Start Blog Seite 84064

New Lawsuit Claims Foreign Payments To Trump Biz Violates The Constitution

0

NewsHubA new lawsuit filed by a liberal advocacy organization Monday in federal court alleges that President Donald Trump is in violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause.
The clause precludes federal officials from accepting gifts from foreign powers. The lawsuit argues Trump is violating the clause because many of his firms do business with foreign governments. Among other alleged violations, lawyers point to space the Chinese government rents at Trump Tower in New York as an example of an unconstitutional emolument. China also helped finance another property in which Trump holds a significant stake.
“The framers of the Constitution were students of history,” Deepak Gupta, one of the lawyers behind the suit, told the New York Times . “And they understood that one way a republic could fail is if foreign powers could corrupt our elected leaders.”
Eric Trump, executive vice president of the Trump Organization, called the suit a political stunt.
“This is purely harassment for political gain, and, frankly, I find it very, very sad,” he said.
During a brief exchange with the press on Monday morning in the Oval Office, the president said the challenge was “totally without merit.”
The lawsuit is organized by an advocacy group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). A number of accomplished lawyers and legal scholars are leading the effort, including Laurence Tribe, the legendary Harvard Law School professor; Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the law school at the University of California, Irvine; and Richard Painter, an ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush White House.
Other legal scholars are dubious of their theory of the Emoluments Clause. Professor Andy Grewal of the University of Iowa College of Law argued in a recent paper that transactions conducted between foreign governments and the Trump Organization do not violate the Constitution, because Trump does not himself participate in those transactions. He argues the term “emolument” refers to specific benefits individuals accrue by personally providing services, and does not reach ordinary exchanges done at market value by business entities that they might own. (RELATED: Jared Kushner Can Lawfully Work In The White House, Justice Dept. Says)
Before reaching arguments on the merits, the group will have to prove it has the right to bring the lawsuit in the first place. To bring a suit against another person or entity, plaintiffs must demonstrate that they have “standing” to sue. Therefore, CREW must demonstrate that they are injured in some fashion by the Trump Organization’s dealings with foreign governments. What’s more, that injury must be a specific and particularized, not generalized or theoretical harm.
Ian Milhiser of ThinkProgress, a liberal legal commentator who is skeptical of the suit, argues a business competitor may have an easier time establishing standing. That view is also shared by Brianne Gorod, chief counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center. Milhiser also notes that, as the Supreme Court explained in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife — an important standing case — that a plaintiff must show a “causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of,” which could prove a tall order for CREW.
For their part, CREW points to a 1982 Supreme Court decision that allowed a civil rights group to sue a landlord after it deployed black clients to broach the possibility of signing a lease with building managers. In the past, those arguments have received a friendly hearing from the 2nd U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and the federal court in New York City, where this lawsuit will be filed.
It is not yet clear who will represent Trump in the litigation.
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Send tips to [email protected] .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

Similarity rank: 11.9
Sentiment rank: -1.7

© Source: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/23/new-lawsuit-claims-foreign-payments-to-trump-biz-violates-the-constitution/
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Trump To Meet Congressional Leaders On First Full Day

0

NewsHubWASHINGTON–Senior members of both parties go to the White House Monday to meet with President Donald Trump the White House announced Sunday night.
The meeting with congressional leaders is set up as a reception as well as a discussion of his policy agenda and the handling of the repeal of the Affordable Care Act going forward.
According to Politico , the list of invited congressional leaders who will meet Trump for the first time in his new role as President of the United Stares includes House Speaker Paul Ryan, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer.
Immediately following the session with the members, the White House says Trump will meet alone with Speaker Ryan. President Trump is also scheduled to meet with Vice President Mike Pence, union leaders and business leaders at separate times during the day.
The gatherings come immediately after a contentious back and forth between the new White House and it detractors over crowd size at the Trump inauguration that began with the swearing in of President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence and then led to a violent reaction of anti-Trump protesters in downtown DC and later a liberal women’s march the following day.
Follow Kerry on Twitter

