids, which have been connected to one of the many causes of dwindling honeybee numbers.
The newer pesticides are aimed more toward animals without backbones to spare birds and mammals, but this means insects such as pollinators get poisoned, Schulz said.
The same goes for some land plants and for aquatic invertebrates including dragonflies and mayflies, which birds and mammals eat, he said, adding that future studies should look at the harm higher up the food chain.
Chris Novak, president of the pesticide industry group CropLife America, said in an email that “it is critical to note that the study found great reductions in acute toxicity have been achieved for humans and mammals over the past few decades.”
Novak noted pesticides go through extensive studies and “only one in 10,000 discoveries make the 11-year journey from the lab to the market.”
It’s not surprising that newer generations of pesticides generally are more harmful to insects, which are undergoing a decline for many reasons, said University of Connecticut entomologist David Wagner, who wasn’t part of the study. But Wagner said this newest research doesn’t provide data needed to show “that pesticides are the major driver of insect declines.”
American farmers are using smaller amounts of better targeted pesticides, but those chemicals are harming pollinators, aquatic insects and some plants far more than the pesticides of decades ago, a new study finds.
Toxicity levels have more than doubled since 2005 for important species, including honeybees, mayflies and buttercup flowers, as the country switched to a new generation of pesticides. But dangerous chemical levels in birds and mammals have plummeted at the same time, according to a paper in Thursday’s journal Science.
“The bottom line is that these pesticides, once believed to be relatively benign and so short-lived that they would not damage ecosystems, are anything but,” said Dr. Lynn Goldman, a former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency assistant administrator for toxic substances who wasn’t part of the study and is now dean of George Washington University’s school of public health
German scientists examined 381 pesticides used in the United States between 1992 and 2016, combining EPA data that calculates toxic dosage effects for eight types of animals and plants with U.S. Geological Survey data on how much of the chemicals were used year by year for dozens of agricultural crops. The scientists calculated a new measurement they call total applied toxicity for the eight groupings of species and trends over time.
“Very often politicians, media, scientists just talk about amounts. They always argue ‘OK, the amount [of] pesticides we use is reduced, so things are getting better,’ and this is not necessarily true,” said lead author Ralf Schulz, a professor of environmental sciences at the University of Kolenz-Landau. “It’s sometimes true, but not always.”
Industry keeps developing new pesticides and “very often these new compounds are more toxic,” Schulz said. They include neonicotinoids, which have been connected to one of the many causes of dwindling honeybee numbers.
The newer pesticides are aimed more toward animals without backbones to spare birds and mammals, but this means insects such as pollinators get poisoned, Schulz said.
The same goes for some land plants and for aquatic invertebrates including dragonflies and mayflies, which birds and mammals eat, he said, adding that future studies should look at the harm higher up the food chain.
Chris Novak, president of the pesticide industry group CropLife America, said in an email that “it is critical to note that the study found great reductions in acute toxicity have been achieved for humans and mammals over the past few decades.”
Novak noted pesticides go through extensive studies and “only one in 10,000 discoveries make the 11-year journey from the lab to the market.”
It’s not surprising that newer generations of pesticides generally are more harmful to insects, which are undergoing a decline for many reasons, said University of Connecticut entomologist David Wagner, who wasn’t part of the study. But Wagner said this newest research doesn’t provide data needed to show “that pesticides are the major driver of insect declines.”
WORKERS CAPITAL
U.S. high court set to hear state teacher-pension caseby Frank E. Lockwood | March 29, 2021
This Nov. 5, 2020 file photo, shows the Supreme Court in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in the case of Goldman Sachs Group v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, which pits the state's largest public pension fund and others against one of the nation's largest banking and financial services companies.
Defending itself against a securities fraud lawsuit, Goldman Sachs argues that the courts should consider the "exceptionally generic nature" of the allegedly false statements in question before deciding whether to certify a massive class action lawsuit brought by the pension fund and other investors.
It also asks the Supreme Court to determine which side bears the "burden of persuasion" at a key stage of the proceeding.
It's important to resolve these matters before granting class action status, Goldman Sachs says. Otherwise, it is a "boon for plaintiffs (and their lawyers), given that the vast majority of securities class actions settle once class certification is granted," it stated in its petition to the Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Paul A. Crotty in New York has already certified the class, clearing the way for the case to proceed. A panel of the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling, upheld the most recent ruling by Crotty, who was placed on the bench by then-President George W. Bush.
Judge Richard C. Wesley, another Bush appointee, and Judge Denny Chin, one of then-President Barack Obama's nominees, sided with the retirement system.
Judge Richard Sullivan, appointed by then-President Donald Trump, dissented.
In its suit, the roughly $20 billion Arkansas retirement fund alleges that Goldman Sachs made false statements about its business practices, causing harm to investors.
Goldman Sachs says the suit lacks merit.
In Securities and Exchange Commission filings, annual reports and conference calls between 2006 and 2010, Goldman Sachs told investors that:
• "[W]e have extensive procedures and controls that are designed to identify and address conflicts of interest."
• "We are dedicated to complying fully with the letter and spirit of the laws, rules and ethical principles that govern us. Our continued success depends upon unswerving adherence to this standard."
• "Integrity and honesty are at the heart of our business."
