ReportWire

Tag: ethics

  • Wrong place, wrong time: How things went so badly for Twitter’s new CEO so quickly | CNN Business

    Wrong place, wrong time: How things went so badly for Twitter’s new CEO so quickly | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    When Parag Agrawal took over as Twitter’s CEO last November following co-founder Jack Dorsey’s surprise resignation from the role, he was little known outside the company.

    Ten months later, Agrawal has featured prominently in a whistleblower disclosure, been rebuked by name in a Congressional hearing and fielded criticism from the world’s richest man (and his possible future boss) both publicly and privately.

    The complications are not letting up. Elon Musk this week proposed following through with the deal to buy Twitter

    (TWTR)     at the originally agreed upon price of $54.20 per share, according to a Tuesday securities filing. The move could bring to an end the ongoing legal battle over Musk’s attempt to pull out of the $44 billion acquisition deal, which is set to go to trial in two weeks. If Twitter

    (TWTR)     decides to move forward with the proposal, Agrawal could soon either be out of a job or be working for the billionaire with whom he’s spent months quarreling.

    Even for a company accustomed to periods of upheaval, Agrawal’s tenure leading Twitter has been marked by an unusual degree of chaos: a nightmare acquisition battle with Musk; a former executive alleging serious security vulnerabilities; and an economic downturn hitting its core advertising business.

    That would be a lot to navigate for even the most seasoned chief executive. But Agrawal, a decade-long veteran of Twitter who previously served as its CTO, had never previously run a company — let alone one of the world’s most important social media platforms.

    “I think Parag was elevated because they thought everything would be status quo,” said Bill Klepper, management professor at Columbia Business School. The past year has been anything but that.

    Despite the challenges, Agrawal has managed to continue growing the platform’s user base and has launched various new features, including testing the long-awaited edit button. But there are sincere doubts about whether Agrawal will survive another year, whether because Musk buys the company and then removes him, or because the board replaces him if the deal falls through.

    Meanwhile, some lawmakers and regulators are suggesting Agrawal could be probed in the wake of the whistleblower allegations, which directly implicate Agrawal, both as CEO and in his previous role at CTO.

    “I’m sure when he goes home at night, he says to himself, ‘What the hell did I get myself into?’” said Klepper.

    Twitter declined to comment for this story.

    From the start, Agrawal had a daunting task. The company’s existing goal was to somehow add 100 million additional daily active users by 2023, a 45% increase from the fourth quarter of 2021, and grow its annual revenue to $7.5 billion, up from just over $5 billion in 2021. At the same time, it was exploring new revenue opportunities, such as its Twitter Blue subscription service and cryptocurrency-related features.

    “The challenge for Twitter is that they still have not been able to grow their user base and improve their monetization to the level where their monetization is on par with their influence,” Forte said.

    Then came Musk.

    In March, after months of quietly amassing Twitter shares, Musk met with Dorsey, although he was no longer Twitter’s CEO, to “discuss the future direction of social media,” according to a company filing. In the days that followed, Musk met with Twitter’s board and some of its leadership team, including Agrawal; publicly announced that he’d become Twitter’s largest shareholder; and accepted a seat on the company’s board.

    Days later, Musk tweeted, “Is Twitter dying?” Agrawal texted Musk later that day to say the tweet was making his life difficult as CEO.

    “You are free to tweet ‘is Twitter dying?’ or anything else about Twitter,” Agrawal said in the text to Musk, revealed in a court filing last week, “but it’s my responsibility to tell you that it’s not helping me make Twitter better in the current context. Next time we speak, I’d like you to provide [your] perspective on the level of internal distraction right now and how [it’s] hurting our ability to do work … I’d like the company to get to a place where we are more resilient and don’t get distracted, but we aren’t there right now.”

    Musk responded tersely: “What did you get done this week?” In two follow-up texts, he rescinded his agreement to join the board, saying, “I’m not joining the board. This is a waste of time.”

    Musk then abandoned the board seat, threatened a hostile takeover and ultimately agreed to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share, a significant premium to the company’s share price at the time, only to then attempt to withdraw from the deal months later, citing concerns about the number of bots and spam accounts on the platform. Twitter sued him to complete the deal — and now must decide whether to accept Musk’s proposal to suspend the litigation process and move forward with completing the deal. (Twitter said Tuesday it had received Musk’s letter and intends “to close the transaction at $54.20 per share.”)

    Throughout the dispute, Agrawal has had to reassure shareholders, advertisers and employees about an acquisition by a billionaire who has been publicly critical of the platform while also confronting public jabs from someone who could be his new boss.

    In May, Musk and Agrawal appeared to openly feud on Twitter over the Tesla CEO’s claims about bots. Agrawal posted a tweet thread attempting to explain the prevalence of false and spam accounts on the platform and the company’s efforts to quantify and address them; Musk responded with a poop emoji.

    Twitter — which many legal experts say has the stronger case if the dispute goes to trial — has sought to have a judge force Musk to follow through with the acquisition agreement. In that case, it seems unlikely Musk would keep Agrawal as CEO or that Agrawal would choose to stay.

    In a text message exchange with Dorsey in April after the deal was signed, Musk suggested he would be unable to work with Agrawal. “Parag is just moving far too slowly and trying to please people who will not be happy no matter what he does,” Musk said in a text.

    If Musk takes over the company and Agrawal is removed, Agrawal could receive a payout worth tens of millions of dollars, including compensation for his stock options.

    But even if Musk wins, or the two sides agree on a settlement that allows Musk to get out of the deal, Klepper said Agrawal remaining as CEO could be a longshot. In the event Musk walks, Twitter’s stock could take a hit. The company would also still be facing the same challenges to its business, compounded by attrition amid the uncertainty with Musk.

    “They’ve got a lot of stuff to clean up,” he said. “The first thing they’re going to do is bring in a new leadership, someone who has turnaround experience.”

    As the legal battle with Musk heated up, Twitter was hit with another blow: Peiter “Mudge” Zatko, the company’s former head of security and a highly regarded figure in the information security world, went public with a whistleblower complaint.

    Zatko accused the company of having serious security vulnerabilities that threatened users, investors and US national security. He also alleged that the company is at risk of foreign interference and that its executives, including Agrawal, have misled regulators and the company’s own board.

    The first months of a new CEO’s tenure are typically spent meeting with various parts of the company and discussing strategy with their board, Klepper said. But according to internal documents included in Zatko’s whistleblower disclosure, in December and January, Agrawal was also fielding concerns from Zatko that the new CEO and other executives had presented false information about the company’s security posture to the board, in what Zatko alleged could amount to fraud. In January, the Twitter board’s audit committee launched an investigation into Zatko’s worries.

    Twitter says that the investigation concluded Zatko’s allegations were unfounded and that he was fired for poor performance; Zatko maintains he was fired in retaliation for speaking up. Twitter has said the whistleblower disclosure paints a “false narrative” of the company that is “riddled with inconsistencies and inaccuracies and lacks important context.”

    Still, the whistleblower’s claims have placed an even greater spotlight on the company and Agrawal. Earlier this month, leading members of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent Agrawal a letter seeking information, and requested responses by Sept. 26. It’s not clear whether Twitter has responded to the letter.

    During a Senate hearing with Zatko, Sen. Chuck Grassley blasted Agrawal for not accepting an invitation to testify alongside the whistleblower. Twitter declined to make Agrawal available amid its concerns that his testimony could jeopardize the company’s ongoing litigation with Musk, according to Grassley.

    Grassley didn’t stop there. If Zatko’s claims turn out to be accurate, he said, “I don’t see how Mr. Agrawal can maintain his position at Twitter.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Chief Justice John Roberts will not testify before Congress about Supreme Court ethics | CNN Politics

    Chief Justice John Roberts will not testify before Congress about Supreme Court ethics | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Chief Justice John Roberts has notified Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin that he won’t testify at an upcoming hearing on Supreme Court ethics, instead releasing a new statement signed by all nine justices that is meant to provide “clarity” to the public about the high court’s ethics practices.

    “I must respectfully decline your invitation,” Roberts wrote in a letter to Durbin, which was released by a spokesperson for the high court Tuesday.

    “Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee by the Chief Justice of the United States is exceedingly rare as one might expect in light of separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence,” he added.

    Without addressing Durbin’s specific concerns over ethics Roberts simply attached a “Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices” to which he said, “All of the current Members of the Supreme Court subscribe.”

    The Illinois Democrat had asked Roberts, in a letter, to voluntarily testify in a hearing on Supreme Court ethics set to take place May 2. The request came in the wake of a ProPublica report that found that Justice Clarence Thomas had gone on several luxury trips at the invitation of a GOP megadonor. The trips were not disclosed on Thomas’ public financial filings.

    Thomas said in a statement that he had not reported the trips because the ethics guidelines in effect at the time had not required such disclosures.

    It was widely expected that Roberts would decline Durbin’s invitation to appear before a separate branch of government to discuss ethics reform.

    Durbin responded to the refusal in a statement Tuesday.

    “Make no mistake: Supreme Court ethics reform must happen whether the Court participates in the process or not,” Durbin said in the statement.

    He also noted that he was surprised that the chief justice had amended his letter with a statement meant to provide “clarity” to the public about how the justices consider ethics issues.

    Durbin dismissed the statement as a “recounting of existing legal standards of ethics” and said that Roberts’ suggestion that current law is adequate “ignores the obvious.”

    “It is time for Congress to accept its responsibility to establish an enforceable code of ethics for the Supreme Court, the only agency of our government without it,” Durbin said.

    The new statement, signed by all nine members of the court, says that the justices want to provide “new clarity” to the public. It might serve instead, to infuriate critics of the court who will say it falls far short of what is necessary to provide more binding regulations applicable to the justices.

    Less than an hour after the court released the statement, for example, Gabe Roth, who runs watchdog group Fix the Court, blasted what he called a “rehashing of things we already knew and found insufficient.”

    “Following weeks of scandal, Americans had been seeking some reassurance that nine of the most powerful people in the country understood their responsibility to act above board, avoid corrupting influences and be honest in their dealings and disclosures,” Roth said in a statement.

    The newly drafted statement by the court notes that the justices “today reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

    The statement reiterates something that Roberts has stressed before: that the justices “consult a wide variety of authorities to address specific ethical issues.”

    “They may turn to judicial opinions, treatises, scholarly articles, disciplinary decisions, and the historical practice of the Court and the federal judiciary” and they “may also seek advice from the Court’s Legal Office and from their colleagues,” the statement says.

    Indeed, Thomas in a rare statement on April 7 said that he had turned to the advice of his colleagues when deciding that luxury trips paid for by GOP megadonor Harlan Crow did not need to be disclosed in his yearly financial disclosure reports under the ethics guidelines that were in place at the time.

    Last weekend, Durbin released a separate statement noting that Roberts had declined to directly respond to a letter asking him to investigate Thomas’ filings but had referred the letter to the Judicial Conference, which serves as the policy-making body of the federal courts.

    Durbin had also included a letter from Judge Roslynn Mauskopf, the secretary of the Judicial Conference, who said that she would send the matter to the conference’s Committee on Financial Disclosure.

    But the new statement emphasizes that while the Judicial Conference has a code of conduct that is followed by lower court judges, the conference “does not supervise the Supreme Court.”

    The statement does note that in 1991, members of the court “voluntarily adopted” a resolution to follow the financial disclosure requirements and limitations on gifts that apply to all other federal judges.

    But when it comes to recusals, the standards are necessarily more restrictive because unlike the lower courts that can freely substitute one district or circuit court judge for the other, the Supreme Court allows only its own members to hear a dispute.

    The statement explains why individual justices “rather than the Court” must decide recusal issues.

    “If the full Court or any subset of the Court were to review the recusal decisions of individual Justices, it would create an undesirable situation in which the Court could affect the outcome of a case by selecting who among its Members may participate,” it says.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Samuel Alito tells Congress to stay out of Supreme Court ethics controversy | CNN Politics

    Samuel Alito tells Congress to stay out of Supreme Court ethics controversy | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Congress should stay out of the Supreme Court’s business and stop trying to impose ethics rules on justices and clerks, Justice Samuel Alito said in an interview published by The Wall Street Journal editorial page Friday.