Similarity rank: 11
Sentiment rank: 2.4

© Source: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/23/trump-to-meet-congressional-leaders-on-first-full-day/
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Trump executive order pulls out of TPP trade deal

0

NewsHubPresident Donald Trump has fulfilled a campaign pledge by signing an executive order to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
The trade deal, a linchpin of ex-President Barack Obama’s Asia policy, was signed by 12 nations.
„Great thing for the American worker what we just did,“ said Mr Trump as he dumped the pact with a stroke of a pen.
He also cut funding for international groups that provide abortions and freezed hiring of some federal workers.
During his presidential campaign, Mr Trump had criticised TPP as a „potential disaster for our country“, arguing it harmed US manufacturing.
The massive trade deal, which covered 40% of the world’s economy, was negotiated in 2015 by nations including the US, Japan, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Mexico.
TPP’s stated aim was to strengthen economic ties and boost growth, including by reducing tariffs.
It also included measures to enforce labour and environmental standards, copyrights, patents and other legal protections.
Also on Monday morning, Mr Trump pledged to „massively“ cut regulations and taxes on companies, but impose „a very major border tax“ if they move factories outside the US.
This followed a meeting with executives from companies including defence manufacturer Lockheed Martin, apparel maker Under Armour, appliance manufacturer Whirlpool, electric-carmaker Tesla and pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson.
After meeting business leaders, Mr Trump also warned them he would impose a „very major border tax“ on companies that move manufacturing out of the US.
„We’re going to be cutting regulation massively“, but the rules will be „just as protective of the people“, he told reporters after the morning meeting in the White House’s Roosevelt Room.
He pledged to lower corporate taxes to 15% or 20% from the current 35% and lift regulations by up to 75%.
Since winning the White House, Mr Trump has upbraided US companies that have moved factories overseas.
Vowing to slap taxes on foreign-manufactured products, he told executives on Monday: „All you have to do is stay. “
According to his schedule, the president will meet labour leaders in the afternoon.
The president is also expected to an sign executive order to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta), a trade pact between the US, Canada and Mexico.
Mr Trump has blamed Nafta for depriving American workers of their jobs.
The US Senate will meanwhile vote on the nomination of Mike Pompeo to be CIA director.
Rex Tillerson ’s nomination as Secretary of State was effectively assured on Monday as Senator Marco Rubio dropped his objections.
On Sunday, Mr Trump spoke by telephone with Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from the White House situation room.
Mr Trump said his conversation with Mr Netanyahu – who had a tense relationship with Mr Obama – was „very nice“.
A White House summary of the call did not mention Mr Trump’s plan to move the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which would overturn two decades of US policy.
The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 requires the US president to transfer the embassy to Jerusalem unless he certifies every six months that it is not in the national interest.
Every president since Bill Clinton has upheld the measure, and President Obama most recently did so on 1 December.
Mr Trump has until May to make a formal decision.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer said the administration was „at the very beginning stages of even discussing this subject“.
On Saturday, Mr Trump launched a stinging attack on media reporting of attendance figures and the weather at his inauguration.
During a heated exchange on NBC on Sunday, his senior adviser Kellyanne Conway said the White House had „alternative facts“, a phrase that quickly went viral.

Similarity rank: 12
Sentiment rank: 4

© Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38721056
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Ari Fleischer advises Sean Spicer to correct any wrong statistics he used

0

NewsHub“My advice to Sean today is if you used a statistic that is wrong, correct it today. There no harm done if you’re press secretary and saying I got statistics wrong and walk it back,” Fleischer said in an interview on “CBS This Morning.”
Fleischer, who served as President George W. Bush’s press secretary from 2001 to 2003, was referring to the situation late Saturday in which Spicer called the press into the White House briefing room to scold the media about its inauguration coverage, telling them that they were wrong in their comparisons to the crowd size at President Obama’s inaugurations. After making the statement, Spicer left the room, refusing to take any questions.
“Cool the confrontation down a notch or three,” Fleischer said.
Fleischer suspected that President Trump ordered Spicer to chastise the press and said that Spicer is now going to get challenged on it at the press briefing on Monday.
“It concerns me, it’s one thing to take on the press — that’s a time-honored tradition in Washington, D. C — [but] take them on though when you have high ground. The part about how people showed up in the audience at the inauguration, who cares, it’s not worth fighting over,” Fleischer said.
His final piece of advice to members of the press was that it doesn’t matter if the president praises them or criticizes them.
“Your job is to be neutral, fair and accurate,” he said.