• "Our clients' interests always come first. Our experience shows that if we serve our clients well, our own success will follow."
Those claims were called into question by the retirement system and others, after Goldman Sachs ran afoul of the SEC.
On April 16, 2010, the SEC brought a securities fraud action against Goldman Sachs, alleging the company had misled investors about an investment instrument that plummeted in value during the 2007-8 financial crisis.
Eventually, Goldman Sachs agreed to pay a $550 million fine after admitting that it had provided investors with "incomplete information" about the deal's origins.
Specifically, it failed to reveal that the portfolio had been assembled at the behest of Paulson & Co. Inc., a company that stood to make money if the value subsequently fell.
Goldman Sachs reached the settlement "[w]ithout admitting or denying the allegations" that were made against it, the settlement noted.
At the time, it was "the largest-ever penalty paid by a Wall Street firm," the SEC stated.
Goldman Sachs stock, which was trading at $184.27 on April 15, fell to $160.70, the day the SEC took action.
STATE SYSTEM SUES
Soon after, Goldman Sachs was sued by the Arkansas retirement system, the West Virginia Investment Management Board and the Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund.
In court filings, Goldman Sachs has denied deceiving the retirement system and other investors.
The statements cited in the suit would not have affected its stock price, it says, because they were merely "aspirational and generic," the sort of assurances "that virtually all companies make."
In nonsecurities fraud contexts, it would be difficult for plaintiffs to prove that a specific misstatement led them to make specific buying or selling decisions.
Under existing Supreme Court case law, however, there is a basic presumption that plaintiffs have relied on a company's public statements if they purchased or sold securities between the time a false, material statement was made and the time the truth becomes public.
Defendants can rebut that presumption by showing that the disputed statements had no effect on the stock's price.
Goldman Sachs is seeking to do just that.
Rather than waiting until after class action status is granted, however, Goldman Sachs wants the court to consider, at the outset, whether the alleged misstatements were so generic that they couldn't have influenced the market.
Goldman Sachs also has evidence it says disproves claims that the statements affected stock prices.
Once that evidence has been produced, Goldman Sachs says the onus, or burden of persuasion, should be on the plaintiffs to show otherwise.
The investors say they should be able to rely on Goldman Sachs' assurances and that the company should be held accountable for misleading them.
In a friend of the court brief "supporting neither party," the U.S. Department of Justice argued that defendants "may rely on the generic nature" of alleged misstatements as evidence the statements "had no actual price impact."
The fact that the statement is generic, on the other hand, is not enough, on its own, to resolve the matter, the department said.
Investors who held onto their Goldman Sachs stocks, despite the SEC action, eventually saw their shares recover in value. Goldman Sachs was trading at $327.39 at Friday's close.
Because of covid-19, the justices will hear today's arguments on a telephone conference, rather than gathering in the Supreme Court chambers.
Typically, a ruling would be handed down by the end of June.
In a written statement, retirement system Deputy Director Rod Graves portrayed Monday's hearing as significant.
"While we generally do not comment on ongoing litigation, we are very excited to have the United States Supreme Court hear our securities class action case against Goldman Sachs," he said. "The case raises important questions for us and public pension funds generally as we continue our efforts to protect shareholder rights."
Goldman Sachs did not respond Friday or Saturday to requests for comment.
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in the case of Goldman Sachs Group v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, which pits the state's largest public pension fund and others against one of the nation's largest banking and financial services companies.
Defending itself against a securities fraud lawsuit, Goldman Sachs argues that the courts should consider the "exceptionally generic nature" of the allegedly false statements in question before deciding whether to certify a massive class action lawsuit brought by the pension fund and other investors.
It also asks the Supreme Court to determine which side bears the "burden of persuasion" at a key stage of the proceeding.
It's important to resolve these matters before granting class action status, Goldman Sachs says. Otherwise, it is a "boon for plaintiffs (and their lawyers), given that the vast majority of securities class actions settle once class certification is granted," it stated in its petition to the Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Paul A. Crotty in New York has already certified the class, clearing the way for the case to proceed. A panel of the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling, upheld the most recent ruling by Crotty, who was placed on the bench by then-President George W. Bush.
Judge Richard C. Wesley, another Bush appointee, and Judge Denny Chin, one of then-President Barack Obama's nominees, sided with the retirement system.
Judge Richard Sullivan, appointed by then-President Donald Trump, dissented.
In its suit, the roughly $20 billion Arkansas retirement fund alleges that Goldman Sachs made false statements about its business practices, causing harm to investors.
Goldman Sachs says the suit lacks merit.
In Securities and Exchange Commission filings, annual reports and conference calls between 2006 and 2010, Goldman Sachs told investors that:
• "[W]e have extensive procedures and controls that are designed to identify and address conflicts of interest."
• "We are dedicated to complying fully with the letter and spirit of the laws, rules and ethical principles that govern us. Our continued success depends upon unswerving adherence to this standard."
• "Integrity and honesty are at the heart of our business."
• "Our clients' interests always come first. Our experience shows that if we serve our clients well, our own success will follow."
Those claims were called into question by the retirement system and others, after Goldman Sachs ran afoul of the SEC.
On April 16, 2010, the SEC brought a securities fraud action against Goldman Sachs, alleging the company had misled investors about an investment instrument that plummeted in value during the 2007-8 financial crisis.