    “Congress did not create the Supreme Court,” Alito said. “I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it. No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court – period.”

    Spurred by a string of stories calling out questionable ethical decisions and a lack of transparency and disclosure, Senate Democrats have advanced legislation meant to create a code of ethics for the Supreme Court.

    One of the authors of the Journal interview, attorney David B. Rivkin Jr., represents the plaintiffs in a major tax case the court will hear next term.

    In an unusual move, Alito last month sought to preempt a ProPublica report on him by publishing a Wall Street Journal op-ed rather than responding to ProPublica’s request for comment directly.

    Alito, a conservative appointed by George W. Bush, said he’s realized that nobody’s going to defend him if he doesn’t do so himself.

    “I marvel at all the nonsense that has been written about me in the last year,” Alito told the Journal, adding that “the traditional idea about how judges and justices should behave is they should be mute.”

    “But that’s just not happening,” he said. “And so at a certain point I’ve said to myself, nobody else is going to do this, so I have to defend myself.”

    As for criticism of the court’s recent decisions, such as Alito’s majority opinion striking down Roe v. Wade last year, the justice compared any effort to defy the court on a vast scale to objections in the South after major civil rights cases in the 1950s, including Brown v. Board of Education, which declared “separate but equal” was unconstitutional.

    “If we’re viewed as illegitimate, then disregard of our decisions becomes more acceptable and more popular,” Alito said. “So you can have a revival of the massive resistance that occurred in the South after Brown.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why the ‘Godfather of AI’ decided he had to ‘blow the whistle’ on the technology | CNN Business

    Why the ‘Godfather of AI’ decided he had to ‘blow the whistle’ on the technology | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Geoffrey Hinton, also known as the “Godfather of AI,” decided he had to “blow the whistle” on the technology he helped develop after worrying about how smart it was becoming, he told CNN on Tuesday.

    “I’m just a scientist who suddenly realized that these things are getting smarter than us,” Hinton told CNN’s Jake Tapper in an interview on Tuesday. “I want to sort of blow the whistle and say we should worry seriously about how we stop these things getting control over us.”

    Hinton’s pioneering work on neural networks shaped artificial intelligence systems powering many of today’s products. On Monday, he made headlines for leaving his role at Google, where he had worked for a decade, in order to speak openly about his growing concerns around the technology.

    In an interview Monday with the New York Times, which was first to report his move, Hinton said he was concerned about AI’s potential to eliminate jobs and create a world where many will “not be able to know what is true anymore.” He also pointed to the stunning pace of advancement, far beyond what he and others had anticipated.

    “If it gets to be much smarter than us, it will be very good at manipulation because it will have learned that from us, and there are very few examples of a more intelligent thing being controlled by a less intelligent thing,” Hinton told Tapper on Tuesday.

    “It knows how to program so it’ll figure out ways of getting around restrictions we put on it. It’ll figure out ways of manipulating people to do what it wants.”

    Hinton is not the only tech leader to speak out with concerns over AI. A number of members of the community signed a letter in March calling for artificial intelligence labs to stop the training of the most powerful AI systems for at least six months, citing “profound risks to society and humanity.”

    The letter, published by the Future of Life Institute, a nonprofit backed by Elon Musk, came just two weeks after OpenAI announced GPT-4, an even more powerful version of the technology that powers the viral chatbot ChatGPT. In early tests and a company demo, GPT-4 was used to draft lawsuits, pass standardized exams and build a working website from a hand-drawn sketch.

    Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, who was one of the signatories on the letter, appeared on “CNN This Morning” on Tuesday, echoing concerns about its potential to spread misinformation.

    “Tricking is going to be a lot easier for those who want to trick you,” Wozniak told CNN. “We’re not really making any changes in that regard – we’re just assuming that the laws we have will take care of it.”

    Wozniak also said “some type” of regulation is probably needed.

    Hinton, for his part, told CNN he did not sign the petition. “I don’t think we can stop the progress,” he said. “I didn’t sign the petition saying we should stop working on AI because if people in America stop, people in China wouldn’t.”

    But he confessed to not having a clear answer for what to do instead.

    “It’s not clear to me that we can solve this problem,” Hinton told Tapper. “I believe we should put a big effort into thinking about ways to solve the problem. I don’t have a solution at present.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Democratic senator calls Samuel Alito ‘stunningly wrong’ on Supreme Court ethics controversy | CNN Politics

    Democratic senator calls Samuel Alito ‘stunningly wrong’ on Supreme Court ethics controversy | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut on Sunday called Justice Samuel Alito “stunningly wrong” in his contention that Congress should stay out of the Supreme Court’s business and stop trying to impose ethics rules.

    “It is just wrong on the facts to say that Congress doesn’t have anything to do with the rules guiding the Supreme Court. In fact, from the very beginning, Congress has set those rules,” Murphy told CNN’s Kasie Hunt on “State of the Union.”

    “But it is even more disturbing that Alito feels the need to insert himself into a congressional debate. And it is just more evidence that these justices on the Supreme Court, these conservative justices, just see themselves as politicians. They just see themselves as a second legislative body that has just as much power and right to impose their political will on the country as Congress does.”

    Spurred by a string of stories about alleged ethics violations by justices, Senate Democrats have advanced legislation meant to create a code of ethics for the Supreme Court.

    But Alito, a conservative appointed by President George W. Bush, maintained in an interview published in The Wall Street Journal’s opinion section Friday that “Congress did not create the Supreme Court” and doesn’t have the authority to regulate it.

    “I marvel at all the nonsense that has been written about me in the last year,” Alito said in the interview, adding that “the traditional idea about how judges and justices should behave is they should be mute.”

    The high court has repeatedly evaded requests in recent months to adopt a binding code of conduct, instead responding to allegations of ethical improprieties by releasing statements outlining and defending its current procedures.

    That has failed to satisfy critics in the wake of an array of media reports shining a spotlight on how the justices are leading their lives off the bench, triggering questions about whether they are improperly benefiting from their positions.

    “They are going to bend the law in order to impose their right-wing view of how the country should work on the rest of us,” Murphy said Sunday of the court’s conservative justices.

    “And it’s why we need to pass this commonsense ethics legislation to at least make sure we know that these guys aren’t in bed having their lifestyles paid for by conservative donors, as we have unfortunately seen in these latest revelations,” Murphy said.

    The ethics legislation is not expected to get the 60 votes required to advance on the floor of the Democratic-controlled Senate. And even if it did, the GOP-led House is unlikely to take it up.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ProPublica: GOP megadonor paid private school tuition for grandnephew of Justice Clarence Thomas | CNN Politics

    ProPublica: GOP megadonor paid private school tuition for grandnephew of Justice Clarence Thomas | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A Texas billionaire and GOP megadonor paid boarding school tuition for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ grandnephew, and the justice did not report the financial assistance for the child he helped raised on his annual disclosures, according to a new ProPublica report – the latest revelation raising ethical questions around the high court.

    The ProPublica report on Thursday revealed that the billionaire Harlan Crow paid tuition for Mark Martin, who lived with Thomas’ family as a child and for whom the justice became a legal guardian. ProPublica cited a 2009 bank statement and an interview with a former administrator at the Georgia boarding school Martin attended.

    The former administrator at the school, Hidden Lake Academy, told ProPublica that Crow paid for Martin’s tuition for the year or so Martin was at the boarding school. The administrator said, according to ProPublica, that he had been told by Crow that Crow also paid for Martin’s tuition at another school, the Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia, which is Crow’s alma mater.

    A statement from Crow’s office did not address the payments for Martin’s tuition directly but said that he and his wife had “supported many young Americans through scholarship and other programs at a variety of schools, including his alma mater.”

    A friend and defender of Thomas, conservative lawyer Mark Paoletta, said on Twitter that Crow paid for the first year that Martin spent Randolph-Macon Academy and for the year he spent at Hidden Lake. Paoletta denied that Thomas ran afoul of the court’s financial disclosures rules by not reporting the payments, arguing that Martin did not qualify as a legal dependent under the federal ethics law in question.

    However, on the justice’s 2002 financial disclosure submission, Thomas reported as a gift $5,000 from another couple that was characterized as an “Education gift to Mark Martin.”

    The Supreme Court’s press office did not respond to requests seeking comment from the court and Thomas.

    ProPublica previously reported that for years, Thomas has accepted lavish trips and gifts from Crow, which have gone mostly unreported on the justice’s financial disclosures, and that Crow also purchased several real estate properties, including the home where his mother lives, from the Thomas family.

    The extent to which these transactions and hospitality should have been reported by Thomas has been the subject of debate among judicial ethics experts, who have noted that a recently-closed loophole for certain “personal hospitality” may have covered some of the luxury trips.

    Thomas has said he followed the advice of others in deciding what required disclosure, and a source close to Thomas previously told CNN that the justice plans to amend his disclosure forms to reflect the real estate transaction, which also went unreported. Thomas also said in a statement last month that Crow “did not have business before the court.”

    Nevertheless, court reforms advocates and Democratic lawmakers say that Thomas’ conduct shows that the current ethics rules for the justices – who are not subject to a code of conduct akin to the standards imposed on lower courts – are too lax.

    Amid the ethics firestorm, which included a Senate hearing this week, Chief Justice John Roberts and the other eight justices released a “Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices” last week that the court’s critics say did not go far enough to address their concerns.

    “Today’s report continues a steady stream of revelations calling Justices’ ethics standards and practices into question,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin in a statement on Thursday. “I hope that the Chief Justice understands that something must be done – the reputation and credibility of the Court is at stake.”

    Republicans have pushed back on Democrats’ calls that Congress step in to enact stricter ethics rules for the justices, but some GOP lawmakers have acknowledged they’d like to see the high court – on its own – take steps towards greater transparency.

    Asked Thursday about the latest ProPublica report, Sen. Mitt Romney said, “I hope they’ll look – they’ll evaluate.”

    “I have no way of knowing the accuracy of that report and what’s been done but it clearly justifies taking a good look at it,” the Utah Republican said.

    Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he wasn’t going to speak to the specifics of the new allegations against Thomas, “because I could sit here and talk about other instances from other justices that the fact patterns are similar.”

    “Which goes back to the point of the Supreme Court should address this and they should address it on a consensus basis,” Tillis said.

    Ethics experts who spoke to ProPublica also acknowledged that the tuition payments, if considered a gift to Martin, may not have required disclosure. But since Thomas was Martin’s legal guardian, according to ProPublica’s report, he would have had responsibility for the child’s education and the tuition could also be viewed as an unreported gift to the justice himself.

    The statement from Crow’s office said that that the tuition he and his wife has provided for young people “is given directly to academic institutions, not to students or to their families.”

    “These scholarships and other contributions have always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business,” the statement said. “It’s disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Senate Judiciary chair says ‘everything is on the table’ in response to Clarence Thomas revelations | CNN Politics

    Senate Judiciary chair says ‘everything is on the table’ in response to Clarence Thomas revelations | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin said Sunday that “everything is on the table” as the panel scrutinizes new ethics concerns around Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

    “The bottom line is this: Everything is on the table. Day after day, week after week, more and more disclosures about Justice Thomas – we cannot ignore them,” the Illinois Democrat told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union.”

    “The thing we’re going to do first, obviously, is to gather the evidence, the information that we need to draw our conclusions. I’m not ruling out anything,” he added.

    ProPublica reported recently that, for years, Thomas has accepted lavish trips and gifts from GOP megadonor Harlan Crow, which have gone mostly unreported on the justice’s financial disclosures. Crow also purchased several real estate properties, including the home where Thomas’ mother lives, from the Thomas family and paid boarding school tuition for Thomas’ grandnephew, according to ProPublica.

    The extent to which these transactions and hospitality should have been reported by Thomas has been the subject of debate among judicial ethics experts, who have noted that a recently closed loophole for certain “personal hospitality” may have covered some of the luxury trips.

    Thomas has said he followed the advice of others in deciding what required disclosure and, in a statement last month, noted that that Crow did not have business before the court.