Similarity rank: 9.7
Sentiment rank: 0

© Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ari-fleischer-advises-sean-spicer-to-correct-any-wrong-statistics-he-used/
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Why college loans are the worst debt

0

NewsHubAs long as I can remember, savants in personal finance had one iron-clad guideline about debt: Know the difference between “good” debt and “bad” debt.
“Good” debt was mostly in the form of mortgages because you could build equity through home ownership. Better yet, you can deduct a portion of the interest if you itemize deductions on your federal taxes.
Then there’s bad debt such as credit card and installment loan finance charges, which can’t be deducted and can lead you into a financial black hole.
But the worst debt of all is probably college loans, particularly if they don’t lead to a degree or gainful employment.
How is college debt somehow worse than noxious credit card debt? For most people, it’s nondeductible. Even worse, except in extreme circumstances, you can’t get rid of it even in bankruptcy. It will stay with most people for decades if they don’t pay it off — even into retirement.
Four years of college may lead to 20+ years of debt, and more troubling facts about student loans.
The 44 million Americans who have college loans are also carrying the kind of burden that gets worse over time. It prevents them from buying homes and settling down. When they go into default, they get burned even more by a damaged credit rating, which puts low-cost credit out of reach for those saddled with loans and other debts.
According to a new report by the progressive think tank Demos, “student debt is particularly damaging for individuals who struggle to repay their loans. Delinquent borrowers are saddled with fees, penalties and rapidly accumulating interest; borrowers who default on their loans face ruined credit and a debt often several times their original loan balance.”
Robert Hiltonsmith, who authored the Demos report, noted: “The majority of people struggling to pay back their college loans have relatively small amounts of debt; half owe less than $16,400.”
“This belies the common media portrayal of struggling borrowers as carrying excessive amounts of debt beyond the average, and brings into question whether a higher education system financed primarily by debt is putting undue risk on students trying to build skills and climb the economic ladder,” Hiltonsmith said.
Relatively small debts can cause big problems, he found. “There is no ‘safe’ amount of student debt: Borrowers with small balances struggle to repay them at the same rate as borrowers with higher balances.”
Not surprisingly, lower-income borrowers and students of color were more likely to default on their loans. And the size of the loan was unrelated to the default rate, the study reported. One-third of those in default owed less than $10,000.
The average student loan debt has more than tripled in the last 20 years, leaving more than 75 million millennials juggling debt and economic unc…
Despite President Donald Trump’s campaign call to privatize the college loan business, which is dominated by the federal loan program, there’s little relief in sight for student borrowers. A moratorium on college debt would help enormously. At the very least, the government should stop charging interest on these loans.
Would it make sense to boost the federal tax write-off for student loan interest? That’s unlikely since it will do little to reduce the actual cost of college, although the after-tax cost of financing will drop somewhat.
At present, if you qualify, you can write off some loan interest, but the IRS rules are restrictive.
You can’t write off interest if you’re married and filing separately, and you lose the write-off if your adjusted income is more than $80,000 for single filers and more than $160,000 for joint returns. However, this deduction applies only if you itemize your expenses, which few taxpayers do. Other rules apply as well.
Still, the true cost of college looms large if taking on debt doesn’t lead to a decent-paying job, which is increasingly harder to find in the age of automation, outsourcing and globalization.
Reasonable solutions to trim college costs include boosting grant aid to public college students to eliminate loans, allowing graduates to discharge college loans in bankruptcy and increasing subsidies to state schools to help them reduce tuition. But I would give these proposals low odds of passage in the current political climate.
Demos’ “ Affordable College Compact Plan ,” which it published nearly three years ago, has several more sensible ideas.
Senator Al Franken (D-MN) questions Donald Trump’s education secretary nominee Betsy DeVos‘ statistics on student debt during her confirmation he…
In the interim, the best way to avoid college debt involves a careful planning strategy. Consider low-cost, debt-free degrees that involve community and commuter colleges. Insist on institutions that provide grants over loans. Avoid for-profit colleges.
More important, do the math that shows you how much taking on college debt will cost you over time. How much will your monthly loan payment be, including principal and interest, when you graduate?
When doing your financing calculation — you’ll find a number of free calculators online — keep in mind that you also have to project your estimated post-graduate salary along with your debt repayments.
Want to get an idea of how much you’ll be making when you graduate? Every college should supply you with this information. You can also check PayScale’s surveys , which track earnings by degree.
If you can’t handle a monthly loan bill without squeezing your earnings to nothing, then you need to make a decision. Will your college debt be ultimately good or bad? This exercise isn’t only good personal finance practice for any debt you take on, it should be an essential part of your college planning journey.

