The term “collusion” may not be in the lawbooks, but other crimes like conspiracy are. Under federal criminal statutes, conspiracy to commit a crime appears in 18 U.S.C. Section 371. The elements of conspiracy provide that two or more people must work together. Former federal prosecutor Harry Sandick discussed the difference between the concept of collusion and the legal definition of conspiracy.
There is no federal law that criminalizes collusion between a political campaign and a foreign government. Acts of collusion span the legal gamut, including campaign finance violations, conspiracy, bribery, and fraud. Federal Election Commission rules prohibit such acts.
Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime at some time in the future. The U.S. code mostly uses the term “collusion” in antitrust laws to address crimes like price fixing. However, there are plenty of specific laws on the books that could punish people for conspiracy, which means working with other people to commit crimes.
In summary, there is no federal crime of collusion, as it is a continuing crime with a statute of limitations that does not begin to run until the last overt act committed for its benefit. In criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime at some time in the future.
📹 George Galloway: Zionism and Nazism cooperated
Respect Party leader George Galloway and former political adviser to Tony Blair, John McTernan discuss the anti-semitism crisis …
What is meant by overt act?
It is generally accepted that an overt act, where there is clear evidence of criminal intent, is more compelling than circumstantial evidence. Such actions are carried out in an overt manner and can be inferred, thereby rendering them more compelling than merely circumstantial evidence. It is essential to obtain feedback in order to enhance the BETA Dictionary service.
What is the actus reus of conspiracy?
In criminal law, the term “actus reus” refers to the physical aspect of criminal activity, which is typically defined as a voluntary act that causes social harm. An individual cannot be found guilty of a criminal act unless their actions are deemed to be a voluntary act, with a few exceptions.
What is the law of collusion?
Collusion is a practice where entities or individuals work together to manipulate a market or pricing to their advantage. It can take various forms, such as price fixing, synchronized advertising, and sharing insider information. Antitrust and whistleblower laws help deter collusion, but it is illegal in the United States. One common form of collusion is price fixing, where a small number of companies in a supply marketplace, known as an oligopoly, agree to set the price level. This can be forcibly lowered to drive out smaller competitors or inflated to support the group’s interests.
What is Section 44 of the Serious crime Act?
The Serious Crime Act 2007, Section 44, prohibits intentionally encouraging or assisting an offence unless the individual intends to do so. However, they cannot be considered to have intended to do so merely because it was a foreseeable consequence of their actions. The legislation may not be fully up-to-date, and any changes made by subsequent legislation have been applied to the text of the legislation. For more information on the timescales for new effects, please refer to the Frequently Asked Questions section.
What is unlawful collusion?
Collusion is when two or more parties secretly agree to defraud a third party or accomplish illegal purposes. Horizontal collusion occurs when competitors at the same market level agree to control prices for their goods or services. Parallel pricing behavior is indicative of collusion only when it is inconsistent with the defendant’s self-interest and not a rational response to market conditions.
What are the 2 types of collusion?
Tactic collusion is an unspoken agreement between competitors in an oligopoly to maintain control of their market share. It occurs when firms agree on a certain price for their product without any formal agreement, minimizing the likelihood of subverting another firm. This type of collusion is illegal and unenforceable due to antitrust laws. Formal collusion involves firms making an official agreement to keep high prices, while tacit collusion involves firms agreeing on a certain price without any formal agreement. This type of collusion helps to minimize the threat of one firm producing more than promised and undercutting another.
What is the conspiracy rule?
Conspiracy law typically doesn’t require proof of specific intent to injure someone, but rather a tacit agreement among group members to commit a crime. This allows the government to charge a defendant regardless of whether the planned criminal act has been committed or the possibility of the crime being carried out successfully. In most U. S. jurisdictions, a person must agree to commit a crime and at least one of the conspirators must commit an overt act in furtherance of the crime.
However, in United States v. Shabani, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that this element is not required under the federal drug conspiracy statute. Conspirators can be guilty even if they don’t know the identity of other members of the conspiracy.