    But Durbin said Sunday the recent revelations “just embarrasses me” as he called on Chief Justice John Roberts to impose a code of conduct on the court. Roberts previously declined Durbin’s request to voluntarily testify in a hearing on Supreme Court ethics.

    “I must respectfully decline your invitation,” Roberts wrote in a letter to Durbin, which was released by a spokesperson for the high court. “Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee by the Chief Justice of the United States is exceedingly rare as one might expect in light of separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence.”

    The debate over Supreme Court ethics was the subject of a Senate Judiciary hearing last week that featured testimony from a law professor, legal advocates and two former judges. Some Republican lawmakers said they want to see more transparency around the court, though they railed against the Democratic push for Congress to impose a code of conduct on the justices.

    Durbin maintained Sunday that “this is the Roberts court, and history is going to judge him by the decision he makes on this.”

    “He has the power to make the difference.”

    Durbin made clear Sunday that he hasn’t reached “any conclusion” on pursuing subpoenas in relation to

    Supreme Court ethics issues, but he acknowledged that the absence of Democratic Sen. Diane Feinstein of California would pose a challenge to the committee “if we go down that path.”

    “Right now, with her absence, it’s a 10-to-10 Committee, and the majority is not there, and a proxy vote doesn’t count in this circumstance,” Durbin said.

    Feinstein, 89, has been away from the Senate since March as she recovers at home in California from shingles. Her absence has prevented the committee from advancing certain judicial nominees of President Joe Biden and several House Democrats have called on her to resign as a result.

    In a statement last week, Feinstein pushed back on those claims, saying that the Senate continues to “swiftly” confirm “highly qualified individuals to the federal judiciary.” She indicated in the statement that she still plans to return but did not say when that would happen.

    “She’s gone through an awful lot. She lost her husband last year, and she’s had some real medical issues that are problematic for her at her age at this point,” Durbin said. “I hope she returns, and I hope it’s this week. We need her. It is a challenge in the Senate Judiciary Committee to do our business.”

    The situation, he added, is “complicated.”

    “I hope she does what’s best for her and her family and the state of California and makes a decision soon as to whether she’s coming back,” Durbin said.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Donald Trump Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    Donald Trump Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a look at the life of Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States.

    Birth date: June 14, 1946

    Birth place: New York, New York

    Birth name: Donald John Trump

    Father: Fred Trump, real estate developer

    Mother: Mary (Macleod) Trump

    Marriages: Melania (Knauss) Trump (January 22, 2005-present); Marla (Maples) Trump (December 1993-June 1999, divorced); Ivana (Zelnicek) Trump (1977-1990, divorced)

    Children: with Melania Trump: Barron, March 20, 2006; with Marla Maples: Tiffany, October 13, 1993; with Ivana Trump: Eric, 1984; Ivanka, October 30, 1981; Donald Jr., December 31, 1977

    Education: Attended Fordham University; University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School of Finance, B.S. in Economics, 1968

    As Trump evolved from real estate developer to reality television star, he turned his name into a brand. Licensed Trump products have included board games, steaks, cologne, vodka, furniture and menswear.

    He has portrayed himself in cameo appearances in movies and on television, including “Zoolander,” “Sex and the City” and “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York.”

    Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again,” was first used by Ronald Reagan while he was running against President Jimmy Carter.

    For details on investigations into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election, visit 2016 Presidential Election Investigation Fast Facts.

    1970s – After college, works with his father on apartment complexes in Queens and Brooklyn.

    1973 – Trump and his father are named in a Justice Department lawsuit alleging Trump property managers violated the Fair Housing Act by turning away potential African American tenants. The Trumps deny the company discriminates and file a $100 million countersuit, which is later dismissed. The case is settled in 1975, and the Trumps agree to provide weekly lists of vacancies to Black community organizations.

    1976 – Trump and his father partner with the Hyatt Corporation, purchasing the Commodore Hotel, an aging midtown Manhattan property. The building is revamped and opens four years later as the Grand Hyatt Hotel. The project kickstarts Trump’s career as a Manhattan developer.

    1983-1990 – He builds/purchases multiple properties in New York City, including Trump Tower and the Plaza Hotel, and also opens casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey, including the Trump Taj Mahal and the Trump Plaza. Trump buys the New Jersey Generals football team, part of the United States Football League, which folds after three seasons.

    1985 – Purchases Mar-a-Lago, an oceanfront estate in Palm Beach, Florida. It is renovated and opens as a private club in 1995.

    1987 – Trump’s first book, “Trump: The Art of the Deal,” is published, and becomes a bestseller. The Donald J. Trump Foundation is established in order to donate a portion of profits from book sales to charities.

    1990 – Nearly $1 billion in personal debt, Trump reaches an agreement with bankers allowing him to avoid declaring personal bankruptcy.

    1991 – The Trump Taj Mahal files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

    1992 – The Trump Plaza and the Trump Castle casinos file for bankruptcy.

    1996 – Buys out and becomes executive producer of the Miss Universe, Miss USA and Miss Teen USA pageants.

    October 7, 1999 – Tells CNN’s Larry King that he is going to form a presidential exploratory committee and wants to challenge Pat Buchanan for the Reform Party nomination.

    February 14, 2000 – Says that he is abandoning his bid for the presidency, blaming discord within the Reform Party.

    January 2004 – “The Apprentice,” a reality show featuring aspiring entrepreneurs competing for Trump’s approval, premieres on NBC.

    November 21, 2004 – Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc. files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

    2005 – Establishes Trump University, which offers seminars in real estate investment.

    February 13, 2009 – Announces his resignation from his position as chairman of Trump Entertainment Resorts. Days later, the company files for bankruptcy protection.

    March 17, 2011 – During an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Trump questions whether President Barack Obama was born in the United States.

    June 16, 2015 – Announces that he is running for president during a speech at Trump Tower. He pledges to implement policies that will boost the economy and says he will get tough on immigration. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best…They’re sending people who have lots of problems,” Trump says. “They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.”

    June 28, 2015 – Says he’s giving up the TV show “The Apprentice” to run for president.

    June 29, 2015 – NBCUniversal says it is cutting its business ties to Trump and won’t air the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants because of “derogatory statements by Donald Trump regarding immigrants.”

    July 8, 2015 – In an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Trump says he “can’t guarantee” all of his employees have legal status in the United States. This is in response to questions about a Washington Post report about undocumented immigrants working at the Old Post Office construction site in Washington, DC, which Trump is converting into a hotel.

    July 22, 2015 – Trump’s financial disclosure report is made public by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

    August 6, 2015 – During the first 2016 Republican debate, Trump is questioned about a third party candidacy, his attitude towards women and his history of donating money to Democratic politicians. He tells moderator Megyn Kelly of Fox News he feels he is being mistreated. The following day, Trump tells CNN’s Don Lemon that Kelly was singling him out for attack, “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”

    September 11, 2015 – Trump announces he has purchased NBC’s half of the Miss Universe Organization, which organizes the annual Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants.

    December 7, 2015 – Trump’s campaign puts out a press release calling for a “complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

    May 26, 2016 – Secures enough delegates to clinch the Republican Party nomination.

    July 16, 2016 – Introduces Indiana Governor Mike Pence as his running mate.

    July 19, 2016 – Becomes the Republican Party nominee for president.

    September 13, 2016 – During an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman says his office is investigating Trump’s charitable foundation “to make sure it’s complying with the laws governing charities in New York.”

    October 1, 2016 – The New York Times reports Trump declared a $916 million loss in 1995 which could have allowed him to legally skip paying federal income taxes for years. The report is based on a financial document mailed to the newspaper by an anonymous source.

    October 7, 2016 – Unaired footage from 2005 surfaces of Trump talking about trying to have sex with a married woman and being able to grope women. In footage obtained by The Washington Post, Trump is heard off-camera discussing women in vulgar terms during the taping of a segment for “Access Hollywood.” In a taped response, Trump declares, “I said it, I was wrong and I apologize.”

    October 9, 2016 – During the second presidential debate, CNN’s Cooper asks Trump about his descriptions of groping and kissing women without their consent in the “Access Hollywood” footage. Trump denies that he has ever engaged in such behavior and declares the comments were “locker room talk.” After the debate, 11 women step forward to claim that they were sexually harassed or sexually assaulted by the real estate developer. Trump says the stories aren’t true.

    November 8, 2016 – Elected president of the United States. Trump will be the first president who has never held elected office, a top government post or a military rank.

    November 18, 2016 – Trump agrees to pay $25 million to settle three lawsuits against Trump University. About 6,000 former students are covered by the settlement.

    December 24, 2016 – Trump says he will dissolve the Donald J. Trump Foundation “to avoid even the appearance of any conflict with my role as President.” A spokeswoman for the New York Attorney General’s Office says that the foundation cannot legally close until investigators conclude their probe of the charity.

    January 10, 2017 – CNN reports that intelligence officials briefed Trump on a dossier that contains allegations about his campaign’s ties to Russia and unverified claims about his personal life. The author of the dossier is a former British spy who was hired by a research firm that had been funded by both political parties to conduct opposition research on Trump.

    January 20, 2017 – Takes the oath of office from Chief Justice John Roberts during an inauguration ceremony at the Capitol.

    January 23, 2017 – Trump signs an executive action withdrawing the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation trade deal negotiated by the Obama administration and awaiting congressional approval.

    January 27, 2017 – Trump signs an executive order halting all refugee arrivals for 120 days and banning travel to the United States from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days. Additionally, refugees from Syria are barred indefinitely from entering the United States. The order is challenged in court.

    February 13, 2017 – Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Flynn, resigns amid accusations he lied about his communications with Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak. Flynn later pleads guilty to lying to the FBI.

    May 3, 2017 – FBI Director James Comey confirms that there is an ongoing investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia during a hearing on Capitol Hill. Less than a week later, Trump fires Comey, citing a DOJ memo critical of the way he handled the investigation into Clinton’s emails.

    May 2017 – Shortly after Trump fires Comey, the FBI opens an investigation into whether Trump “had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests,” citing former law enforcement officials and others the paper said were familiar with the probe.

    May 17, 2017 – Former FBI Director Robert Mueller is appointed as special counsel to lead the probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, including potential collusion between Trump campaign associates and Russian officials. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein makes the appointment because Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from investigations into Trump’s campaign.

    May 19, 2017 – Departs on his first foreign trip as president. The nine-day, five-country trip includes stops in Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Vatican, a NATO summit in Brussels and a G7 summit in Sicily.

    June 1, 2017 – Trump proclaims that the United States is withdrawing from the Paris climate accord but adds that he is open to renegotiating aspects of the environmental agreement, which was signed by 175 countries in 2016.

    July 7, 2017 – Meets Russian President Vladimir Putin in person for the first time, on the sidelines of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany.

    August 8, 2017 – In response to nuclear threats from North Korea, Trump warns that Pyongyang will “face fire and fury like the world has never seen.” Soon after Trump’s comments, North Korea issues a statement saying it is “examining the operational plan” to strike areas around the US territory of Guam.

    August 15, 2017 – After a violent clash between neo-Nazi activists and counterprotesters leaves one dead in Charlottesville, Virginia, Trump holds an impromptu press conference in the lobby of Trump Tower and declares that there were “fine people” on both sides.

    August 25, 2017 – Trump’s first pardon is granted to former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of criminal contempt for disregarding a court order in a racial-profiling case. Trump did not consult with lawyers at the Justice Department before announcing his decision.

    September 5, 2017 – The Trump administration announces that it is ending the DACA program, introduced by Obama to protect nearly 800,000 undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. Trump calls on Congress to introduce legislation that will prevent DACA recipients from being deported. Multiple lawsuits are filed opposing the policy in federal courts and judges delay the end of the program, asking the government to submit filings justifying the cancellation of DACA.

    September 19, 2017 – In a speech at the United Nations General Assembly, Trump refers to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as “Rocket Man” and warns that the United States will “totally destroy North Korea” if forced to defend itself or its allies.

    September 24, 2017 – The Trump administration unveils a third version of the travel ban, placing restrictions on travel by certain foreigners from Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. (Chad is later removed after meeting security requirements.) One day before the revised ban is set to take effect, it is blocked nationwide by a federal judge in Hawaii. A judge in Maryland issues a similar ruling.