Similarity rank: 0
Sentiment rank: 1.4

© Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/forget-bad-debt-college-loans-are-the-worst-debt/
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

19 things wrong with Daniel Hannan’s tweet about the women’s march Is the French Left having its Jeremy Corbyn moment?

0

NewsHubSince Daniel Hannan, a formerly obscure MEP, has emerged as the anointed intellectual of the Brexit elite, The Staggers is charting his ascendancy…
State of this:
I mean honestly, where do you even begin? Even by Daniel’s rarefied standards of idiocy, this is a stonker. How is it stupid? Let me count the ways.
1. “Our female head of government” implies the existence of “their female head of government”. Which is odd, because the tweet is clearly aimed at Hillary Clinton, who isn’t anybody’s head of government.
Way to kick someone when they’re down, Dan. What next? “So pleased that my daughter received a wide selection of Christmas presents, unlike those of certain families”?
2. I dunno, I’m no expert, but it’s just possible that there are reasons why so few women make it to the top of politics which don’t have anything to do with how marvellous Britain is.
3. Hillary Clinton was not “the last guy’s wife”. You can tell this, because she was not married to Barack Obama, whose wife is called Michelle. (Honestly, Daniel, I’m surprised you haven’t spotted the memes.)
4. She wasn’t married to the guy before him, come to that. Her husband stopped being president 16 years ago, since when she’s been elected to the Senate twice and served four years as Secretary of State.
5. I’m sure Hillary would love to have been able to run for president without reference to her husband – for the first few years of her marriage, indeed, she continued to call herself Hillary Rodham. But in 1980 Republican Frank White defeated Bill Clinton’s campaign to be re-elected as govenor of Arkansas, in part by mercilessly attacking the fact his wife still used her maiden name.
In the three decades since, Hillary has moved from Hillary Rodham, to Hillary Rodham Clinton, to Hillary Clinton. You can see this as a cynical response to conservative pressure, if you so wish – but let’s not pretend there was no pressure to subsume her political identity into that of her husband, eh? And let’s not forget that it came from your side of the fence, eh, Dan?
6. Also, let’s not forget that the woman you’re subtweeting is a hugely intelligent former senator and secretary of state, who Barack Obama described as the most qualified person ever to run for president. I’m sure you wouldn’t want to be so patronising as to imply that the only qualification she had was her husband, now, would you?
7. I’d love to know what qualifications Dan thinks are sufficient to become US president, and whether he believes a real estate mogul with an inherited fortune and a reality TV show has them.
8. Hillary Clinton got nearly 3m more votes than Donald Trump, by the way.
9. More votes than any white man who has ever run for president, in fact.
10. Certainly a lot more votes than Theresa May, who has never faced a general election as prime minister and became leader of the government by default after the only other candidate left in the race dropped out. Under the rules of British politics this is as legitimate a way of becoming PM as any, of course, I’m just not sure how winning a Tory leadership contest by default means she “ran in her own right” in a way that Hillary Clinton did not.
11. Incidentally, here’s a video of Daniel Hannan demanding Gordon Brown call an early election in 2009 on the grounds that “parliament has lost the moral mandate to carry on”.
So perhaps expecting him to understand how the British constitution works is expecting too much.
12. Why the hell is Hannan sniping at Hillary Clinton, who is not US president, when the man who is the new US president has, in three days, come out against press freedom, basic mathematics and objective reality? Sorry, I’m not moving past that.