Eventually, Goldman Sachs agreed to pay a $550 million fine after admitting that it had provided investors with "incomplete information" about the deal's origins.
Specifically, it failed to reveal that the portfolio had been assembled at the behest of Paulson & Co. Inc., a company that stood to make money if the value subsequently fell.
Goldman Sachs reached the settlement "[w]ithout admitting or denying the allegations" that were made against it, the settlement noted.
At the time, it was "the largest-ever penalty paid by a Wall Street firm," the SEC stated.
Goldman Sachs stock, which was trading at $184.27 on April 15, fell to $160.70, the day the SEC took action.
STATE SYSTEM SUES
Soon after, Goldman Sachs was sued by the Arkansas retirement system, the West Virginia Investment Management Board and the Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund.
In court filings, Goldman Sachs has denied deceiving the retirement system and other investors.
The statements cited in the suit would not have affected its stock price, it says, because they were merely "aspirational and generic," the sort of assurances "that virtually all companies make."
In nonsecurities fraud contexts, it would be difficult for plaintiffs to prove that a specific misstatement led them to make specific buying or selling decisions.
Under existing Supreme Court case law, however, there is a basic presumption that plaintiffs have relied on a company's public statements if they purchased or sold securities between the time a false, material statement was made and the time the truth becomes public.
Defendants can rebut that presumption by showing that the disputed statements had no effect on the stock's price.
Goldman Sachs is seeking to do just that.
Rather than waiting until after class action status is granted, however, Goldman Sachs wants the court to consider, at the outset, whether the alleged misstatements were so generic that they couldn't have influenced the market.
Goldman Sachs also has evidence it says disproves claims that the statements affected stock prices.
Once that evidence has been produced, Goldman Sachs says the onus, or burden of persuasion, should be on the plaintiffs to show otherwise.
The investors say they should be able to rely on Goldman Sachs' assurances and that the company should be held accountable for misleading them.
In a friend of the court brief "supporting neither party," the U.S. Department of Justice argued that defendants "may rely on the generic nature" of alleged misstatements as evidence the statements "had no actual price impact."
The fact that the statement is generic, on the other hand, is not enough, on its own, to resolve the matter, the department said.
Investors who held onto their Goldman Sachs stocks, despite the SEC action, eventually saw their shares recover in value. Goldman Sachs was trading at $327.39 at Friday's close.
Because of covid-19, the justices will hear today's arguments on a telephone conference, rather than gathering in the Supreme Court chambers.
Typically, a ruling would be handed down by the end of June.
In a written statement, retirement system Deputy Director Rod Graves portrayed Monday's hearing as significant.
"While we generally do not comment on ongoing litigation, we are very excited to have the United States Supreme Court hear our securities class action case against Goldman Sachs," he said. "The case raises important questions for us and public pension funds generally as we continue our efforts to protect shareholder rights."
Goldman Sachs did not respond Friday or Saturday to requests for comment.
JUDGES VIEW PLAYERS AS 'WORKERS'
US supreme court notes 'disturbing' trends in colleges' treatment of athletes
- Student athletes’ dispute with NCAA reaches supreme court
- Liberal and conservative justices appear sympathetic to athletes
Associated Press
Wed 31 Mar 2021
The US supreme court on Wednesday seemed ready to give college athletes a win in a dispute with their governing body, the NCAA.
With the March Madness basketball tournament in its final stages, the court heard arguments in a case about how colleges can reward athletes who play basketball and football in Division I, the highest level of college sports. Under current NCAA rules, students cannot be paid, and the scholarship money colleges can offer is capped at the cost of attending the school. The NCAA defends its rules as necessary to preserve the amateur nature of college sports.
But the former athletes who brought the case, including former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston, say the NCAA’s rules are unfair and violate federal antitrust law designed to promote competition.
The outcome will help determine how college athletes are compensated and whether schools can offer tens of thousands of dollars in education benefits for things such as postgraduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad opportunities and vocational school payments.
During an hour and a half of arguments both liberal and conservative justices sounded sympathetic to students.
Justice Elena Kagan suggested that what was going on sounded a lot like price fixing. “Schools that are naturally competitors ... have all gotten together in an organization,” she said, and used their power to “fix athletic salaries at extremely low levels.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed. He told a lawyer for the NCAA that “it does seem ... schools are conspiring with competitors ... to pay no salaries for the workers who are making the schools billions of dollars on the theory that consumers want the schools to pay their workers nothing.” Kavanaugh said that was “somewhat disturbing.”
A ruling for the former players would not necessarily mean an immediate infusion of cash to current college athletes. It would mean that the NCAA could not bar schools from sweetening their offers to Division I basketball and football athletes with additional education-related benefits. Individual athletic conferences could still set limits.
Still, if the athletes were to win, there would be pressure on schools to offer additional benefits, and that could create bidding wars for the best players. The NCAA says that could turn off fans and erase the distinction between professional and college sports.
Whatever happens at the high court, changes seem on the way for how college athletes are compensated.
The NCAA is in the process of trying to amend its rules to allow athletes to profit from their names, images and likenesses. That would allow athletes to earn money for things like sponsorship deals, online endorsement and personal appearances. For some athletes, those amounts could dwarf any education-related benefits.