    December 4, 2017 – The Supreme Court rules that the revised travel ban can take effect pending appeals.

    December 6, 2017 – Trump recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and announces plans to relocate the US Embassy there.

    January 11, 2018 – During a White House meeting on immigration reform, Trump reportedly refers to Haiti and African nations as “shithole countries.”

    January 12, 2018 – The Wall Street Journal reports that Trump allegedly had an affair with a porn star named Stephanie Clifford, aka Stormy Daniels. The newspaper states that Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, arranged a $130,000 payment for a nondisclosure agreement weeks before Election Day in 2016. Trump denies the affair occurred. In March, Clifford sues Trump seeking to be released from the NDA. In response, Trump and his legal team agree outside of court not to sue or otherwise enforce the NDA. The suit is dismissed. A California Superior Court judge orders Trump to pay $44,100 to Clifford, to reimburse her attorneys’ fees in the legal battle surrounding her nondisclosure agreement.

    March 13, 2018 – Trump announces in a tweet that he has fired Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and will nominate CIA Director Mike Pompeo as Tillerson’s replacement.

    March 20, 2018 – A New York Supreme Court judge rules that a defamation lawsuit against Trump can move forward, ruling against a July 2017 motion to dismiss filed by Trump’s lawyers. The lawsuit, filed by Summer Zervos, a former “Apprentice” contestant, is related to sexual assault allegations. In November 2021, attorneys for Zervos announce she is dropping the lawsuit.

    March 23, 2018 – The White House announces that it is adopting a policy, first proposed by Trump via tweet in July 2017, banning most transgender individuals from serving in the military.

    April 9, 2018 – The FBI raids Cohen’s office, home and a hotel room where he’d been staying while his house was renovated. The raid is related to a federal investigation of possible fraud and campaign finance violations.

    April 13, 2018 – Trump authorizes joint military strikes in Syria with the UK and France after reports the government used chemical weapons on civilians in Douma.

    May 7, 2018 – The Trump administration announces a “zero tolerance” policy for illegal border crossings. Sessions says that individuals who violate immigration law will be criminally prosecuted and warns that parents could be separated from children.

    May 8, 2018 – Trump announces that the United States is withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal.

    May 31, 2018 – The Trump administration announces it is imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum imported from allies Canada, Mexico and the European Union.

    June 8-9, 2018 – Before leaving for the G7 summit in Quebec City, Trump tells reporters that Russia should be reinstated in the group. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 led to Russia’s suspension. After leaving the summit, Trump tweets that he will not endorse the traditional G7 communique issued at the end of the meeting. The President singles out Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for making “false statements” at a news conference.

    June 12, 2018 – Trump meets Kim in person for the first time during a summit in Singapore. They sign a four-point statement that broadly outlines the countries’ commitment to a peace process. The statement contains a pledge by North Korea to “work towards” complete denuclearization but the agreement does not detail how the international community will verify that Kim is ending his nuclear program.

    June 14, 2018 – The New York attorney general sues the Trump Foundation, alleging that the nonprofit run by Trump and his three eldest children violated state and federal charity law.

    June 26, 2018 – The Supreme Court upholds the Trump administration’s travel ban in a 5-4 ruling along party lines.

    July 16, 2018 – During a joint news conference with Putin in Helsinki, Trump declines to endorse the US government’s assessment that Russia interfered in the election, saying he doesn’t “see any reason why” Russia would be responsible. The next day, Trump clarifies his remark, “The sentence should have been, ‘I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia.” He says he accepts the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia meddled in the election but adds, “It could be other people also.”

    August 21, 2018 – Cohen pleads guilty to eight federal charges, including two campaign finance violations. In court, he says that he orchestrated payments to silence women “in coordination and at the direction of a candidate for federal office.” On the same day, Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort is convicted on eight counts of federal financial crimes. On December 12, Cohen is sentenced to three years in prison.

    October 2, 2018 – The New York Times details numerous tax avoidance schemes allegedly carried out by Trump and his siblings. In a tweet, Trump dismisses the article as a “very old, boring and often told hit piece.”

    November 20, 2018 – Releases a statement backing Saudi Arabia in the wake of the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a Virginia resident, killed in October at a Saudi consulate in Turkey. Khashoggi was a frequent critic of the Saudi regime. The Saudis initially denied any knowledge of his death, but then later said a group of rogue operators were responsible for his killing. US officials have speculated that such a mission, including the 15 men sent from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to murder him, could not have been carried out without the authorization of Saudi leader Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. In the statement, Trump writes, “Our intelligence agencies continue to assess all information, but it could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event, maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!”

    December 18, 2018 – The Donald J. Trump Foundation agrees to dissolve according to a document filed in Manhattan Supreme Court. The agreement allows the New York attorney general’s office to review the recipients of the charity’s assets.

    December 22, 2018 – The longest partial government shutdown in US history begins after Trump demands lawmakers allocate $5.7 billion in funding for a border wall before agreeing to sign a federal funding package.

    January 16, 2019 – After nearly two years of Trump administration officials denying that anyone involved in his campaign colluded with the Russians to help his candidacy, Trump lawyer and former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani, says “I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or people in the campaign. I said the President of the United States.”

    January 25, 2019 – The government shutdown ends when Trump signs a short-term spending measure, providing three weeks of stopgap funding while lawmakers work on a border security compromise. The bill does not include any wall funding.

    February 15, 2019 – Trump declares a national emergency to allocate funds to build a wall on the border with Mexico. During the announcement, the President says he expects the declaration to be challenged in court. The same day, Trump signs a border security measure negotiated by Congress, with $1.375 billion set aside for barriers, averting another government shutdown.

    February 18, 2019 – Attorneys general from 16 states file a lawsuit in federal court challenging Trump’s emergency declaration.

    March 22, 2019 – Mueller ends his investigation and delivers his report to Attorney General William Barr. A senior Justice Department official tells CNN that there will be no further indictments.

    March 24, 2019 – Barr releases a letter summarizing the principal conclusions from Mueller’s investigation. According to Barr’s four-page letter, the evidence was not sufficient to establish that members Trump’s campaign tacitly engaged in a criminal conspiracy with the Russian government to interfere with the election.

    April 18, 2019 – A redacted version of the Mueller report is released. The first part of the 448-page document details the evidence gathered by Mueller’s team on potential conspiracy crimes and explains their decisions not to charge individuals associated with the campaign. The second part of the report outlines ten episodes involving possible obstruction of justice by the President. According to the report, Mueller’s decision not to charge Trump was rooted in Justice Department guidelines prohibiting the indictment of a sitting president. Mueller writes that he would have cleared Trump if the evidence warranted exoneration.

    May 1, 2019 – The New York Times publishes a report that details how Giuliani, in his role as Trump’s personal attorney, is investigating allegations related to former Vice President Joe Biden, a potential Trump opponent in the 2020 presidential race. Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, served on the board of a Ukrainian energy company called Burisma Holdings. In 2016, the elder Biden pressured Ukraine to oust a prosecutor who had investigated Burisma for corruption. Giuliani suggests that Biden’s move was motivated by a desire to protect his son from criminal charges. Giuliani’s claims are undermined after Bloomberg reports that the Burisma investigation was “dormant” when Biden pressed the prosecutor to resign.

    June 12, 2019 – Trump says he may be willing to accept information about political rivals from a foreign government during an interview on ABC News, declaring that he’s willing to listen and wouldn’t necessarily call the FBI.

    June 16, 2019 – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu unveils a sign at the proposed site of a Golan Heights settlement to be named Trump Heights.

    June 18, 2019 – Trump holds a rally in Orlando to publicize the formal launch of his reelection campaign.

    June 28, 2019 – During a breakfast meeting at the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman reportedly discuss tensions with Iran, trade and human rights.

    June 30, 2019 – Trump becomes the first sitting US president to enter North Korea. He takes 20 steps beyond the border and shakes hands with Kim.

    July 14, 2019 – Via Twitter, Trump tells Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Illhan Omar and Ayanna Pressley to “go back” to their home countries. Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Pressley are natural-born US citizens; Omar was born in Somalia, immigrated to the United States and became a citizen.

    July 16, 2019 – The House votes, 240-187, to condemn the racist language Trump used in his tweets about Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, Omar and Pressley.

    July 24, 2019 – Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee and the House Intelligence Committee.

    July 25, 2019 – Trump speaks on the phone with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump asks Zelensky for a “favor,” encouraging him to speak with Giuliani about investigating Biden. In the days before the call, Trump blocked nearly $400 million in military and security aid to Ukraine.

    August 12, 2019 – A whistleblower files a complaint pertaining to Trump’s conduct on the Zelensky call.

    September 11, 2019 – The Trump administration lifts its hold on military aid for Ukraine.

    September 24, 2019 – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announces the beginning of an impeachment inquiry related to the whistleblower complaint.

    September 25, 2019 – The White House releases notes from the July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky. The readout contains multiple references to Giuliani and Barr. In response, the Justice Department issues a statement that says Barr didn’t know about Trump’s conversation until weeks after the call. Further, the attorney general didn’t talk to the President about having Ukraine investigate the Bidens, according to the Justice Department. On the same day as the notes are released, Trump and Zelensky meet in person for the first time on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. During a joint press conference after the meeting, both men deny that Trump pressured Zelensky to investigate Biden in exchange for aid.

    September 26, 2019 – The House releases a declassified version of the whistleblower complaint. According to the complaint, officials at the White House tried to “lock down” records of Trump’s phone conversation with Zelensky. The complaint also alleges that Barr played a role in the campaign to convince Zelensky that Biden should be investigated. Trump describes the complaint as “fake news” and “a witch hunt” on Twitter.

    September 27, 2019 – Pompeo is subpoenaed by House committees over his failure to provide documents related to Ukraine. Kurt Volker, US special envoy to Ukraine, resigns. He was named in the whistleblower complaint as one of the State Department officials who helped Giuliani connect with sources in Ukraine.

    October 3, 2019 – Speaking to reporters outside the White House, Trump says both Ukraine and China should investigate alleged corruption involving Biden and his son. CNN reports that the President had brought up Biden and his family during a June phone call with Xi Jinping. In that call, Trump discussed the political prospects of Biden as well as Elizabeth Warren. He also told Xi that he would remain quiet on the matter of Hong Kong protests. Notes documenting the conversation were placed on a highly secured server where the transcript from the Ukraine call was also stored.

    October 6, 2019 – After Trump speaks on the phone with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the White House announces that US troops will move out of northern Syria to make way for a planned Turkish military operation. The move marks a major shift in American foreign policy and effectively gives Turkey the green light to attack US-backed Kurdish forces, a partner in the fight against ISIS.

    October 9, 2019 – Turkey launches a military offensive in northern Syria.

    October 31, 2019 – Trump says via Twitter that he is changing his legal residency from New York to Florida, explaining that he feels he is treated badly by political leaders from the city and state.

    November 7, 2019 – A judge orders Trump to pay $2 million to settle a lawsuit against his charity filed by the New York state attorney general. According to the suit, Trump breached his fiduciary duty by allowing his presidential campaign to direct the distribution of donations. In a statement, Trump accuses the attorney general of mischaracterizing the settlement for political purposes.

    November 13, 2019 – Public impeachment hearings begin and Trump meets Erdogan at the White House.

    November 20, 2019 – During a public hearing, US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland says he worked with Giuliani on matters related to Ukraine at the “express direction of the President of the United States” and he says “everyone was in the loop.” Sondland recounts several conversations between himself and Trump about Ukraine opening two investigations: one into Burisma and another into conspiracies about Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 US election.

    December 10, 2019 – House Democrats unveil two articles of impeachment, one for abuse of power and one for obstruction of Congress.

    December 11, 2019 – Trump signs an executive order to include discrimination against Jewish people as a violation of law in certain cases, with an eye toward fighting antisemitism on college campuses.

    December 13, 2019 – The House Judiciary Committee approves the two articles of impeachment in a party line vote.

    December 18, 2019 – The House of Representatives votes to impeach Trump, charging a president with high crimes and misdemeanors for just the third time in American history.