What are the three types of collusion?
The term “collusion” can be applied to a variety of contexts, both formal and informal. It encompasses a range of forms, including civil, criminal, and nonfeasance collusion, which occurs without the explicit agreement of the involved parties.
What are the collusion laws in the US?
The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits unreasonably restrained trade, including agreements to fix prices, wages, or allocate customers, workers, or markets. It also makes it illegal to monopolize, conspire to monopolize, or attempt to monopolize a market for products or services. An unlawful monopoly exists when one firm has market power for a product or service, obtained or maintained through anticompetitive conduct. Monopolization offenses can be prosecuted criminally or civilly.
The Clayton Act promotes fair competition and prevents unfair business practices that could harm consumers. It prohibits actions such as tying agreements, predatory pricing, and mergers that could reduce competition.
What is the conspiracy act in the UK?
Criminal conspiracy offences involve the planning of a crime rather than the actual committing of it. Under the Criminal Law Act 1977, the agreement to carry out the crime is considered the criminal act of conspiracy. Any criminal conspiracy charge carries a severe penalty, with the penalty for the planning of a crime being as severe as the penalty for actually carrying out the crime. There are various types of criminal conspiracy offences, including conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to commit robbery, conspiracy to commit burglary, conspiracy to rape, and conspiracy to murder.
These offences involve dishonesty, robbery, burglary, rape, and murder, and can carry severe penalties for those involved. The penalties for planning and carrying out these crimes can be as severe as those for carrying out the crime.
What counts as collusion?
Collusion is a collaborative learning process where students work together to complete independent assessments. It can be beneficial for improving understanding and supporting learning. However, there is a distinction between working collaboratively or in cooperation and collusion. Collaborative learning involves students working together to complete assessments, while cooperation involves working independently. Talking to friends and peers about a topic can also enhance understanding and support learning.
📹 Barr: Mueller found no Trump campaign collusion
Attorney General William Barr said that, while special counsel Robert Mueller and his team “investigated a number of links or …
1) Krishnan Guru-Murthy interrupts George Galloway continuously but not McTernan. 2) Galloway’s points are historically accurate and/or a matter of public record yet are still constantly questioned. 3) McTernan’s points are purely supposition, fabrication or slander yet are given a free pass. Bravo website 4 News. Bravo.
Here in Russia, many Jews criticize Israel, including my relatives, and they cannot be called anti-Semites. Accordingly, to criticize Israel of course does not mean to be an anti-Semite, when the criticism comes from the best of intentions.. I will also talk about this topic on my website. Should be interesting.
During a ME history degree in the mid 90’s, one of the modules I studied was called “The Palestine Mandate”, covering British rule in Palestine post WW1. It is on public record that the Nazi Regime and Jewish leaders in Palestine co-operated to have German Jews emigrate to Palestine /Israel. Its on record… Its not an allegation, its fact.
I am a Jew who is anti-Zionist. Why should a Jewish state exist? Should a Nazi state exist? Should the British Empire exist? These are meaningless questions and a red herring. The issue is whether one population placed on the land of another by a third country has the right to displace the local population and eventually isolate and proceed to ethnically cleanse the local population. And trust me I am not anti-Semitic. I think Israel is bad for Palestinians AND for the Jewish people who have come to view Zionism as part of Judaism.
I do believe that Nazism and Zionism have something in common. Both are political ideologies not religious, and they both have racism as the core motivation. Nazis wanted what they thought was the most pure german race, to be preserved and spread around the globe and Zionist based the foundation and existence of the State of Israel under the premise of being a country only for jews. Even today Israel officials do not hide this. They don’t want immigrants from Africa because they say is a danger for the Jewish hegemony of the country. We all know what they do to Palestinians but it’s not so often exposed how they treat African workers as dogs. This are not opinions, Amnesty International has lots of reports on that issue.