The former college athletes have some big-time supporters. The players associations of the NFL, NBA and WNBA all urged the justices to side with the ex-athletes, as did the Biden administration. So far, the former players have won every round of the case.
A decision in the case is expected before the end of June, when the high court traditionally breaks for summer.
The invisible shield: how qualified immunity was created and nearly destroyed the ability to sue police officers in America Pt. I
HERB BOYD and DAMASO REYES | 4/1/2021, midnight
Artwork by Amanda Ulloa
In the aftermath of the Civil War an America broken by bloodshed and riven by racial strife began slowly putting itself back together. In little more than five years a nation that had been founded on chattel slavery passed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments, bringing the country to the precipice of being able to, for the first time in its history, live up to those famous words in the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal.” In the South, where the memories of slave auctions were still fresh, Black men were elected and appointed to state legislatures, the House of Representatives and the United States Senate. America, it seemed, was changing.
But the true believers in the “Lost Cause” would not, or could not, accept this. Throughout the country, but especially in the South, justice was denied to Black Americans despite the new protections enshrined in the Constitution. The KKK was formed and often local members and government officials were one and the same. And they used their official positions to mete out their own brand of justice when they couldn’t use a rope and a tree.
It was in this context that the Civil Rights Act of 1871, also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act, was passed. It stated very clearly, “Every person who, under color of any statute…subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law.” (Emphasis added.)
Put simply, government officials who violate the constitutional rights of citizens or anyone else in the United States while performing their official duties can be sued by that person. As Reconstruction ended, this ability to sue was essential to provide at least civil relief to the victims of those who would misuse their offices but were rarely held accountable. But over the course of the 20th century this very clear statute was redefined and reinterpreted not by Congress which passed it but by unelected judges who twisted its meaning into the doctrine we now know as qualified immunity.
“The past is never dead. It’s not even past,” the novelist William Faulkner wrote. And those words are given fresh currency in two instances that set the course of creating the concept of qualified immunity as we know it. These cases allowed a law designed to protect Americans, especially Black Americans, against the misuse of official power to instead become a shield for government officials, especially law enforcement.
In order to understand where we are today we must travel back to September 1961.
Freedom Riders lose the freedom to sue
At that time the Rev. Robert L. Pierson was traveling with a delegation of priests as part of the Mississippi Freedom Rides when he was arrested, along with 14 others—three of them Black—for a “breach of peace,” a Mississippi statutory code violation.
The interracial group, bound for Chattanooga, Tennessee, was arrested in a coffee shop in a Trailways bus terminal in Jackson, Mississippi. They faced a misdemeanor charge after refusing to move on when ordered to do so by police officers. Local judge James Spencer found them guilty and sentenced them to four months and a $200 fine and, according to several published accounts, the judge and the captain had arrested and sentenced countless Freedom Riders on similar “breach of peace” charges. The clerics were soon out on bail, filed an appeal, and exhaled when the case was dismissed on a directed verdict. Judge Russell Moore concluded there was no violation of the law.
Believing they were falsely arrested and imprisoned, the priests sought damages in the Jackson district court. The jury in the case found in favor of the police, who had asserted they were merely acting to prevent violence. The priests took their case to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit where they also found no redress. The Appeals Court ruled that Judge Spencer could not be held liable for his decision, even though the Court also ruled that the Mississippi law the priests had been convicted under was unconstitutional. It was their opinion that the law does not require the officers “to predict at their peril which state laws are constitutional and which are not.” This was the first crack in the dam that would unleash qualified immunity.
Finally the plaintiffs reached the Supreme Court. The defendants were captain J.L. Ray, the police chief; the two arresting officers David Allison Nichols and Joseph David Griffith; and Judge Spencer, the municipal police justice who had originally convicted the priests.
At the core of Pierson v. Ray was the issue of whether the Civil Rights Act of 1871 truly guaranteed citizens the ability to sue any government official who caused a deprivation of rights under the Constitution. Eight of the nine of the Supreme Court Justices affirmed the lower court’s ruling that Judge Spencer could not be held liable for damages under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, extending a long-standing legal principle that judges are immune from lawsuits for damages, established in Bradley v. Fisher (1872). Moreover, the majority added that while the police officers who arrested the priests did not have total immunity from lawsuits, they did have protection in the same way that an officer who unknowingly arrests an innocent person based on probable cause is not guilty of false arrest.
With the Pierson v. Ray case in 1967, the Supreme Court extended a “good faith defense” to police officers. This protected police officers, judges and other government officials who made good faith errors from being sued, an exception not provided by the Civil Rights Act of 1871. Despite this exception government officials who acted in bad faith were not protected by qualified immunity, for the moment.
But less than 20 years later the Supreme Court’s Harlow v. Fitzgerald decision in 1982 allowed the “good faith defense” to morph into what is now called qualified immunity and later deemed distinct from absolute immunity.
The dam breaks
Arthur Ernest Fitzgerald was a deputy for management systems in the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force. When he discovered $2 billion in cost overruns and technical problems in the Lockheed C5 program that had been concealed by Pentagon officials, he revealed it during his testimony before the Joint Economic Committee in Congress. For this, Fitzgerald claimed in his suit that he was blacklisted, denied any further roles of significance, and mentioned in the Watergate tapes by President Nixon, who took responsibility for firing Fitzgerald.