    January 3, 2020 – Speaking at Mar-a-Lago, Trump announces that a US airstrike in Iraq has killed Qasem Soleimani, the leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Quds Force.

    January 8, 2020 – Iran fires a number of missiles at two Iraqi bases housing US troops in retaliation for the American strike that killed Soleimani. No US or Iraqi lives are reported lost, but the Pentagon later releases a statement confirming that 109 US service members had been diagnosed with mild traumatic brain injuries in the wake of the attack.

    January 24, 2020 – Makes history as the first President to attend the annual March for Life rally in Washington, DC, since it began nearly a half-century ago. Trump reiterates his support for tighter abortion restrictions.

    January 29, 2020 – Trump signs the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement into law, which replaces the North American Free Trade Agreement.

    January 31, 2020 – The Trump administration announces an expansion of the travel ban to include six new countries. Immigration restrictions will be imposed on: Nigeria, Eritrea, Tanzania, Sudan, Kyrgyzstan and Myanmar (known as Burma), with exceptions for immigrants who have helped the United States.

    February 5, 2020 – The Senate votes to acquit Trump on two articles of impeachment. Sen. Mitt Romney is the sole Republican to vote to convict on the charge of abuse of power, joining with all Senate Democrats in a 52-48 not guilty vote. On the obstruction of Congress charge, the vote falls along straight party lines, 53-47 for acquittal.

    May 29, 2020 – Trump announces that the United States will terminate its relationship with the World Health Organization.

    July 10, 2020 – Trump commutes the prison sentence of his longtime friend Roger Stone, who was convicted of crimes that included lying to Congress in part, prosecutors said, to protect the President. The announcement came just days before Stone was set to report to a federal prison in Georgia.

    October 2, 2020 – Trump announces that he has tested positive for coronavirus. Later in the day, Trump is transferred to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, and returns to the White House on October 5.

    November 7, 2020 – Days after the presidential election on November 3, CNN projects Trump loses his bid for reelection to Biden.

    November 25, 2020 – Trump announces in a tweet that he has granted Michael Flynn a “full pardon,” wiping away the guilty plea of the intelligence official for lying to the FBI.

    December 23, 2020 – Announces 26 new pardons, including for Stone, Manafort and son-in-law Jared Kushner’s father, Charles.

    January 6, 2021 – Following Trump’s rally and speech at the White House Ellipse, pro-Trump rioters storm the US Capitol as members of Congress meet to certify the Electoral College results of the 2020 presidential election. A total of five people die, including a Capitol Police officer the next day.

    January 7-8, 2021 – Instagram and Facebook place a ban on Trump’s account from posting through the remainder of his presidency and perhaps “indefinitely.” Twitter permanently bans Trump from the platform, explaining that “after close review of recent Tweets…and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”

    January 13, 2021 – The House votes to impeach Trump for “incitement of insurrection.” He is the only president to be impeached twice.

    January 20, 2021 – Trump issues a total of 143 pardons and commutations that include his onetime political strategist, Steve Bannon, a former top fundraiser and two well-known rappers but not himself or his family. He then receives a military-style send-off from Joint Base Andrews on Inauguration morning, before heading home to Florida.

    February 13, 2021 – The US Senate acquits Trump in his second impeachment trial, voting that Trump is not guilty of inciting the deadly January 6 riots at the US Capitol. The vote is 43 not guilty to 57 guilty, short of the 67 guilty votes needed to convict.

    May 5, 2021 – Facebook’s Oversight Board upholds Trump’s suspension from using its platform. The decision also applies to Facebook-owned Instagram.

    June 4, 2021 – Facebook announces Trump will be suspended from its platform until at least January 7th, 2023 – two years from when he was initially suspended.

    July 1, 2021 – New York prosecutors charge the Trump Organization and Trump Payroll Corporation with 10 felony counts and Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg with 15 felony counts in connection with an alleged tax scheme stretching back to 2005. Trump himself is not charged. On December 6, 2022, both companies are found guilty on all charges.

    February 14, 2022 – Accounting firm Mazars announces it will no longer act as Trump’s accountant, citing a conflict of interest. In a letter to the Trump Organization chief legal officer, the firm informs the Trump Organization to no longer rely on financial statements ending June 2011 through June 2020.

    May 3, 2022 – The Trump Organization and the Presidential Inaugural Committee agree to pay a total of $750,000 to settle with the Washington, DC, attorney general’s office over allegations they misspent money raised for former President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

    June 9-July 21, 2022 – The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol holds eight hearings, where it hears from witnesses including top ex-Trump officials, election workers, those who took part in the attack and many others. Through live testimony, video depositions, and never-before-seen material, the committee attempts to paint the picture of the former president’s plan to stay in power and the role he played on January 6.

    August 8, 2022 – The FBI executes a search warrant at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, as part of an investigation into the handling of presidential documents, including classified documents, that may have been brought there.

    August 12, 2022 – A federal judge unseals the search warrant and property receipt from the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago. The unsealed documents indicate the FBI recovered 11 sets of classified documents from its search, including some materials marked as “top secret/SCI” – one of the highest levels of classification, and identify three federal crimes that the Justice Department is looking at as part of its investigation: violations of the Espionage Act, obstruction of justice and criminal handling of government records.

    September 21, 2022 – The New York state attorney general files a lawsuit against Trump, three of his adult children and the Trump Organization, alleging they were involved in an expansive fraud lasting over a decade that the former President used to enrich himself. According to the lawsuit, the Trump Organization deceived lenders, insurers and tax authorities by inflating the value of his properties using misleading appraisals.

    October 3, 2022 – Trump files a lawsuit against CNN for defamation, seeking $475 million in punitive damages.

    November 15, 2022 – Announces that he will seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2024.

    November 19, 2022 – Trump’s Twitter account, which was banned following the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, is reinstated after users respond to an online poll posted by Twitter CEO and new owner Elon Musk.

    December 19, 2022 – The Jan. 6 insurrection committee votes to refer Trump to the Department of Justice on at least four criminal charges. Four days later the panel releases its final report recommending Trump be barred from holding office again.

    February 9, 2023 – Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts are restored following a two-year ban in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection, a Meta spokesperson confirms to CNN. On March 17, 2023, YouTube restores Trump’s channel.

    March 30, 2023 – A grand jury in New York votes to indict Trump, the first time in American history that a current or former president has faced criminal charges.

    April 4, 2023 – Surrenders and is placed under arrest before pleading not guilty to 34 felony criminal charges of falsifying business records in Manhattan criminal court. Prosecutors allege that Trump sought to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election through a hush money scheme with payments made to women who claimed they had extramarital affairs with Trump. He has denied the affairs. Hours after his arraignment, Trump rails against the Manhattan district attorney and the indictment during a speech at his Florida resort at Mar-a-Lago.

    May 9, 2023 – A Manhattan federal jury finds Trump sexually abused former magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll in a luxury department store dressing room in the spring of 1996 and awards her $5 million for battery and defamation.

    May 15, 2023 – A report by special counsel John Durham is released. In it he concludes that the FBI should never have launched a full investigation into connections between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election. The report does not recommend any new charges against individuals or “wholesale changes” about how the FBI handles politically charged investigations, despite strongly criticizing the agency’s behavior.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Simmering tensions erupt between top Texas state Republicans | CNN Politics

    Simmering tensions erupt between top Texas state Republicans | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The day after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton accused the state House speaker of presiding over the chamber while drunk and called on him to resign, a House ethics panel on Wednesday heard explosive testimony from investigators detailing what they described as years of misconduct by the attorney general.

    The week’s events marked an eruption of simmering tensions between two of the top Republicans in the most populous red state.

    The remarkable outburst of public acrimony has been years in the making. Paxton, a more conservative figure who aligned himself with former President Donald Trump and used his office to challenge the 2020 presidential election results, has long cast House leadership as too liberal.

    His attacks on state House Speaker Dade Phelan are a vivid window into a political environment where Republicans control all levers of state government but are split into multiple factions battling for power and influence.

    Paxton on Tuesday posted on Twitter a letter to the state House General Investigating Committee, the chamber’s ethics panel, asking for an investigation into Phelan for performing his duties in what Paxton described as “an obviously intoxicated state.”

    Paxton’s call for Phelan’s resignation came after video circulated on social media over the weekend of Phelan appearing to slur his words as he presided over the House chamber at the end of Friday’s late-night session.

    Paxton did not present any evidence beyond the video clips to support his claim that Phelan was drunk.

    “It is with profound disappointment that I call on Speaker Dade Phelan to resign at the end of this legislative session,” Paxton said in a statement posted to his Twitter account. “Texans were dismayed to witness his performance presiding over the Texas House in a state of apparent debilitating intoxication.”

    Less than an hour later, the state House General Investigating Committee – a panel that investigates corruption in state government and has the power to initiate impeachment proceedings – revealed it had subpoenaed records from Paxton’s office as part of an investigation Phelan’s office said started in March.

    “It is not surprising that a committee appointed by liberal Speaker Dade Phelan would seek to disenfranchise Texas voters and sabotage my work as Attorney General,” Paxton said in a statement he posted on Twitter. “The false testimony of the highly partisan Democrat lawyers with the goal of manipulating and misleading the public is reprehensible. Every allegation is easily disproved, and I look forward to continuing my fight for conservative Texas values.”

    Phelan’s office said Paxton’s allegation was merely retaliation for the House ethics panel’s probe.

    “Mr. Paxton’s statement today amounts to little more than a last ditch effort to save face,” Phelan communications director Cait Wittman said in a statement Tuesday.

    Democratic state Rep. Terry Canales said that the broader context of Friday’s all-day session made clear that Phelan “was not under the influence.”

    “At that point in the night the House had been in session over 13 hours and we had been doing so for multiple days in a row. We were all exhausted,” Canales said in a statement. “Nevertheless, I had multiple interactions with the speaker throughout the day and that night and I can say unequivocally he was not under the influence.”

    The acrimony between Phelan and Paxton underscores the personal and ideological tensions within the GOP as the party approaches its 2024 presidential primary.

    Phelan has also clashed in recent months with another more conservative Republican official, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, over property tax relief, school choice and other key issues.

    The state House hearing is the latest in a string of legal troubles for Paxton. CNN has previously reported that he was facing an FBI investigation for abuse of office and that Justice Department prosecutors in Washington, DC, took over the corruption investigation. He is also under indictment for securities fraud in a separate, unrelated case. Paxton has denied all charges and allegations.

    On Wednesday, a team of lawyers working with the House ethics panel spent three hours laying out details of allegations of misconduct against Paxton spanning years.

    The probe began in March after Paxton sought to use $3.3 million in state dollars to settle a whistleblower lawsuit after four former employees of the attorney general’s office accused him of using his authority to benefit political friend Nate Paul, a real estate investor who had donated tens of thousands of dollars to Paxton’s campaign. In the settlement, Paxton apologized but did not admit fault or accept liability. He denied wrongdoing and said in a statement he had agreed to the settlement “to put this issue to rest.”

    As the hearing took place on Wednesday, the Texas Tribune reported that Paxton called into Dallas radio host Mark Davis’ show and criticized the investigation.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Key Senate Dems want Supreme Court funding tied to an ethics code for justices | CNN Politics

    Key Senate Dems want Supreme Court funding tied to an ethics code for justices | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Key Senate Democrats are calling for next year’s funding for the Supreme Court to be conditioned on the creation of an ethics code for the justices.

    Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat who leads the appropriations subcommittee charged with writing the annual funding bill for the judiciary, has expressed support for the idea, but doing so will ultimately need the backing of GOP lawmakers, and the top Republican on the subcommittee is signaling opposition to the proposal.

    Van Hollen is weighing in as 15 other members of the Democratic caucus – including Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat who chairs the Senate Judiciary subcommittee that oversees the federal bench – are proposing language to be attached to next year’s funding bill that would require the Supreme Court to adopt more transparent processes for recusals and for investigating ethics allegations lodged against the justices.

    They did so in a new letter, obtained by CNN, to Van Hollen and Tennessee Sen. Bill Hagerty, who is the top Republican on the appropriations subcommittee with jurisdiction over the judiciary.