People should feel safe wherever they are whether they are Jewish, Muslim,Christian, Hindu or atheists. No one likes discrimination of any kind and it’s time to find solutions to difficult issues by listening and working cooperatively.Progress stops when the other side is viewed as less than equal.Start by showing respect to others.
I don’t like Galloway but I agree with him. Being against Israel is not Anti Jewish. Zionism is not Judaism. A One State Solution of a multicultural Palestine is the only one that will prevail. Human psychological flaws such as bystander apathy and submitting and giving their own power to a self declared authority keep human injustices like this alive. Apaths give Psychopaths power on a plate and empathic people are punished.
If you link so closely a religion to a state, illegally occupy another’s land and systematically murder those who resist then you are deserving of criticism. If equal treatment is all that is being asked for then surely the description I have given, of the Islamic State should also be applied to any other state which does the same? Or did you think I was talking about Israel?
“It’s probably just Ken showing that he should no longer contribute to public debate” That’s the point we’re at now. Any criticism of Israel means you are not allowed a public platform. Jews in foreign lands care more about Israel than they do about the countries they reside in. For example, they defend to the hilt a country with one of the most strict immigration systems in the world all the while pushing for more lax immigrantion controls in their host countries. Then when we criticise them they cry “anti-Semite!”. Israel is one of the most militarily advanced and wealthiest nations in the world. In spite of this we are still expected to believe it’s people are still essentially victims. This is getting old. The card has been played for too long. You cannot excuse mass murder with mass murder, only the sick would do such a thing.
Classic deflection here! When asked directly if you can be anti Israel and not be anti-semitic, JM immediately says that’s not the question! Yes, John, that is the question! It appears nowadays that anything Jewish folk do not like or agree with, is automatically anti-semitism. This is clearly intolerable and repugnant to all free thinking people.
“You have not begun to appreciate the depth of our guilt. We are intruders. We are subverters. We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them. We have been at the bottom of not merely the latest Great War (World War 1) but of every other major revolution in your history. We have brought discord and confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. No one can tell how long we shall go on doing it. Who knows what great and glorious destiny might have been yours if we had left you alone.” – Marclis Eli Ravage, ( a Jew,) Century Magazine, February – 1926.
Drawing parallels between efforts to bring down the Soviet Union and anti-Israel activism is a brilliant one. Fighting against certain state structures does not imply the wish to liquidate their citizens. Being anti-Soviet did not aim at wiping Russians off the map. Equally fighting against apartheid South Africa did not imply the desire to eradicate Whites from SA, but to replace the apartheid system with a democratic one that enables black and white people to live as equal citizens, enjoying the same rights. Likewise anti-anti-Zionism aims at deconstructing the current supremacist apartheid system and replacing it with a true democracy in which Palestinians and Jews live as equal citizens enjoying the same rights. .
George is a voice of reason to be taken very seriously. He may not appeal to everyone….nobody does, but much of his thinking is extremely sound. His command of speech is superlative and he can debate with the best of them. I don’t possess anything like his knowledge of middle eastern issues but know and trust him well enough to appreciate that what he says and his take on current affairs is solid. However, as with all things political, I don’t just listen to the arguments from one source or one flavour. I seek out the views of many commentators in order to educate myself. Further to that, I look for the nuances in their language and in that of their interviewers to determine where their prejudices and bias lies. That often tells you more. George Galloway is a master in that field and very few, if any, can flummox him.
A few biographies I have read of Hitler say that he only became anti-semitic after WW1 because he believed absolutely that the soldiers were betrayed by their generals and political leaders. He thought they were stabbed in the back by jews when they were fighting the hardest and he couldn’t take this mentally. So he wasn’t always anti-semitic.