13. Notice the way the tweet says that our “head of government ” got there on merit. That’s because our “head of state ” got the job because her great, great grandmother happened to be a protestant in 1701 and her uncle wanted to marry a divorcee – all of which makes it a bit difficult to say that our head of government “ran in her own right”. But hey, whatever makes you happy.
14. Is Daniel calling the US a banana republic? I mean, it’s a position I have some sympathy with in this particular week, but it’s an odd fit with the way he gets all hot and bothered whenever someone starts talking about the English-speaking peoples.
15. Incidentally, he stole this tweet from his 14-year-old daughter:
16. Who talks, oddly, like a 45-year-old man.
17. And didn’t even credit her! It’s exactly this sort of thing which stops women making it to the top rank of politics, Daniel.
18. He tweeted that at 6.40am the day after the march. Like, he spent the whole of Saturday trying to come up with a zinger, and then eventually woke up early on the Sunday unable to resist stealing a line from his teenage daughter. One of the great orators of our age, ladies and gentlemen.
19. He thinks he can tweet this stuff without people pointing and laughing at him.
Has the French Left taken a Corbynite turn? That’s certainly the verdict of many after the first round of the French Socialist Party’s primary.
In first place is Benoit Hamon, who quit Francois Hollande’s government over its right turn in 2014, and counts the adoption of a universal basic income, the legalisation of cannabis and the right to die among his policy proposals, with 36 per cent of the vote.
In second place and facing an uphill battle to secure the nomination is Manuel Valls, the minister who more than any other symbolized the rightward lurch of Hollande’s presidency, with 31 per cent. That of the five eliminated candidates – under the French system, if no candidate secures more than half of the vote, the top two go through to a run-off round – only one could even arguably be said to be closer to Valls than Hamon shows the struggle he will have to close the gap next weekend. And for a variety of reasons, even supporters of his close ally Sylvia Pinel may struggle to put a tick in his box.
Still, Valls clearly believes that electability is his best card, and he’s compared Hamon to Corbyn, who „chose to remain in opposition“. Also making the Hamon-Corbyn comparison is most of the British press and several high-profile activists in the French Republican Party.
Is it merited? The differences are probably more important than the similarities: not least that Hamon served as a minister until 2014, and came up through the backrooms. In terms of the centre of gravity and the traditions of his party, he is much closer in analogue to Yvette Cooper and Andy Burnham than he is to Jeremy Corbyn, though Corbynistas and Hamonites bear a closer resemblance to one another than their leaders to.
What will give heart to the leader’s office is that Hamon surged in the polls after each debate, when his ideas were given a bigger platform. But what will alarm everyone in Labour is the French Socialists‘ poll ratings – they are expected to get just 6 per cent in the elections. (And before you scoff at the polls, it’s worth noting that they have, so far, performed admirably in the French electoral cycle, picking up on the lightning rise of both Hamon and Francois Fillon.)
That attests to something it’s easy to forget in Westminster, where we tend to obsess over the United States and ignore politics on the Continent, despite the greater commonalities: throughout Europe, social democratic parties are in a fight for their lives, no matter if they turn to the left or the right.
The Democrats, in contrast, won the presidential election by close to three million votes and lost due to the electoral college. They have good prospects in the midterm elections and their greatest threat is gerrymandering and electoral malfeasance. But absent foul play, you’d have to be very, very brave to bet on them going extinct.