    “It is unacceptable that the Supreme Court has exempted itself from the accountability that applies to all other members of our federal courts, and I believe Congress should act to remedy this problem,” Van Hollen said in a statement shared with CNN Monday. His comments were first reported by The Washington Post.

    Democrats’ interest in leveraging the funding Congress appropriates to the high court is the latest volley in the debate over whether a stronger code of conduct is needed at the Supreme Court, which is not beholden to many of the ethics procedures imposed on lower court judges.

    Van Hollen noted that including an ethics code requirement in the annual appropriations bill will require bipartisan support given the current make-up of Congress, but said he didn’t “see any reason why ensuring that the Supreme Court establish a code of ethics should be a partisan issue.”

    A spokesperson for Hagerty said that an ethics code is a “policy question that is separate from the funding levels for Supreme Court operations and security.”

    “Moreover, Senator Hagerty strongly believes in preserving the independence of the Judicial Branch from political interference intended to force the Court to change its rulings or policies,” the spokesperson said in a statement Monday evening. “Threats to hold the personal security of the justices and their families hostage in exchange for favored policies are no different from court-packing proposals or protests outside the homes of Justices.”

    Some Republicans in the House have indicated openness in the past to pushing for an ethics code for the justices, but congressional GOP leaders have defended conservative justices in the face of claims that they had run afoul of ethical norms.

    The new letter from the Democrats pointed to recent reports that have raised questions about potential conflicts-of-interests issues with the political activities of Justice Clarence Thomas’ spouse, and about an alleged well-financed, secret campaign seeking to influence the high court’s conservatives.

    “The Supreme Court has the tools and authority it needs to develop and implement these changes, including adopting a code of conduct, creating fairer and more transparent recusal rules, and setting up procedures – based on longstanding procedures in the lower courts – to receive and investigate complaints of judicial misconduct,” the letter said. “The only obstacle keeping the Court from adopting these reforms is the Court’s own unwillingness to see them through.”

    They argued that the annual funding bill should withhold $10 million of the Supreme Court’s funding unless the justices adopted an ethics code. The Supreme Court is asking for nearly $151 million in the coming appropriations process for 2024.

    The ethics language the new letter is proposing for the annual appropriations legislation would create more concrete standards for when a justice must disqualify him or herself from a case, as well as a system “for receiving and investigating complaints alleging violations of such public code of ethics or other misconduct by justices of the Court.”

    Currently, justices decide for themselves whether they must recuse themselves from a case. It is unclear what procedures, if any, the Supreme Court uses to review ethics allegations brought against the justices.

    In the past, Chief Justice John Roberts has written that the justices have taken the steps necessary to maintain transparency and the public’s trust.

    “I have complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted,” he wrote in a 2011 year-end report. His 2021 report stressed the need for the judicial branch to have “institutional independence,” while implying that the federal bench could be trusted to police itself without the interference of Congress.

    With the Democrats’ new letter to the appropriators, the senators countered that “Congress has broad authority to compel the Supreme Court to institute these reforms, which would join other requirements already legislatively mandated.”

    “And Congress’s appropriations power is one tool for achieving these changes,” the Democrats’ letter said, while citing DC Circuit cases where judges – including Republican appointees – asserted that Congress could use the power of the purse to pressure the Executive Branch to make certain changes.

    The Supreme Court’s press office did not immediately respond to CNN’s inquiry about the funding bill proposal.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Whistleblowers say IRS recommended far more charges, including felonies, against Hunter Biden | CNN Politics

    Whistleblowers say IRS recommended far more charges, including felonies, against Hunter Biden | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Two whistleblowers told Congress that IRS investigators recommended charging Hunter Biden with attempted tax evasion and other felonies, which are far more serious crimes than what the president’s son has agreed to plead guilty to, according to transcripts of their private interviews with lawmakers.

    The IRS whistleblowers said the recommendation called for Hunter Biden to be charged with tax evasion and filing a false tax return – both felonies – for 2014, 2018 and 2019. The IRS also recommended that prosecutors charge him with failing to pay taxes on time, a misdemeanor, for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, according to the transcripts, which were released Thursday by House Republicans.

    It appears that this 11-count charging recommendation also had the backing of some Justice Department prosecutors, but not from more senior attorneys, according to documents that the whistleblowers provided to House investigators.

    In a deal with prosecutors announced earlier this week, Hunter Biden is pleading guilty to just two tax misdemeanors.

    The allegations come from Gary Shapley, a 14-year IRS veteran, who oversaw parts of the Hunter Biden criminal probe, and an unnamed IRS agent who was on the case nearly from its inception. Shapley approached Congress this year with information that he claimed showed political interference in the investigation. He and the entire IRS team were later removed from the probe.

    “I am alleging, with evidence, that DOJ provided preferential treatment, slow-walked the investigation, did nothing to avoid obvious conflicts of interest in this investigation,” Shapley told lawmakers.

    David Weiss, the Trump-appointed US attorney in Delaware who oversaw the Hunter Biden criminal probe, eventually reached a plea deal where the president’s son will plead guilty to two misdemeanors for failing to pay taxes on time. The plea agreement will also resolve a separate felony gun charge, if Hunter Biden abides by certain court-imposed conditions for a period of time.

    Hunter Biden isn’t pleading guilty to any felonies, and he wasn’t charged with any tax felonies. CNN reported that prosecutors are expected to recommend no jail time. He is scheduled to appear in federal court in Delaware on July 26.

    It isn’t uncommon for there to be internal disagreements among investigators over which charges to file against the target of an investigation, much like the disagreements that the IRS whistleblowers described. CNN reported last year that some FBI and IRS investigators were at odds with other Justice Department officials over the strength of the case, and that there were discussions over which types of charges were appropriate and whether further investigation was needed.

    Sources familiar with the criminal probe told CNN in April that prosecutors were still actively weighing a felony tax charge against Hunter Biden. And it is common for prosecutors to strike deals with defendants where they plead guilty to a small subset of the possible charges they could’ve faced.

    The Justice Department probe into Hunter Biden was opened in November 2018, and was codenamed “Sportsman.” According to Shapley’s testimony, federal investigators knew as early as June 2021 that there were potential venue-related issues with charging Hunter Biden in Delaware. Under federal law, charges must be brought in the jurisdiction where the alleged crimes occurred.

    If the potential charges couldn’t be brought in Delaware, then Weiss would need help from his fellow US attorneys. He looked to Washington, DC, where some of Hunter Biden’s tax returns were prepared, and the Central District of California, which includes the Los Angeles area where Hunter Biden lives.

    But Shapley told the committee that the US attorneys in both districts wouldn’t seek an indictment.

    A second whistleblower, an IRS case agent who also testified to the committee but hasn’t been publicly identified, also told lawmakers that this is what happened. He agreed that Weiss was “was told no” when he tried to get the cooperation of the US attorneys in in DC and Los Angeles, who are Biden appointees.

    Hunter Biden’s eventual plea agreement was filed in Weiss’ jurisdiction, in Delaware.

    Shapley contends in his interview that Attorney General Merrick Garland was not truthful when he told Congress that Weiss had full authority on the investigation.

    Shapley recounted a meeting on October 7, 2022, where, according to Shapley’s notes memorializing the meeting, Weiss said, “He is not the deciding person on whether charges are filed” against Hunter Biden. This undermines what Weiss and Garland have publicly said about Weiss’ independence on the matter.

    Shapley also testified to committee investigators that it was during this October 2022 meeting that he learned for the first time that Weiss had requested to be named as a special counsel, but was denied.

    In testimony to Congress in March, Garland said Weiss was advised “he is not to be denied anything he needs.”

    Regarding the claims of political interference with the Hunter Biden criminal probe, Weiss told House Republicans in a recent letter that Garland granted him “ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges.”

    After the transcripts were released Thursday, spokespeople for the US attorney’s offices in DC and Los Angeles issued near-identical statements reiterating that Weiss “was given full authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction he deemed appropriate.” The Justice Department echoed those comments in a statement saying Weiss “needs no further approval” to bring charges wherever he wants.

    The whistleblowers also allege that at multiple key junctures, investigators were thwarted in their efforts because prosecutors were concerned about interfering in the 2020 presidential election.

    In 2020, IRS investigators sought to conduct search warrants and take other overt steps. But according to Shapley, several weeks before the election, in September 2020, a Justice Department prosecutor questioned the optics of searching Hunter Biden’s residence and Joe Biden’s guest home.

    Later that year, other planned searches were delayed because then-President Donald Trump was refusing to concede and was continuing to contest the results.

    Republicans have slammed the plea agreement Hunter Biden struck as a “sweetheart deal,” and said it amounted to “a slap on the wrist.”

    House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith said earlier Thursday that the transcripts reveal “credible whistleblower testimony alleging misconduct and abuse” at the Justice Department that “resulted in preferential treatment for the president’s son.”

    The Missouri Republican highlighted the whistleblowers’ allegations that the Justice Department “overstepped” in their efforts to intervene in the Hunter Biden criminal probe.

    “The testimony … details a lack of US attorney independence, recurring unjustified delays, unusual actions outside the normal course of any investigation, a lack of transparency across the investigation and prosecution teams, and bullying and threats from the defense counsel,” Smith said.

    Democrats on the committee said the transcripts were “a premature and incomplete record” of what happened with the Hunter Biden probe and accused the GOP of a “stunning abuse of power.”

    Hunter Biden’s lawyer pushed back in a statement Friday against the whistleblowers claims, saying it was “preposterous and deeply irresponsible” to suggest that federal investigators “cut my client any slack” during their “extensive” five-year probe.

    “A close examination of the document released publicly yesterday by a very biased individual raises serious questions over whether it is what he claims it to be,” attorney Chris Clark said. “It is dangerously misleading to make any conclusions or inferences based on this document.”

    Shapley, the IRS supervisor-turned-whistleblower, told House lawmakers that Justice Department prosecutors denied requests to look into messages allegedly from Hunter Biden where he used his father as leverage to pressure a Chinese company into paying him.

    “I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled,” according to a document Shapley gave to Congress, which quotes from texts that are allegedly from Hunter Biden to the CEO of a Chinese fund management company.

    The message continues: “Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand. And now means tonight.” The message goes onto say, “I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”

    The second, unnamed IRS whistleblower also testified to lawmakers about this alleged WhatsApp message, saying prosecutors questioned whether they could be sure Hunter Biden was telling the truth that his father was actually in the room in the messages. The unnamed whistleblower testified that they did not know whether the FBI investigated the message.

    Shapley told House investigators that a Justice Department attorney insisted that the FBI not ask directly about Joe Biden when doing interviews. But the FBI did manage to ask one key witness about Joe Biden, and Shapley said the witness told investigators that some suggestions of the president’s involvement were overstated.

    An email sent among business partners of Hunter Biden said an equity stake should be held “for the big guy,” an apparent reference to Joe Biden, who was vice president at the time. But one of the associates told the FBI that it was probably just “wishful thinking or maybe he was just projecting” that Joe Biden would get involved if he did not run for president in 2016.

    Joe Biden has repeatedly denied having any involvement in his son’s overseas business dealings, where he made millions of dollars from China, Ukraine and other countries. House Republicans have used their oversight probes to look for evidence that Joe Biden was actually involved.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘It’s an especially bad time’: Tech layoffs are hitting ethics and safety teams | CNN Business

    ‘It’s an especially bad time’: Tech layoffs are hitting ethics and safety teams | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    In the wake of the 2016 presidential election, as online platforms began facing greater scrutiny for their impacts on users, elections and society, many tech firms started investing in safeguards.

    Big Tech companies brought on employees focused on election safety, misinformation and online extremism. Some also formed ethical AI teams and invested in oversight groups. These teams helped guide new safety features and policies. But over the past few months, large tech companies have slashed tens of thousands of jobs, and some of those same teams are seeing staff reductions.

    Twitter eliminated teams focused on security, public policy and human rights issues when Elon Musk took over last year. More recently, Twitch, a livestreaming platform owned by Amazon, laid off some employees focused on responsible AI and other trust and safety work, according to former employees and public social media posts. Microsoft cut a key team focused on ethical AI product development. And Facebook-parent Meta suggested that it might cut staff working in non-technical roles as part of its latest round of layoffs.