In response, Fitzgerald filed a lawsuit against government officials in 1969, charging he lost his job because he was a whistleblower. All of the Pentagon officials involved claimed absolute immunity, including Nixon and a few of his aides. Nixon, as president, was found to have absolute immunity; the Harlow v. Fitzgerald case examined whether the same immunity extended to his aides. While denying Nixon’s aides absolute immunity it did provide them with qualified immunity from lawsuits. With Harlow v. Fitzgerald qualified immunity became a kind of legal shield for government officials, who while “performing discretionary functions,” are “generally shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate… clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,” according to the Supreme Court ruling.
The term “clearly established” would be pivotal to the future of qualified immunity. It said, in essence, that unless a previous court ruling had clearly established a type of abuse which was unconstitutional, then the government official could be protected under qualified immunity.
“Fifteen years later in the early ’80s, the court stripped out the bad faith part of it, so it was no longer a question of whether the officer was acting in bad faith,” stated Scott Michelman, legal director of the ACLU of Washington, D.C. “The officer could be acting in bad faith and still, if the court found that the officer’s mistake about the Constitution was reasonable, the officer would still get immunity.”
Flood damage
“That was a major shift in the doctrine because what it meant was, even if its officer subjectively acted in bad faith, intentionally violated someone’s rights, they may be protected by qualified immunity, so at that point it no longer becomes a doctrine about protecting the officer who acted in good faith, as the court had initially said,” Amir Ali, deputy director of the Supreme Court and Appellate Program at the MacArthur Justice Center, said in an interview. Over the course of 100 years America went from a law that clearly allowed any government official to be sued by someone whom they deprived of their constitutional rights, to a system where police officers who were acting in good faith were protected against being sued to finally a system that by default protects police officers, even when it is clear they were acting in bad faith.
“It denies people whose constitutional rights have been violated an opportunity to bring their claims in a civil rights case, which is often the only available path toward justice for people whose rights have been violated,” Joanna C. Schwartz, professor of law at the UCLA School of Law, said of qualified immunity. “The doctrine makes bringing these claims much more expensive and complicated and time-consuming than they would be without it, which means that lawyers are less likely to bring these cases, which is another reason that people are denied justice when their rights have been violated.”
Since the Harlow decision the Supreme Court has expanded the reach of qualified immunity in a way that some say has emboldened police officers to violate people’s rights.
“The decisions themselves send a very dangerous message to police. As Justice Sotomayor said in an opinion, it suggests that police can shoot first and think later. The doctrine makes it harder for courts to explain what the Constitution requires and so creates more confusion than there would be otherwise about constitutional protections, which means that police departments can’t write policies and train their officers in compliance with the Constitution,” Professor Schwartz added.
In our next articles we will learn exactly how this judicially created doctrine has been used to protect law enforcement and why, as Amir Ali says, “Qualified immunity really eliminates the individual’s ability to hold law enforcement and correctional officials accountable.”
This series was made possible by grants from the Fund for Investigative Journalism and the Solutions Journalism Network.
FOR PART II GO HERE
ONLY THE STATE CAN TAKE IT FROM YOU
AG issues guidance to protect New Yorkers’ stimulus payments from debt collectors
AmNews Staff Reports | 4/1/2021, midnight
Cash, money, credit card PIXABAY
New York Attorney General Letitia James recently took action to block debt collectors from seizing billions of dollars in emergency stimulus payments authorized by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.
James issued official guidance to New York state banking institutions, creditors and debt collectors, making clear that financial relief provided through stimulus payments are exempt from garnishment under New York law.
The American Rescue Plan Act authorized the U.S. Department of Treasury to send billions of dollars to Americans struggling as a result of the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic. James says the emergency stimulus payments were not designated as exempt from garnishment, allowing debt collectors to potentially benefit before consumers.
The guidance does not apply to any actions taken by the state of New York, including,
but not limited to, any actions to collect past due child support.
Imprisoned Palestinian leader's entry shakes up planned vote
RAMALLAH, Palestinian Territory — A popular Palestinian leader imprisoned by Israel has registered his own parliamentary list in May elections, his supporters said Wednesday, in a last-minute shakeup that could severely weaken President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party and help its militant Hamas rivals.
RAMALLAH, Palestinian Territory — A popular Palestinian leader imprisoned by Israel has registered his own parliamentary list in May elections, his supporters said Wednesday, in a last-minute shakeup that could severely weaken President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party and help its militant Hamas rivals.
© Provided by The Canadian Press
Marwan Barghouti’s wife, Fadwa, registered the list hours before the deadline set by the election commission. Polls indicate it would split the vote for Fatah, potentially paving the way for another major victory by Hamas. That increases the likelihood that Abbas will find a way to call off the first Palestinian elections in 15 years.
Barghouti, 61, a former Fatah militant commander, is serving five life sentences in Israel following a 2004 terrorism conviction. But he remains a popular and charismatic leader, and by breaking with Abbas he could reshape Palestinian politics and potentially replace him as president.
His entry reflects growing frustration with Abbas, who has presided over an increasingly authoritarian and unpopular Palestinian Authority that has failed to achieve national unity or advance Palestinian hopes for an independent state.