As a former educator with a PhD in European history I can tell you this. Historical events are sometimes subject to change in response to the feelings of people in the present. Particularly if said people have an internet connection. The exact mechanism is not known but it has been observed on numerous occasions that when enough people feel a certain way, the facts adapt to said feelings and history itself can change. It’s theorized by some that human emotions, when strong enough and in a large enough concentration can produce a form of anti-gravity thus tearing apart the fabric of space and time. It is speculated that this mechanism of antigravity is what allows human emotions to change historical events. If enough Blairites and Zionists FEEL that Hitler never had meetings with Zionist organisations then it’s entirely possible these events in history were erased.
He clearly loves playing the same card.perhaps the only one he has.. ‘In January 2008, while McTernan was employed as a special adviser to the Secretary of State for Scotland, it emerged that in 2002 McTernan had branded Scotland as being “narrow” and “racist” during the period he worked for the Scottish Arts Council. In an email to the then Labour MSP Karen Gillon, who was about to make a trip to Sweden, McTernan wrote: “If you’ve not been to Sweden before, I think you’ll really like it – it’s the country Scotland would be if it wasn’t narrow, Presbyterian, racist etc. etc. Social democracy in action.”‘ Following the 2016 revelations about David Cameron’s earlier offshore earnings, and Corbyn’s call for an investigation, McTernan argued in his Daily Telegraph column that tax avoidance is an expression of basic British freedoms. In October 2018, John McTernan was asked if he still defended the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He responded in the affirmative
Israel is an Apartheid state by definition. Any Jew worldwide can come to Israel and gain automatic citizenship. Yet millions of refugees that have lived in Palestine for centuries and now living in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere have no “right of return”. While most Israelis say that the West Bank and Gaza are Palestinians lands, the fact remains that Israel builds new settlements in the West Bank daily. The contradictions are clear, indisputable and overwhelming. People that are critical of Israeli policy are labeled as anti-semites, which end all meaningful discussion.
The majority of Palestinians are Semitic peoples. The majority of Jews are not Semitic peoples. Equating Zionism with an ethnicity is used to protect the Zionists from criticism. The Zionists created the holy cost as early as 1900. They know it didn’t happen but admit that it is a useful myth. Israel is not a Jewish state and most Jews know it.
Modern Israel is a product of Western sponsorship of Zionism in Palestine. Note that the original Israel before the time when Jesus lived did not anymore exist during the Roman Empire. And the Israel at the current modern period are mostly European descent and non-Middle Eastern. The delusion of thinking themselves as Jews and chosen people of God: When some people of European and U.S. descent converted to Jews their culture and beliefs (not being themselves Middle Easterners) were probably radicalized. Thus, they may practice adulterated type of Judaism or none at all (for instance Zionism). The Zionist Jews came to the Middle East and evicted many Palestinians from homes and land properties; these Zionists are modern type bandits. Netanyahu and the IDF have become butchers in Gaza and are now accused of committing genocide.
• A land without a people for a people without a land. – Zionist Saying “The dream of the Jewish people resurrecting in their historical homeland and the barbed wire of Auschwitz being replaced by the boundaries of a Jewish State with a powerful army. In order to make this Jewish dream a reality, we had to visit a nightmare on the local population. There was no land without a people. There were people who had been living there for thousands of years. There was no way a Jewish state could be created without oppressing and expelling the local people. There are no two sides. It’s pretty straightforward. In terms of power and control, there was a land -there was a land with a people living there and other people wanted it. They took it over and they continue to take it over and they continue to discriminate against, oppress and disposes that other people. That is what happened and that is what is happening” – Dr. Gabor Maté.
Let’s always start with simple facts that audiences can understand One piece of land governed by Muslims in Palestine was stolen and given to a terrorist blood thirsty occupation which had all its ideas rooted in getting rid of every single Palestinian by Genocide and ethnic cleansing while pretending to be the VICTIM
Zionism is definitely a hideous example of a racist genocidal occupation, apartheid, and colonization. How complicated is that to understand that planned and conspired mass immigration of millions of people of some race from other countries, which not only is resulted in mass murder and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, but it was foreseen and planned by founders of Zionism in 19th century. Zionism not only is a filthy racist colonization, but it has been so from the beginning.