    Meta, according to CEO Mark Zuckerberg, hired “many leading experts in areas outside engineering.” Now, he said, the company will aim to return “to a more optimal ratio of engineers to other roles,” as part of cuts set to take place in the coming months.

    The wave of cuts has raised questions among some inside and outside the industry about Silicon Valley’s commitment to providing extensive guardrails and user protections at a time when content moderation and misinformation remain challenging problems to solve. Some point to Musk’s draconian cuts at Twitter as a pivot point for the industry.

    “Twitter making the first move provided cover for them,” said Katie Paul, director of the online safety research group the Tech Transparency Project. (Twitter, which also cut much of its public relations team, did not respond to a request for comment.)

    To complicate matters, these cuts come as tech giants are rapidly rolling out transformative new technologies like artificial intelligence and virtual reality — both of which have sparked concerns about their potential impacts on users.

    “They’re in a super, super tight race to the top for AI and I think they probably don’t want teams slowing them down,” said Jevin West, associate professor in the Information School at the University of Washington. But “it’s an especially bad time to be getting rid of these teams when we’re on the cusp of some pretty transformative, kind of scary technologies.”

    “If you had the ability to go back and place these teams at the advent of social media, we’d probably be a little bit better off,” West said. “We’re at a similar moment right now with generative AI and these chatbots.”

    When Musk laid off thousands of Twitter employees following his takeover last fall, it included staffers focused on everything from security and site reliability to public policy and human rights issues. Since then, former employees, including ex-head of site integrity Yoel Roth — not to mention users and outside experts — have expressed concerns that Twitter’s cuts could undermine its ability to handle content moderation.

    Months after Musk’s initial moves, some former employees at Twitch, another popular social platform, are now worried about the impacts recent layoffs there could have on its ability to combat hate speech and harassment and to address emerging concerns from AI.

    One former Twitch employee affected by the layoffs and who previously worked on safety issues said the company had recently boosted its outsourcing capacity for addressing reports of violative content.

    “With that outsourcing, I feel like they had this comfort level that they could cut some of the trust and safety team, but Twitch is very unique,” the former employee said. “It is truly live streaming, there is no post-production on uploads, so there is a ton of community engagement that needs to happen in real time.”

    Such outsourced teams, as well as automated technology that helps platforms enforce their rules, also aren’t as useful for proactive thinking about what a company’s safety policies should be.

    “You’re never going to stop having to be reactive to things, but we had started to really plan, move away from the reactive and really be much more proactive, and changing our policies out, making sure that they read better to our community,” the employee told CNN, citing efforts like the launch of Twitch’s online safety center and its Safety Advisory Council.

    Another former Twitch employee, who like the first spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of putting their severance at risk, told CNN that cutting back on responsible AI work, despite the fact that it wasn’t a direct revenue driver, could be bad for business in the long run.

    “Problems are going to come up, especially now that AI is becoming part of the mainstream conversation,” they said. “Safety, security and ethical issues are going to become more prevalent, so this is actually high time that companies should invest.”

    Twitch declined to comment for this story beyond its blog post announcing layoffs. In that post, Twitch noted that users rely on the company to “give you the tools you need to build your communities, stream your passions safely, and make money doing what you love” and that “we take this responsibility incredibly seriously.”

    Microsoft also raised some alarms earlier this month when it reportedly cut a key team focused on ethical AI product development as part of its mass layoffs. Former employees of the Microsoft team told The Verge that the Ethics and Society AI team was responsible for helping to translate the company’s responsible AI principles for employees developing products.

    In a statement to CNN, Microsoft said the team “played a key role” in developing its responsible AI policies and practices, adding that its efforts have been ongoing since 2017. The company stressed that even with the cuts, “we have hundreds of people working on these issues across the company, including net new, dedicated responsible AI teams that have since been established and grown significantly during this time.”

    Meta, maybe more than any other company, embodied the post-2016 shift toward greater safety measures and more thoughtful policies. It invested heavily in content moderation, public policy and an oversight board to weigh in on tricky content issues to address rising concerns about its platform.

    But Zuckerberg’s recent announcement that Meta will undergo a second round of layoffs is raising questions about the fate of some of that work. Zuckerberg hinted that non-technical roles would take a hit and said non-engineering experts help “build better products, but with many new teams it takes intentional focus to make sure our company remains primarily technologists.”

    Many of the cuts have yet to take place, meaning their impact, if any, may not be felt for months. And Zuckerberg said in his blog post announcing the layoffs that Meta “will make sure we continue to meet all our critical and legal obligations as we find ways to operate more efficiently.”

    Still, “if it’s claiming that they’re going to focus on technology, it would be great if they would be more transparent about what teams they are letting go of,” Paul said. “I suspect that there’s a lack of transparency, because it’s teams that deal with safety and security.”

    Meta declined to comment for this story or answer questions about the details of its cuts beyond pointing CNN to Zuckerberg’s blog post.

    Paul said Meta’s emphasis on technology won’t necessarily solve its ongoing issues. Research from the Tech Transparency Project last year found that Facebook’s technology created dozens of pages for terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda. According to the organization’s report, when a user listed a terrorist group on their profile or “checked in” to a terrorist group, a page for the group was automatically generated, although Facebook says it bans content from designated terrorist groups.

    “The technology that’s supposed to be removing this content is actually creating it,” Paul said.

    At the time the Tech Transparency Project report was published in September, Meta said in a comment that, “When these kinds of shell pages are auto-generated there is no owner or admin, and limited activity. As we said at the end of last year, we addressed an issue that auto-generated shell pages and we’re continuing to review.”

    In some cases, tech firms may feel emboldened to rethink investments in these teams by a lack of new laws. In the United States, lawmakers have imposed few new regulations, despite what West described as “a lot of political theater” in repeatedly calling out companies’ safety failures.

    Tech leaders may also be grappling with the fact that even as they built up their trust and safety teams in recent years, their reputation problems haven’t really abated.

    “All they keep getting is criticized,” said Katie Harbath, former director of public policy at Facebook who now runs tech consulting firm Anchor Change. “I’m not saying they should get a pat on the back … but there comes a point in time where I think Mark [Zuckerberg] and other CEOs are like, is this worth the investment?”

    While tech companies must balance their growth with the current economic conditions, Harbath said, “sometimes technologists think that they know the right things to do, they want to disrupt things, and aren’t always as open to hearing from outside voices who aren’t technologists.”

    “You need that right balance to make sure you’re not stifling innovation, but making sure that you’re aware of the implications of what it is that you’re building,” she said. “We won’t know until we see how things continue to operate moving forward, but my hope is that they at least continue to think about that.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Garland denies claims of meddling in Hunter Biden probe, as White House says president uninvolved in son’s business dealings | CNN Politics

    Garland denies claims of meddling in Hunter Biden probe, as White House says president uninvolved in son’s business dealings | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday rejected claims the Justice Department interfered in the Hunter Biden probe as the White House insisted President Joe Biden wasn’t involved in his son’s business dealings.

    In congressional testimony publicly released on Thursday, two IRS whistleblowers who worked on the probe alleged to lawmakers that the president’s son had been given preferential treatment by the Justice Department. The whistleblowers made several explosive allegations, including that the IRS had recommended far more serious charges for the president’s son, that US Attorney in Delaware David Weiss was blocked from bringing charges in other states and that Garland denied a request from Weiss to be named as a special counsel.

    Hunter Biden has since agreed to plead guilty next month to two tax misdemeanors and struck a deal with federal prosecutors to resolve a felony gun charge. His attorney, Chris Clark, on Friday said “any suggestion the investigation was not thorough, or cut corners, or cut my client any slack, is preposterous and deeply irresponsible.”

    When pushed on the allegations during a news conference Friday, Garland said that Weiss was “permitted to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute any way in which he wanted to and in any district in which he wanted to.”

    “I don’t know how it would be possible for anybody to block him from bringing a prosecution, given that he has this authority,” Garland said.

    Garland rejected any claim that he would not appoint Weiss as a special counsel, stating that “Mr. Weiss never made that request to me.”

    “Mr. Weiss had, in fact, more authority than a special counsel would have,” Garland added. “He had and has complete authority, as I said, to bring a case anywhere he wants in his discretion.”

    Additionally, Garland said he would “support Mr. Weiss explaining or testifying” about the allegations raised by the whistleblowers “when he deems it appropriate.”

    Later Friday, the White House wouldn’t say whether Biden was present in July 2017 when Hunter Biden is alleged to have texted a Chinese business partner, claiming he was sitting with his father, and using that claim as leverage to pressure a Chinese company into paying him.

    The questions referred to a portion of the testimony in which a IRS supervisor-turned-whistleblower told House lawmakers that Justice Department prosecutors denied requests to look into messages allegedly from Hunter Biden where he used his father as leverage to pressure a Chinese company into paying him.

    “I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled,” according to a document the whistleblower gave to Congress, which quotes from texts that are allegedly from Hunter Biden to the CEO of a Chinese fund management company.

    The message continues: “Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand. And now means tonight.” The message goes onto say, “I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”

    The second, unnamed IRS whistleblower also testified to lawmakers about this alleged WhatsApp message, saying prosecutors questioned whether they could be sure Hunter Biden was telling the truth that his father was actually in the room in the messages. The unnamed whistleblower testified that they did not know whether the FBI investigated the message.

    White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, pressed repeatedly on the issue, referred questions to the White House Counsel’s Office, insisting the matter had been addressed.

    Ian Sams, a spokesman for the counsel’s office, said in an email that Joe Biden hadn’t been in business with his son. He did not specifically provide information about Joe Biden’s whereabouts when Hunter texted the Chinese businessman on July 30, 2017.

    “As we have said many times before, the President was not in business with his son,” he wrote. “As we have also said many times before, the Justice Department makes decisions in its criminal investigations independently, and in this case, the White House has not been involved.”

    Asked whether Joe Biden had been involved in coercive business dealings by his son, Jean-Pierre said: “I appreciate the question. I believe my colleague at the White House counsel has answered this question already, has dealt with this, has made it very clear. I just don’t have anything to share outside of what my colleagues have shared.”

    In a statement Friday, Hunter Biden’s lawyer Chris Clark suggested the messages were written at a time when the president’s son was suffering from addiction.

    “The DOJ investigation covered a period which was a time of turmoil and addiction for my client. Any verifiable words or actions of my client, in the midst of a horrible addiction, are solely his own and have no connection to anyone in his family,” the statement read.

    President Biden has said he’s never spoken to his son about his foreign business arrangements.

    “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings,” he said in 2019.

    This story and its headline have been updated with additional developments on Friday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McCarthy floats potential impeachment inquiry into Garland over IRS whistleblower claims | CNN Politics

    McCarthy floats potential impeachment inquiry into Garland over IRS whistleblower claims | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Speaker Kevin McCarthy is floating the possibility that the House could open an impeachment inquiry into Attorney General Merrick Garland over Internal Revenue Service whistleblower allegations that Justice Department leadership improperly interfered in the Hunter Biden probe, which Garland has denied.

    “If it comes true what the IRS whistleblower is saying, we’re going to start impeachment inquiries on the attorney general,” McCarthy said Monday on Fox News.

    In congressional testimony publicly released on Thursday, two IRS whistleblowers alleged to lawmakers that the president’s son had been given preferential treatment by the Justice Department.

    McCarthy said on Fox News that the IRS agents who came forward “watched the abuse of power in how Hunter Biden was treated.”

    The allegation that the DOJ has been politicized against conservatives has been central to how House Republicans approach their congressional investigations, though there is scant evidence backing up most of their claims.

    Garland rejected those claim during a Friday news conference.

    “Some have chosen to attack the integrity of the Justice Department … by claiming that we do not treat like cases alike,” Garland said. “This constitutes an attack on an instutiton that is essential to American democracy … nothing could be further from the truth.”