It's unclear how Barghouti's rise would affect relations with Israel. Both he and Abbas want a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, but there have been no substantive peace talks in over a decade. Israel is unlikely to release Barghouti regardless of his political fortunes, and may refuse to engage with a leader it views as a terrorist.
Abbas has decreed parliamentary and presidential elections for May and July this year, the first since 2006, when the Islamic militant Hamas won a landslide victory in parliamentary elections. That precipitated a crisis that led to Hamas’ seizure of Gaza from Abbas’s forces the following year, leaving the West Bank and Gaza divided between rival governments.
Abbas decreed the election in January in a step meant to help heal the division. It now remains to be seen whether the elections will actually be held, given the long-running feud between Fatah and Hamas — and the widening divisions within Fatah.
An opinion poll carried out by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research earlier this month found that a separate list endorsed by Barghouti would split the Fatah vote and potentially garner more support than the official list.
“Barghouti running would dramatically change the outcome,” the centre's director Khalil Shikaki said last week when the results of the poll were published.
If Barghouti runs for president in elections planned for this summer, he would easily defeat both Abbas and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, according to the poll, which surveyed 1,200 Palestinians with a margin of error of 3 percentage points.
Barghouti, 61 has flirted with a run in the past but eventually ended up endorsing Abbas, who was elected to a four-year term in 2005 but has remained in power since then.
This time Barghouti will partner with Nasser al-Kidwa, the 67-year-old nephew of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for a list called “Freedom.” Al-Kidwa was kicked out of Fatah in early March after announcing he would run on his own
“We hope that this list will lead to democracy," Fadwa Barghouti said. "We registered this list and we hope it will succeed.”
Earlier, senior Fatah official Jibril Rajoub submitted the party's official list.
He said the elections would be held in “all the Palestinian territories, including east Jerusalem,” which Israel annexed and considers part of its capital. He also predicted the elections would lead to a national unity government that would end the rift.
“We seek to win the elections in the spirit of democracy, and we will respect the results,” he added.
Another list, known as “Future,” has been registered by supporters of Mohammed Dahlan, a former senior Fatah official who had a falling-out with Abbas and is now based in the United Arab Emirates. He is also expected to drain support from Fatah.
The fracturing of Fatah severely weakens Abbas and could pave the way for the far more disciplined and unified Hamas — which is running on one list — to emerge as the largest Palestinian party. Abbas could postpone or cancel the elections, but that would risk censure from the United States and European nations, which provide vital aid to the Palestinian Authority and have long called for free and fair elections.
East Jerusalem could provide a pretext for cancelling or postponing the elections. Israel bars the PA from operating there and has not said whether it will allow voting in the city.
Tensions are already rising in the occupied West Bank. In the Qalandia refugee camp near Jerusalem, dozens of Fatah gunmen fired automatic weapons into the air Wednesday night to protest the expected makeup of the official party list, which they said did not represent them.
Barghouti led Fatah’s militant wing during the intifada, or uprising, that erupted in 2000 amid the breakdown of the peace process. He condemned attacks targeting civilians inside Israel, though Israel says he is responsible for civilian deaths.
The uprising saw Palestinians carry out suicide bombings and other attacks against Israeli civilians as the Israeli military launched deadly raids in the West Bank and Gaza. More than 6,000 Palestinians and over 1,000 Israelis were killed, with the unrest tapering off after 2005.
Israeli troops arrested Barghouti in 2002, at the height of the uprising, and two years later a military court convicted him of orchestrating attacks that killed five people, giving him an equivalent number of life sentences. Barghouti refused to recognize the Israeli military court or offer any defence.
Many Palestinians view Barghouti as a revolutionary leader in the mould of Nelson Mandela or Fidel Castro, unsullied by the corruption of the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority or the long-running feud between Fatah and Hamas. As a long-jailed militant, he is seen as having sacrificed his freedom for the cause of Palestinian independence.
From behind bars, he has continued to call for a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, lands Israel seized in the 1967 war. Polls consistently show him to be the most popular Palestinian leader, with support from across the political spectrum.
In 2017, Barghouti led more than 1,500 prisoners in a 40-day hunger strike to demand better conditions inside Israeli jails. Most Palestinians view prisoners held by Israel as heroes to their cause, and the strike bolstered Barghouti’s image.
Israel considers Barghouti and other Palestinians jailed for security offences to be terrorists and has given no indication it would free him. He was not included in a group of more than 1,000 high-profile prisoners who were released in 2011 in a deal with Hamas in exchange for an Israeli soldier captured by militants and held in Gaza for more than five years.
Joseph Krauss, The Associated Press
Marwan Barghouti’s wife, Fadwa, registered the list hours before the deadline set by the election commission. Polls indicate it would split the vote for Fatah, potentially paving the way for another major victory by Hamas. That increases the likelihood that Abbas will find a way to call off the first Palestinian elections in 15 years.
Barghouti, 61, a former Fatah militant commander, is serving five life sentences in Israel following a 2004 terrorism conviction. But he remains a popular and charismatic leader, and by breaking with Abbas he could reshape Palestinian politics and potentially replace him as president.
His entry reflects growing frustration with Abbas, who has presided over an increasingly authoritarian and unpopular Palestinian Authority that has failed to achieve national unity or advance Palestinian hopes for an independent state.