Similarity rank: 0.1
Sentiment rank: 0

© Source: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/01/19-things-wrong-daniel-hannan-s-tweet-about-women-s-march
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Facebook Live 'broadcasts gang rape' of woman in Sweden

0

NewsHubThree men were arrested on suspicion of rape in Sweden on Sunday, following reports of an assault against a woman being live-streamed on Facebook.
Police in Uppsala were contacted in the morning by a woman who said she had seen a gang rape broadcast in a closed group on the site.
„You have been raped,“ one of the men said at the end of the video and then laughed, according to the viewer.
Police later confirmed they, and „many“ others, had seen the footage.
The Facebook group is said to have several thousand members.
Police confirmed that they had found three men, aged between 19 and 25, and one woman at a local apartment.
The men were arrested on the spot.
Josefine Lundgren, 21, called the police when she saw the video.
Speaking to Swedish tabloid Expressen, she said she saw one of the men tear the woman’s clothes off and lie on top of her.
She also said one of the men had a gun.
Facebook Live shows a count of other people simultaneously watching the broadcast and Ms Lungren said she could see 60 other people viewing.
„Three against one hahaha,“ one of the viewers wrote in the comments section underneath the video, she said.
Online witnesses told Swedish media they had also seen a second video where the same woman then denied being raped, but there was speculation as to whether or not she had done so under her own free will.
According to Sweden’s state broadcaster SVT, the men were still filming the follow-up video when the police arrived.
Facebook started offering live-streaming features at the end of 2015.
It is now regularly used by news organisations for on-the-scene reporting, between friends and peers for fun, and by anyone wanting to share thoughts or events with a wide audience.
However, it has also captured various crimes and acts of violence.
Earlier this month, four people were charged for a hate crime in the US city of Chicago after a live-streamed video on Facebook showed a mentally disabled man being tortured.
In June 2016, Antonio Perkins, 28, also from Chicago, was shot dead while live-streaming a video of himself on the site.
Facebook Live also caught the aftermath of an incident in which a police officer shot and killed a man in St Paul , Minnesota in July 2016.
After this, the social network issued more details on its live-streaming policy, saying it would be treated the same as for other content.
The company said footage will not be removed simply because it is violent or graphic, but if it is shared to mock the victim or celebrate the violence it will be taken down.
They said live videos can be reported to a team, which is on call 24 hours a day. Reviewers in the team can interrupt a live stream if it breaches Facebook’s community standards.
However, people complained when the Chicago torture video ran for 30 minutes, racking up thousands of views, before it was stopped.

Similarity rank: 2.1
Sentiment rank: -3.9

© Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38717186
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

High court won’t hear "Sister Wives" appeal over bigamy law

0

NewsHubWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court said Monday it won’t hear an appeal from the family on TV’s “Sister Wives” challenging Utah’s law banning polygamy.
The justices left in place a lower court ruling that said Kody Brown and his four wives can’t sue over the law because they weren’t charged under it.
A federal judge sided with the Browns and overturned key parts of the state’s bigamy law in 2013, but an appeals court overturned that decision last year.
The Browns claim the law infringes on their right to freedom of speech and religion. The family said they should be able to challenge the law because the threat of prosecution forced them to flee to Nevada and still looms over them when they return to Utah.
Police investigated the family after their show premiered in 2010, but closed the case without filing any charges. The family argued in legal briefs that the state should not be able to thwart a constitutional challenge to the law “by changing its enforcement policy during the pendency of litigation.”
Utah’s law forbids married people from living with a second purported “spouse,” making it stricter than anti-bigamy laws in other states and creating a threat of arrest for plural families. But state officials have followed a long tradition of not prosecuting polygamists unless they commit some other crime, such as child or spousal abuse, domestic violence or fraud.
The state says only 10 people were charged with violating the law between 2001 and 2011. Utah officials argue that the ban is important to protect vulnerable people from exploitation and abuse.
Kody Brown is legally married to one of his wives, but says he is “spiritually married” to three other women. They live together in a plural relationship and belong to a religious group that believes in polygamy as a core religious practice.
About 30,000 polygamists live in Utah, according to court documents. The mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints abandoned the practice in 1890 and strictly prohibits it today.