This is real funny, dude didn’t say what they wanted to hear so the undermined and refused to engage in the discussion. There is such a disparity between fact and truth these days. We are just supposed to believe what we are told like good mannequins and never acknowledge the truth even when it sits in our face if it upset people.
Galloway was right 7 years ago and it is still true today, to be anti-Zionist is not anti-Semitic and to suggest that it is, is ludicrous. There are 1000s of orthodox Jews who are passionately anti-Zionist, does this make them anti-semitic?????? Sadly we have all seen in recent weeks that the Israeli government is deeply Zionist and it has no interest in a “two-state” solution instead it is seeking to expel all non-Jews from land that it is occupying by force.
It is well documented by high ranking SS. Goebbles made a medal for them called ‘A Nazi travels to Palestine’ with David star on one side and swastika on the other. Ben Gurion sent some delegation to Vienna to work with Eichmann and ‘select’ those who they deemed worthy to join their new Israel which wasn’t officially established. They turned many away. Also the zionists betrayed Hungarian jews when they were asked by a Czech rabbi for help. In 1948, Einstein and a number of Jewish academics sent a letter to the New York Times to protest against a visit to America by Menachem Begin. In the well-documented letter, they denounced Begin’s Herut (Freedom) party, likening it to “a political party closely akin in its organisation, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties.”
The very vast majority of anti Zionists simply want the two state solution based on the pre 1967 borders which is the solution deemed fairest by the international community, which Israel has obstructed for 75 years and which the Likud party charter states is impossible because ‘from the river to the sea must be Israel only’. Yes, Likud invented that phrase in the 1950s.
The Nazis allowed the Zionists and only the Zionists to maintain their newspapers in Germany, to have industrial colleges in Germany to prepare the Zionists for their future blue collar workers in their new homeland, Himmler allowed interned Jews to leave the concentration camps for Palestine, the Jews were allowed to take their money out of Germany only if they were moving to Palestine and the first ships taking Jews from Germany to Palestine flew both the Zionist and Nazi flags. It was the British who tried to stop the Jews from going to Palestine, not the Nazis.
Zionism is against peace and selfishly cruel to an extend of trying to make an entire ethnicity go extinct. Jews have been misled, misinformed, and misseduacted by their government for decades, and this has nothing to do with the Judaism and its followers. So Anti-zionism isnt Anti-semitism like many Jews have already proved throughout the years especially since Oct 7. #CeaseFireNow #FreePalestine #FreeTheJews #SaveTheChildren #PeaceNotWar
Mahmoud Abbas did his doctorate in Moscow. The subject was the cooperation between the Nazis and the Zionists during WW II. But Zionism now is about the expansion of Israel and the relocation of Jews who never lived there, not just the security of those who are already there. Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are two different things.
Zionism and Nazism cooperated… In 1923 National Zionism allied with National Socialism (Eustace Mullins) and this Alliance gave birth to “NAZISM” used as a derogatory term by Jews against Germany! In 1933, both allied again by signing the Haavarah Agreement with British banking complicity! BAFS:face-blue-wide-eyes:
The Haavara Coin with swastika and hexagram star commemorating the Haavara (Transfer) Agreement, negotiated by Eliezer Hoofein, director of the Anglo-Palestine Bank, was agreed to by the Reich Economics Ministry in 1933, and continued, with declining German government support, until it was wound up in 1939. Under the agreement, Jews emigrating from Germany could use their assets to purchase German-manufactured goods for export, thus salvaging their personal assets during emigration. The agreement provided a substantial export market for German factories in British-ruled Palestine. Between November 1933, and 31 December 1937, 77,800,000 Reichmarks, or $22,500,000, (values in 1938 currency) worth of goods were exported to Jewish businesses in Palestine under the program. By the time the program ended with the start of World War II, the total had risen to 105,000,000 marks (about $35,000,000, 1939 values).