It's unclear how Barghouti's rise would affect relations with Israel. Both he and Abbas want a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, but there have been no substantive peace talks in over a decade. Israel is unlikely to release Barghouti regardless of his political fortunes, and may refuse to engage with a leader it views as a terrorist.
Abbas has decreed parliamentary and presidential elections for May and July this year, the first since 2006, when the Islamic militant Hamas won a landslide victory in parliamentary elections. That precipitated a crisis that led to Hamas’ seizure of Gaza from Abbas’s forces the following year, leaving the West Bank and Gaza divided between rival governments.
Abbas decreed the election in January in a step meant to help heal the division. It now remains to be seen whether the elections will actually be held, given the long-running feud between Fatah and Hamas — and the widening divisions within Fatah.
An opinion poll carried out by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research earlier this month found that a separate list endorsed by Barghouti would split the Fatah vote and potentially garner more support than the official list.
“Barghouti running would dramatically change the outcome,” the centre's director Khalil Shikaki said last week when the results of the poll were published.
If Barghouti runs for president in elections planned for this summer, he would easily defeat both Abbas and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, according to the poll, which surveyed 1,200 Palestinians with a margin of error of 3 percentage points.
Barghouti, 61 has flirted with a run in the past but eventually ended up endorsing Abbas, who was elected to a four-year term in 2005 but has remained in power since then.
This time Barghouti will partner with Nasser al-Kidwa, the 67-year-old nephew of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for a list called “Freedom.” Al-Kidwa was kicked out of Fatah in early March after announcing he would run on his own
“We hope that this list will lead to democracy," Fadwa Barghouti said. "We registered this list and we hope it will succeed.”
Earlier, senior Fatah official Jibril Rajoub submitted the party's official list.
He said the elections would be held in “all the Palestinian territories, including east Jerusalem,” which Israel annexed and considers part of its capital. He also predicted the elections would lead to a national unity government that would end the rift.
“We seek to win the elections in the spirit of democracy, and we will respect the results,” he added.
Another list, known as “Future,” has been registered by supporters of Mohammed Dahlan, a former senior Fatah official who had a falling-out with Abbas and is now based in the United Arab Emirates. He is also expected to drain support from Fatah.
The fracturing of Fatah severely weakens Abbas and could pave the way for the far more disciplined and unified Hamas — which is running on one list — to emerge as the largest Palestinian party. Abbas could postpone or cancel the elections, but that would risk censure from the United States and European nations, which provide vital aid to the Palestinian Authority and have long called for free and fair elections.
East Jerusalem could provide a pretext for cancelling or postponing the elections. Israel bars the PA from operating there and has not said whether it will allow voting in the city.
Tensions are already rising in the occupied West Bank. In the Qalandia refugee camp near Jerusalem, dozens of Fatah gunmen fired automatic weapons into the air Wednesday night to protest the expected makeup of the official party list, which they said did not represent them.
Barghouti led Fatah’s militant wing during the intifada, or uprising, that erupted in 2000 amid the breakdown of the peace process. He condemned attacks targeting civilians inside Israel, though Israel says he is responsible for civilian deaths.
The uprising saw Palestinians carry out suicide bombings and other attacks against Israeli civilians as the Israeli military launched deadly raids in the West Bank and Gaza. More than 6,000 Palestinians and over 1,000 Israelis were killed, with the unrest tapering off after 2005.
Israeli troops arrested Barghouti in 2002, at the height of the uprising, and two years later a military court convicted him of orchestrating attacks that killed five people, giving him an equivalent number of life sentences. Barghouti refused to recognize the Israeli military court or offer any defence.
Many Palestinians view Barghouti as a revolutionary leader in the mould of Nelson Mandela or Fidel Castro, unsullied by the corruption of the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority or the long-running feud between Fatah and Hamas. As a long-jailed militant, he is seen as having sacrificed his freedom for the cause of Palestinian independence.
From behind bars, he has continued to call for a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, lands Israel seized in the 1967 war. Polls consistently show him to be the most popular Palestinian leader, with support from across the political spectrum.
In 2017, Barghouti led more than 1,500 prisoners in a 40-day hunger strike to demand better conditions inside Israeli jails. Most Palestinians view prisoners held by Israel as heroes to their cause, and the strike bolstered Barghouti’s image.
Israel considers Barghouti and other Palestinians jailed for security offences to be terrorists and has given no indication it would free him. He was not included in a group of more than 1,000 high-profile prisoners who were released in 2011 in a deal with Hamas in exchange for an Israeli soldier captured by militants and held in Gaza for more than five years.
Joseph Krauss, The Associated Press
NO FOOLING
US jobless claims rise to 719K as virus still forces layoffsWASHINGTON — The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits rose by 61,000 last week to 719,000, signalling that many employers are still cutting jobs even as more businesses reopen, vaccines are increasingly administered and federal aid spreads through the economy.
© Provided by The Canadian Press
The Labor Department said Thursday that the number of claims increased from 658,000 the week before. Though the pace of applications has dropped sharply since early this year, they remain high by historical standards: Before the pandemic flattened the economy a year ago, jobless claims typically ran below 220,000 a week.
