Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
5:30 pm, April 4th, 2025 - 16 comments
Categories: Daily review -
Tags:
Daily review is also your post.
This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Don’t forget to be kind to each other …
Daily review is also your post. This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy). Don’t forget to be kind to each other …
Daily review is also your post. This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy). Don’t forget to be kind to each other …
Daily review is also your post. This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy). Don’t forget to be kind to each other …
A persistent but very dangerous little glove puppet…………
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360640874/no-thanks-select-committee-report-dunks-david-seymours-treaty-principles-bill
I get the feeling the journo enjoyed writing this
We could thank Seymour ..'cos tho he attempted to sew racial dissent..
(.at which he abjectly failed..)
..but what he did do was to prove for us that most new Zealanders want a racially harmonious society ..
..and one that recognizes the waitangi treaty as the founding document it is..
..and we don't want anyone to mess with that document…
And I dunno about you..but I find all that somewhat cheering…
Seymour keeps pushing that most New Zealanders want equality……..inferring that we don't at present…….he compares the End of Life Bill as an example…….pushing for a referendum…….he is a dangerous little glove puppet with ill intent……interesting to see if his donors keep up the financial support when all fails……..
John key said he would have voted for trump…
…we don't need to know anything else..do we..?
Elect a mob boss, find out how an autocratic oligarchy works.
/
Amid a flurry of pardons President Donald Trump issued to white-collar criminals last week, one name that has largely escaped notice did not belong to a person at all.
In what may have been a first, Trump pardoned a corporation. The company to earn that distinction was a cryptocurrency exchange sentenced to a $100 million fine for violating an anti-money laundering law.
The move surprised scholars of presidential pardons, which have traditionally been considered the domain of human beings. Several experts contacted by The Intercept said Trump appears to have acted within his powers, but they were unaware of any prior instances of corporations granted full pardons.
“There have been plenty of cases where presidents have remitted fines or forfeitures, or something else like that,” said Margaret Love, who served as U.S. pardon attorney from 1990 to 1997. “As far as I know, the president has never granted a full pardon to a corporation.”
[…]
The company pleaded guilty last July. Two months ago, a federal judge handed it a $100 million fine and two years’ probation. The fine was supposed to be paid within 60 days of the judgment’s entry into the court record. The company said it had not paid the fine before receiving the pardon. The timing of Trump’s pardon means the company avoided the fine deadline by hours
https://theintercept.com/2025/04/02/trump-pardons-corporation-bitmex-crypto/?
The degenerate junkie said he wouldn't take away anybody's vaccines.
.
Last week, Jackie Griffith showed up at her office at the Collin County Health Care Clinic in north Texas ready to start her day — answering emails from local doctors before heading to a nearby high school to go over the latest vaccine record requirements.
Instead, the 60-year-old registered nurse was called into her director’s office and told to pack up her belongings. The federal government had yanked funding, she learned, and her position — supporting vaccination efforts for uninsured children through a network of more than 60 providers — was gone.
[…]
The cuts that ensnared Griffith, Hogan and many others whose work touches vaccines in dozens of states were part of $11.4 billion in funds that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Department of Health and Human Services pulled back from state and community health departments last week, included in the larger slashing of federal government under Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. More than $2 billion was taken from “Immunization and Vaccines for Children” grants, which support the delivery of vaccines to children whose families may not be able to afford them, according to a list HHS published.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/rfk-jr-vaccines-children-weakening-system-hhs-budget-cuts-rcna199188
The rot ….definitely starts at the top. You might not have seen this…
Cooker in Chief.
In early March, Marks said, Kennedy’s team requested that Marks turn over data on cases of brain swelling and deaths caused by the measles vaccine—data that Marks said doesn’t exist because there have been no such confirmed cases in the U.S.
“I can only come to a single conclusion that there was not an appreciation for having somebody who was rigorously science-driven within the organization,” Marks said.
An HHS official earlier said that Marks had no place at FDA if he did “not want to get behind restoring science to its golden standard and promoting radical transparency.”
https://archive.li/Bbru6 (wsj)
"The move surprised scholars of presidential pardons, which have traditionally been considered the domain of human beings. "
That would be the magic of the fourteenth amendment at work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#:~:text=Pennsylvania%20%E2%80%93%20125%20U.S.%20181%20(1888,%5Bin%20the%20Fourteenth%20Amendment%5D.
Senator Rand Paul opposed the new tariffs in a speech to the Senate:
https://unherd.com/newsroom/trumps-tariffs-are-unconstitutional/
As if semantics don't matter. A tariff is a tax if you call it that? I doubt any judge would agree, unless case law had established precedent on it. I think a tariff is a cost that becomes incorporated into strategic pricing by companies, so consumers end up paying it. Perhaps he means that but is averse to saying so? Regardless, rationality of this framing seems a tad ephemeral. He's flying this kite confidently though, on the basis that they're unconstitutional. Perhaps he over-estimates the rationality of the SC.
Just watched a program that showed that Mexico has not responded with their own tariffs. For many weeks Mexico has brought big USA Business in Mexico under pressure. The effect is growing big industry anxiety via CEOs in Washington. Thus Republican MPs are getting hammered as the big companies like Ford or Massey panic.
Does this work?
It has been argued for ages that the undoing of Trump will come from the People rather than from brute force. What will happen if other countries adopt the Mexico method?
For Mexico to have responded with retaliatory tariffs would only have operated as a tax on its own people.
Was starting to get interested in this link, when 1 minute into the video I realised it was one of those cheap nasty ones with a computer generated voice. Would prefer that links like this were not used, waste of my time…
But is it essentially true? Makes sense to me.