Similarity rank: 5.5
Sentiment rank: 1

© Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sister-wives-high-court-wont-hear-appeal-over-bigamy-law/
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Faraday Future hit with $1.8 million lawsuit over new car debut

0

NewsHubChristopher DeVargas
Faraday Future unveils their first production vehicle, the FF91, during CES week in Las Vegas, Tuesday, Jan. 3, 2017.
By Ryan Felton, Jalopnik
Monday, Jan. 23, 2017 | 7:05 p.m.
A visual effects company has claimed in a lawsuit that Faraday Future owes it $1.8 million for a graphic presentation that was designed to promote this month’s launch of the automaker’s first production vehicle.
It wasn’t immediately clear if the company, the Mill Group, designed aspects of Faraday’s presentation for the vehicle at this month’s CES conference. But the complaint is yet another blemish for the troubled startup automaker, which claimed at CES that it’s well-positioned for success and that construction at the site of its proposed Southern Nevada factory should relaunch within the coming weeks.
To see the full story, click here .

Similarity rank: 0
Sentiment rank: 1.2

© Source: http://lasvegassun.com/blogs/elsewhere/2017/jan/23/faraday-future-18-million-lawsuit-over-car-debut/
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Marek Kuchciński: Zarzuty opozycji są bezpodstawne

0

NewsHubZarzuty czy pretensje ze strony opozycji są bezpodstawne – powiedział w poniedziałek marszałek Sejmu Marek Kuchciński, odnosząc się do wniosku PO o jego odwołanie. Stwierdził też, że posłowie okupujący mównicę złamali regulamin Sejmu, należy więc ich ukarać.
Zdjęcie
Marek Kuchciński /Stefan Maszewski /Reporter
„Będziemy mieli debatę nad odwołaniem marszałka Sejmu“ – powiedział Kuchciński w poniedziałek w Polskim Radiu 24. Jak dodał, „można dyskutować z uzasadnieniem“ wniosku, które z jego punktu widzenia „jest bardzo wątpliwe“.
Pytany, czy ma poparcie PiS w głosowaniu nad wnioskiem PO o odwołanie go z funkcji marszałka, Kuchciński odpowiedział: „Nie słyszałem, żeby coś się zmieniło“. „Zarzuty czy pretensje ze strony opozycji są bezpodstawne“ – oświadczył marszałek Sejmu.
Kuchciński wyraził też pogląd, że 16 grudnia ub.r. podczas posiedzenia Sejmu „zawiódł zdrowy rozsądek ze strony grupy posłów, którzy do 2015 roku byli obozem rządowym“.
Jak ocenił, nie mogli się oni pogodzić z tym, że po wyborach, w trakcie głosowań w Sejmie „w demokratyczny sposób przegrywają“. „Wydaje mi się, że byli także wykorzystywani przez różne siły międzynarodowe do tego, żeby wprowadzić destabilizację w Polsce“ – powiedział Kuchciński.
16 grudnia ub.r. rozpoczął się na sali sejmowej protest posłów PO i Nowoczesnej, którego powodem były planowane przez marszałka Sejmu zmiany dotyczące zasad pracy dziennikarzy w Sejmie i wykluczenie z posiedzenia posła PO Michała Szczerby. Później posłowie protestowali również w związku z głosowaniami m.in. nad ustawą budżetową na 2017, które odbyły się podczas obrad przeniesionych przez marszałka Sejmu do Sali Kolumnowej. 12 stycznia Platforma zawiesiła protest i po blisko miesiącu opuściła salę obrad. Dzień wcześniej protest zakończyła Nowoczesna.
Informując o zawieszeniu protestu, politycy PO poinformowali także, że złożą wniosek o odwołanie Kuchcińskiego z funkcji marszałka Sejmu. We wniosku tym podkreślono m.in., że głosowania 16 grudnia ub.r. nad ustawą budżetową odbyły się z pogwałceniem konstytucji i regulaminu Sejmu. Według Platformy, pełną odpowiedzialność za to ponosi marszałek Kuchciński.
Marszałek Sejmu ocenił w poniedziałek, że opozycja okupując mównicę sejmową, złamała regulamin Sejmu, dlatego – jego zdaniem – musi nastąpić procedura karania tych posłów. „W moim przekonaniu i wedle tych wszystkich przepisów, stenogramów, zapisów opozycja, która okupowała mównicę, która okupowała fotel marszałka, uniemożliwiała w ten sposób prowadzenie obrad złamała regulamin Sejmu. Nie tylko zresztą w tym przypadku“ – podkreślił Kuchciński.
Pytany, czy posłowie opozycji będą karani, odparł: „W moim przekonaniu taki proces, taka procedura musi nastąpić, ponieważ do tego mnie zobowiązuje regulamin Sejmu“. Zaznaczył, że decyzja co do tego, czy posłowie zostaną ukarani karami pieniężnymi, czy innymi wynikającymi z regulaminu Sejmu, podejmuje Prezydium Sejmu. „Ja jestem zobowiązany przedstawić Prezydium Sejmu pełną, wyczerpującą informację na temat postawy i zachowań tych posłów“ – dodał Kuchciński.
Marszałek Sejmu zwrócił się do 45 posłów, którzy 16 grudnia protestowali na sali sejmowej o wyjaśnienia; na odpowiedź czeka do rozpoczęcia kolejnego posiedzenia, zaplanowanego na 8 lutego.
Kuchciński pytany o wypowiedź posła Szczerby, który zapowiedział, że będzie się odwoływał do Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka w Strasburgu od decyzji o wykluczeniu go z obrad Sejmu powiedział, że „każdy poseł, tak jak każdy obywatel wolnego państwa, jakim jest Rzeczypospolita Polska ma prawo odwoływać się od decyzji władz państwowych, a takie decyzje podejmował Sejm“.
„Od tych decyzji, szczególnie jeśli one dotyczą danego posła i jeśli poseł uważa, że są one niesprawiedliwe, ma pełne prawo (do odwołania), tutaj nikt nie może mu tego zakazać“ – powiedział marszałek Sejmu.
Jak jednak dodał, takie decyzje poseł może podejmować po wyczerpaniu się drogi „wewnątrzkrajowej“. „Z perspektywy regulaminu Sejmu, decyzję o zatwierdzeniu wykluczenia (Szczerby) podjęło Prezydium Sejmu, w konsekwencji grożą mu kary finansowe dość duże, bo odebranie 50 procent uposażenia przez 6 miesięcy“ – zaznaczył marszałek Sejmu.
Pytany o doniesienia portalu „DoRzeczy“, który podał, że 16 grudnia, gdy zaczynał się protest w Sejmie, posłowie PO i Nowoczesnej mieli przygotowany „wspólny apel opozycji“, w którym „wzywano Radę Europy i Parlament Europejski do pilnej interwencji w związku z sytuacją w Polsce“, Kuchciński powiedział, że pojawia się pytanie, czy grupa posłów, „rzeczywiście nie wystąpiła przeciwko własnemu państwu, na wzór współczesnej Targowicy“.
PO i Nowoczesna zaprzeczają, by takie wydarzenie miało miejsce. Podkreślają, że było pismo do marszałka Sejmu, a nie apel do zagranicznych instytucji.

Similarity rank: 4.2
Sentiment rank: -3.2

© Source: http://fakty.interia.pl/raporty/raport-kryzys-sejmowy/aktualnosci/news-marek-kuchcinski-zarzuty-opozycji-sa-bezpodstawne,nId,2341538
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.

Timeline words data