NOW AS WE SEE HERE, ISRAEL IS NOT THE REAL ISRAEL. THE REAL ANCIENT ISRAEL IS IN AFRICA. THESE GENTLEMEN CLEARLY STATED THAT THE JEWS WAS EXPELLED FROM GERMANY DURING WORLD WAR 2, WHEN AFOLF HITLER WAS THE LEADER IN GERMANY. PALESTINIANS GAVE THAT LAND TO THE JEWS WHICH THEY NAME ISRAEL BETWEEN 1936-1945. THE SO CALL JEWISH PEOPLE OF TODAY HAVE THEIR ORGIN FROM GREECE AND LATER MOVE TO GERMANY.
being anti-Zionist and even anti-Semitic is a perfectly rightful and righteous way of being as long as it’s based on valid reasons (such as corrupt/manipulative/oppressive/supremacist actions and mentalities) …. people should stop arguing against the label of ‘anti-semite’, and rather view it as a complement
It’s odd that the idiot on the left never considered there were Jews among the German Nazis or that Jews themselves could become “honorary” Aryans by some strange twist of fate. I mean, was Nazi-ism really about Jews specifically or was it about psychopaths using psychological tricks to gain more power? Why waste something as powerful as religion or historical claims toward that aim? Are those not the strategies of Zionists and Nazis alike? I think the commingling of peoples actually resulted in the fusion of these objectives in a way many non-critical thinkers too easily reject.
To say that criticism of Israel implies criticism of ALL Jews is like saying that any critics of the German Nazis in the 1930s were against the whole German nation. Criticizing a part DOES NOT implies criticism of the whole. By this logic, criticism of REAL ‘anti-Jewish’ groups would be ‘anti-American’
Mr Galloway is quite correct… not only did the Nazis mint a coin with the swastika on one side and the so-called ‘star of David’ on the other, but Adolf Hitler’s signature is very prominent on the Haavara Transfer Agreement which Israel recognises as its ‘foundation document’. These are plain historical facts which can be checked out very easily.
I don’t have a single issue with Jewish people but Zionism is a political movement, supported by the British who switched up on the Arabic people on their promise to give them the post Ottoman empire lands, known as Palestine. Instead, they gave it to the Zionists. But where it truly becomes a problem is the apartheid state, oppression (Gaza doesn’t even have a port or an airport despite being separate), bombings are normal, invading as settlements into West Bank. Now with what’s happening, their true colors are shown, the modern day Nazis.
No one is anti-Israelite, people are questioning what on earth are Russia to Eastern European gypsies and historic converts to Judiasm are doing! IMO there is a clear difference between Israelites and converts to Judiasm over the centuries. It is like there is a difference between Kemet and Egypt, and if we don’t understand the differences this is where the confusion, anxiety and trouble stems from. If my great great great grandfather converted to Judiasm, and through the generations everyone practised it, it does not give us legitmacy to Israel and turn what is meant for TWELVE tribes of Israel into a Jewish state, and exterminating everyone else from it. The truth is some Palestinians by DNA could very well be true desendants of the Israelites too, they couldn’t have converted to Islam and Christianity over the centuries too. That is how complex that region is.
Relocating the European jews out of the historically “cold Europe” for the historically “hot and sunny” middle East.. Is like forcing the world to accept that the “Arctic Polar bears” have a historical right to live in “sunny 🌞 Florida”.. along with the black bears.😂!! It makes no “natural” sense and It was definitely a political move with nothing to do with the actual practice of the Jewish religion.!!
Nazis were for the downfall of the Jewish people. Zionism is about the downfall of Palestinians. The difference is how they go about disenfranchising, oppressing, and forms of exterminating the opposition. How quickly the Jewish/Israel has forgotten what they went through that they have been doing it to the Palestinians for decades. I guess that is what George Galloway means when he says; “Nazism and Zionism are 2 sides of the same coin.”