    Regarding the Hunter Biden probe, the whistleblowers made several explosive allegations, including that the IRS had recommended far more serious charges for the president’s son and that US Attorney in Delaware David Weiss was blocked from bringing charges in other states.

    Garland said Friday that Weiss was “permitted to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute any way in which he wanted to and in any district in which he wanted to.”

    “I don’t know how it would be possible for anybody to block him from bringing a prosecution, given that he has this authority,” Garland said.

    Hunter Biden will plead guilty to two tax misdemeanors and struck a deal with federal prosecutors to resolve a felony gun charge, the Justice Department said Tuesday in court filings.

    As part of the plea agreement, the Justice Department has agreed to recommend a sentence of probation for the two counts of failing to pay taxes in a timely matter for the years 2017 and 2018, according to sources. Hunter Biden owed at least $100,000 in federal taxes for 2017, and at least $100,000 in 2018, but did not pay what was due to the IRS by the deadlines.

    A judge will have the final say on any sentence.

    Garland said Friday he would “support Mr. Weiss explaining or testifying” about the allegations raised by the whistleblowers “when he deems it appropriate.”

    McCarthy said on Fox News Monday, “We have requested by July 6, Weiss to come in and answer these questions because the IRS whistleblowers took copious notes.”

    The federal prosecutor overseeing the Hunter Biden investigation sent a letter to House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan in early June saying that he had “ultimate authority” over the probe.

    Weiss, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, makes clear in a letter obtained by CNN that he was granted this authority, cutting against Republican claims that Garland and the DOJ are “weaponized” against conservatives and politicizing the Hunter Biden case.

    “I want to make clear that, as the attorney general has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations” Weiss wrote to Jordan on June 7.

    In response, Jordan has asked Weiss to explain and provide further information about the letter stating he had “ultimate authority” over the probe.

    Jordan asked in a letter to Weiss why he was the one to respond to Congress on June 7, when the initial letter from Jordan about alleged retaliation against the IRS whistleblowers was addressed to Garland. “Who instructed you to sign and send your June 7 letter to the committee?,” Jordan asked.

    Hunter Biden’s lawyer pushed back in a statement on Friday against the whistleblowers’ claims, saying it was “preposterous and deeply irresponsible” to suggest that federal investigators “cut my client any slack” during their “extensive” five-year probe.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ethical Index Tracking Aims to Create a Better and Honest Global Environment

    Ethical Index Tracking Aims to Create a Better and Honest Global Environment

    [ad_1]


    EDMONTON, Alberta, June 10, 2019 (Newswire.com)
    –
    As modern societies become more and more complex with every passing day, it is not a rare sight to see people using unfair means to succeed in attaining their personal definition of success. In such a world, it becomes exceedingly necessary to keep track of ethics and morality. Ethical Index is a unique website that offers a platform to view and create profiles of people based on their moral characters. The website features profiles of people as random as local shopkeepers to strong and influential celebrities and leaders on the business and political front. The website aims to grow and reach out to a wider audience and, for this reason, has launched a crowd-funding campaign on Kickstarter. The funding goal has been set at CA $15,000.

    With businesses becoming increasingly crafty and politicians becoming corrupt, the world is staring at a collective loss of optimism and trust. Ethical Index offers a website that is accessible to all. People can go online and review people without investing much time or effort. From deciding on the right candidate to choose from in the local elections to the stranger that might turn out to be a potential friend or romantic partner — everyone’s ethical index can be successfully tracked. Ethical Index allows people to make better informed and cautious decisions while reaching conclusive judgments on other people’s morality and code of conduct.

    The ultimate goal behind a website that allows for the rating and ranking of people is to create a global society that is safe and is welcome to the concept of transparency. This will hopefully allow for a better understanding of the relationships and structures of society. The global database will be taking great advantage of technology and its growing influence and will help create an enhanced network of awareness and moral conscience.

    To endorse a safer and dignified global community, visit the official Kickstarter campaign page for Ethical Index. Information on the perks available for backers can also be found there.

    Source: Ethical Index

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Voice of General Counsels a Game-Changing Influence at Ethisphere’s 10th Annual Global Ethics Summit

    The Voice of General Counsels a Game-Changing Influence at Ethisphere’s 10th Annual Global Ethics Summit

    [ad_1]

    Top company legal minds assemble in New York City to discuss integrity as a performance accelerator.

    Press Release
    –


    updated: Mar 1, 2018


    NEW YORK, March 1, 2018 (Newswire.com)
    –
    The Ethisphere Institute, a global leader in defining and advancing the standards of ethical business practices, announced today a roster of company legal practitioners anchoring a diverse faculty at Ethisphere’s 10th Annual Global Ethics Summit, March 14-15 at the Grand Hyatt in New York City.

    A special selection of current and former General Counsels (GC) and Deputy GCs will offer candid insights through interactive sessions with peers and other company officers highlighting some of the unique angles on corporate behavior today. Each leader will speak on a distinct range of topics impacting corporate integrity and performance in a global business environment rife with both opportunities and pitfalls.

    Among those topics are the emerging impact of artificial intelligence, global compliance team management, influence at the executive level, board-level relationship building, career-shaping, key insights into anti-bribery and corruption, careful execution through times of crisis, progressing the “speak up” culture and more.

    First-time members of the faculty leadership include:

    • Trish Walsh, Chief Legal Officer, Voya Financial, Inc.
    • Rich Rothberg, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Dell
    • Ann D. Davidson, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, L3 Technologies
    • Guillermo Bichara, Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, Praxair, Inc.
    • Gregory L. Riggs, Former Senior Vice President – General Counsel and Chief Corporate Affairs Officer, Delta Air Lines, Inc.
    • David Pitofsky, General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer, News Corp.
    • David Deitchman, Deputy General Counsel, Global Functions, Ethics & Compliance, HP Inc.
    • Michele M. Brown, SVP, Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer and Deputy General Counsel, Leidos
    • Callie Pappas, Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer & Deputy General Counsel, Schnitzer Steel Industries, Inc.
    • Tushar Chawla, General Counsel, India, JLL
    • Glenn Leon, SVP & Deputy General Counsel, Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer, Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Among those returning to the Global Ethics Summit to offer new insights and advancements are:

    • David Howard, Corporate VP and Deputy GC, Litigation, Competition Law and Compliance, Microsoft Corporation
    • Lucy Fato, Executive Vice President & General Counsel, AIG
    • Edward A. Ryan, Former Executive Vice President and Global General Counsel, Marriott International, Inc.
    • Richard Buchband, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, ManpowerGroup
    • Lynn Haaland, SVP, Deputy General Counsel, Global Chief Compliance & Ethics Officer and Chief Counsel, Cybersecurity, PepsiCo, Inc.
    • Kathryn Ditmars, Global Litigation Director and General Counsel, Americas, JLL

    Drawing from Ethisphere’s Business Ethics Leadership Alliance (BELA) community and further enriched from a broad selection of additional multinational companies, the Global Ethics Summit is the premier annual event connecting some of the most respected and diverse company leaders. Senior representatives come together to share forward-thinking practices and amplify the need for greater application of values ethical culture, and responsible practices. CEOs, board members, GCs/CLOs, corporate secretaries, chief compliance officers, law firm partners, and other influencers participate in the Summit to examine together the ways in which companies can make a difference in doing good.

    “Throughout the Summit, there will be more than 70 speakers each contributing unique perspectives and meaningful advice, but the voices of General Counsels continue to be transcendent as these are roles that are make-or-break for the executive team and the company itself,” said Kevin McCormack, Vice President of Global Thought Leadership & Programs at Ethisphere. “You simply cannot have the proper calibration of many of the issues addressed at the Summit without GCs in the mix. They are a universal connector when it comes to balancing risk, integrity, culture, and strategy within the organization. From the GCs involved each year, we see that while they may represent very different organizations and industries, there is a shared purpose and commitment to continuous improvement enabling companies to perform better while keeping their values intact.”

    Join these leaders and other influencers among over 400 delegates as the Global Ethics Summit celebrates its 10th Anniversary March 14-15, 2018 at the Grand Hyatt New York City. Registration remains open but is closing soon: https://www.globalethicssummit2018.com.

    About Ethisphere 

    The Ethisphere® Institute is the global leader in defining and advancing the standards of ethical business practices that fuel corporate character, marketplace trust, and business success. Ethisphere has deep expertise in measuring and defining core ethics standards using data-driven insights that help companies enhance corporate character. Ethisphere honors superior achievement through its World’s Most Ethical Companies® recognition program provides a community of industry experts with the Business Ethics Leadership Alliance (BELA), and showcases trends and best practices in ethics with Ethisphere Magazine. Ethisphere is also the leading provider of independent verification of corporate ethics and compliance programs, including Ethics Inside® Certification and Compliance Leader Verification™. More information about Ethisphere can be found at http://www.ethisphere.com. 

    Media Contact

    Aarti Maharaj

    Director of Communications

    646-480-9715

    aarti.maharaj@ethisphere.com 

    Twitter: @Ethisphere

    Source: The Ethisphere Institute

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Reversing Moral Decline in India

    Reversing Moral Decline in India

    [ad_1]

    Press Release
    –


    updated: Nov 15, 2016


    New Delhi, India, November 15, 2016 (Newswire.com)
    –
    ​​​​​New Delhi businessman Rohit Sharma was deeply troubled by the moral collapse in his country: rape cases doubled between 1990 and 2008 and murders have more than tripled over the last 60 years.

    Looking for something he could do to reverse the decline and restore a sense of decency to the people of his country, in 2007 Sharma found The Way to Happiness, a nonreligious commonsense moral code written by Church of Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard that lays out 21 fundamental precepts anyone of any faith can use as a road map for a better life.

    Sharma found The Way to Happiness had a profound effect on his outlook, and the way he viewed and treated others. This inspired him to see what it could do for others. He delivered his first seminar on the subject, using the award-winning The Way to Happiness book-on-film and public service announcements to 100 students in Vinay Nagar Bengali secondary school.

    Much to the surprise and delight of their teachers, the students, listened with rapt attention. Many vowed to adopt these precepts. One student wrote, “I will start living my life on these principles because, after seeing this, I realized that everyone has to follow the rules to become a disciplined person and be successful.”

    Sharma was soon delivering the lecture in schools across New Delhi and, at an annual teacher’s conference, trained some 600 teachers and principals, an event that made headlines in the Hindustan Times. Before long, he had trained more than 2,500 educators who brought The Way to Happiness to more than 110,000 students in some 900 schools.

    Sharma next approached the police. After receiving a presentation on the program, the New Delhi Deputy Commissioner ordered 10,000 copies of The Way to Happiness with custom covers bearing the police’s logo. The booklets created so much impact, Sharma was asked to bring the workshop to police in every district of the city.

    The New Delhi Traffic Division decided to make The Way to Happiness the core of their citywide program to reform drunk drivers and traffic offenders, 55,000 of whom they have put through the program. Many were so pleased with what they learned they thanked the police for the “penalty.”

    In honor of United Nations International Day of Happiness, The Way to Happiness Foundation and police teamed up to host a massive parade, attended by some 2,500. Launched by a member of Indian Parliament, the parade aired to 60 million viewers on DD1 National TV.

    Sharma has trained more than 3,000 police and every branch of Indian law enforcement has now embraced the booklet. He has distributed more than 58,000 booklets across 16 states of India, and has reached more than 70 million people with the booklet’s message with the help of national media.

    Sharma next plans to travel to each of India’s 29 states to introduce the campaign to all schools and police departments in his bid for a better India.

    “I have had 100 percent success wherever I have gone with The Way to Happiness,” he says.

    Immensely popular since its first publication in 1981, some 115 million copies of The Way to Happiness have been distributed in 115 languages in 186 nations and the campaign has been embraced by more than 250,000 individuals and groups.

    The Way to Happiness is one of a number of humanitarian programs supported by the Church of Scientology. The Scientology religion was founded by L. Ron Hubbard, and the first Church of Scientology was formed in Los Angeles in 1954. Since then, the religion has expanded to more than 11,000 Churches, Missions and affiliated groups, with millions of members in 167 countries.

    Read the article on the Scientology Newsroom.

    Source: Church of Scientology International

    [ad_2]

    Source link