Still, the four-week average of claims, which smooths out week-to-week gyrations, fell by 10,500 to 719,000 — the fewest since mid-March 2020, just before the pandemic began to cause widespread layoffs.
All told, 3.8 million people were collecting traditional state benefits during the week ending March 20. If you include federal programs that are meant to help the unemployed through the health crisis, 18.2 million people were receiving some type of jobless aid in the week that ended March 13. That's down from 19.7 million in the previous week.
Economists monitor weekly applications for unemployment aid for early signs of where the job market is headed. Applications generally reflect the rate of layoffs, which normally fall steadily as a job market strengthens. During the pandemic, though, the numbers have become less reliable as states have struggled with application backlogs and allegations of fraud have clouded the actual volume of job cuts.
Even so, measures of the overall economy show clear improvement from the collapse last spring, with the rising number of vaccinations encouraging people to return to airports, shopping centres, restaurants and bars. The number of new confirmed COVID-19 cases has dropped from an average of about 250,000 a day in early January to below 70,000, though it has begun to rise again in recent days.
Last month, consumer confidence reached a post-pandemic peak. And the $1,400 checks in President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion economic relief plan have sharply lifted consumer spending, according to Bank of America’s tracking of its debit and credit cards. Spending jumped 23% in the third week of March compared with pre-pandemic levels, the bank said.
And even with the pace of layoffs still relatively high, hiring has begun to accelerate. In February, employers added a robust 379,000 jobs across the country. Last month, they are believed to have added even more: According to the data firm FactSet, economists expect the March jobs report being released Friday to show that the economy added a sizable 614,000 jobs and that the unemployment rate fell from 6.2% to 6%. Less than a year ago, the jobless rate had hit 14.8%.
Some economists are even more optimistic: Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at the tax advisory firm RSM, is predicting 1 million added jobs for March.
The Federal Reserve’s policymakers have substantially boosted their forecast for the economy this year, anticipating growth of 6.5% for 2021, up from an estimate in December of just 4.2%. That would be the fastest rate of expansion in any year since 1984.
“With vaccination efforts increasing seemingly by the day, hope may finally be on the horizon," said AnnElizabeth Konkel, an economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab. “Getting the public health situation back to normal is the only way to stop coronavirus’ economic damage. A robust recovery will only be able to flourish once the virus is under control.”
Still, the economic impact of the pandemic lingers. The data firm Womply reports that 63% of movie theatres and other entertainment venues were closed last week, as were 39% of bars and 39% of hair salons and other beauty shops.
Paul Wiseman, The Associated Press
The Labor Department said Thursday that the number of claims increased from 658,000 the week before. Though the pace of applications has dropped sharply since early this year, they remain high by historical standards: Before the pandemic flattened the economy a year ago, jobless claims typically ran below 220,000 a week.
Still, the four-week average of claims, which smooths out week-to-week gyrations, fell by 10,500 to 719,000 — the fewest since mid-March 2020, just before the pandemic began to cause widespread layoffs.
All told, 3.8 million people were collecting traditional state benefits during the week ending March 20. If you include federal programs that are meant to help the unemployed through the health crisis, 18.2 million people were receiving some type of jobless aid in the week that ended March 13. That's down from 19.7 million in the previous week.
Economists monitor weekly applications for unemployment aid for early signs of where the job market is headed. Applications generally reflect the rate of layoffs, which normally fall steadily as a job market strengthens. During the pandemic, though, the numbers have become less reliable as states have struggled with application backlogs and allegations of fraud have clouded the actual volume of job cuts.
Even so, measures of the overall economy show clear improvement from the collapse last spring, with the rising number of vaccinations encouraging people to return to airports, shopping centres, restaurants and bars. The number of new confirmed COVID-19 cases has dropped from an average of about 250,000 a day in early January to below 70,000, though it has begun to rise again in recent days.
Last month, consumer confidence reached a post-pandemic peak. And the $1,400 checks in President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion economic relief plan have sharply lifted consumer spending, according to Bank of America’s tracking of its debit and credit cards. Spending jumped 23% in the third week of March compared with pre-pandemic levels, the bank said.
And even with the pace of layoffs still relatively high, hiring has begun to accelerate. In February, employers added a robust 379,000 jobs across the country. Last month, they are believed to have added even more: According to the data firm FactSet, economists expect the March jobs report being released Friday to show that the economy added a sizable 614,000 jobs and that the unemployment rate fell from 6.2% to 6%. Less than a year ago, the jobless rate had hit 14.8%.
Some economists are even more optimistic: Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at the tax advisory firm RSM, is predicting 1 million added jobs for March.
The Federal Reserve’s policymakers have substantially boosted their forecast for the economy this year, anticipating growth of 6.5% for 2021, up from an estimate in December of just 4.2%. That would be the fastest rate of expansion in any year since 1984.
“With vaccination efforts increasing seemingly by the day, hope may finally be on the horizon," said AnnElizabeth Konkel, an economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab. “Getting the public health situation back to normal is the only way to stop coronavirus’ economic damage. A robust recovery will only be able to flourish once the virus is under control.”
Still, the economic impact of the pandemic lingers. The data firm Womply reports that 63% of movie theatres and other entertainment venues were closed last week, as were 39% of bars and 39% of hair salons and other beauty shops.
Paul Wiseman, The Associated Press
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)