I forgot how extreme the Corbyn smear campaign was. “Palling around with the Provisional IRA”, he was literally trying to bring about peace talks decades before the British government would even admit they were talking to the IRA. And then the government pats themselves on the back for doing what he was trying to do decades earlier and call him a terrorist sympathizer for it. I’m getting really sick of the tories and Israel and all these other horrible things going. Things need to change or people are gonna eventually gonna have enough
There is what George says to a public audience, there is also another to what says to the party faithful, and there is another l when he thinks the mics are not recording. The guy talks a lot about politicians being “two cheeks of the same bottom”, but he is what comes out of the bottom, and without the decency to be solid.
IF THIS COUNTRY IS FOR THE PEOPLE AND ALL AMERICANS WHO PAID TAXES AND FOR THE FULL REPORT, THEN THE FULL REPORT SHOULD BE RELEASE TO THE PEOPLE AND TO CONGRESS FOR EXAMINATION. THE FULL REPORT SHOULD BE RELEASE TO PUBLIC AND EXAMINED BY CONGRESS FOR ANY BAD AND WRONG DOING BY DUMP. THE TAX PAYERS PAID 35 MILLION FOR IT. THIS GOVERNMENT IS FOR THE PEOPLE, NOT FOR THE PRESIDENT, ONE PERSON. BARR (DUMP’S NEW FIXER) SHOULD BE ARRESTED AND CONGRESS SHOULD TAKE THE FULL REPORT AND START IMPEACHMENT.
Insufficient evidence is not the same thing as “no evidence,” though I get the distinct impression that this is how it’s being spun. “Did not establish” logically implies a lack of conclusive evidence such as would allow collusion to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but doesn’t reasonably imply that no evidence whatsoever was uncovered. I must assume the AG would understand this, so his interpretation really does come off as a whitewash.
Candida auris! Some quotes out of articles of our media regarding candida auris: “At last count in February, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported, 617 people nationwide had been infected. Of those, 158 were in Illinois, the vast majority in the Chicago area. The fungus is frequently resistant to drug treatment. More than 1 in 3 patients die within a month of being infected, the CDC said.” “a highly transmissible fungus that has a propensity to develop resistance.” Quote out of the report! “They tried many things in various doses. This wasn’t an issue anyone took lightly.” Quote of a familymember of a deceased! “Identifying C. auris is critical to knowing what steps to take to control it in a health care setting, the CDC reported. The fungus can colonize in patients for many months, persist in the environment and withstand many routinely used disinfectants in health care facilities.” Fascinating! “In particular, Nicholas Spoor(son of deceased) said, he hopes Illinois will lift its ban on disclosing the names of facilities that have cases of the infection. Illinois Department of Public Health officials say they are withholding the information so as not to reveal the identities of any infected individuals at those facilities — though such disclosure would not identify individuals. “Secrecy is no way to treat an illness,” Nicholas Spoor said. “You would think the way our nation dealt with the AIDS epidemic would have taught us that.” Quote Greg Spoor: “I lost my wife, that hurts more than anything,” he said.
I have to admit, after 2 years of this shit show, I did not think anything could shock me. But perusal the Attorney General of the United States of America do something so blatantly partisan and biased in an attempt to strip congress (and that includes you, republican held senate) of its ability to do their job and review and form an opinion on the findings of that report and then make the findings public, is truly stunning. And frankly, much more terrifying than i thought it would be.
for me personally Rogers Stone was always the key and the parson that was willing to do the Dirty Work especially after I seen that documentary about Rogers Stone he left the campaign too early and out of the blue and then here comes Paul manafort we just haven’t seen the Roger Stone part play out yet but watch
I looked at the Ethics and govt act and it talks about govt officials such the as the President, disclosing all their financial history. I didn’t see anything that allows the president to see the report before congress. I may have missed it. If it does, I have a feeling its in relation to those reports and the AG is stretching/extending the right to cover the report in this situation. I’m not a lawyer, I just get very suspicious point to protections from fields unrelated to the one at hand. If anyone can pinpoint the section, I would be appreciative of it. Its 37pgs of dry text.
HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAH