2:00PM Water Cooler 3/16/2016

By Lambert Strether of Corrente.


“TTIP Proposal for Chapter: Good Regulatory Practices” [Lobby Control]. A leaked proposal:

For planned major regulatory acts undergoing impact assessment each party shall make publicly available, as early as possible, information on planning and timing leading to their adoption, including on planned stakeholder consultations and potential for significant impacts on trade, investment and on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

Note that “regulatory acts” are defined as “draft bills introduced in Congress.”

“Meeting today in Washington, Richard Trumka, President of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and Luca Visentini, General Secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), together stressed that, from available information, the current negotiations on the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) are on the wrong course. If this course isn’t corrected, TTIP will fail to create the people and planet-centered agreement needed to benefit the working peoples of the European Union and the United States” [ETUC]. That’s not a bug. It’s a feature.

CETA: Who pulled the plug on the right to regulate? [Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure].

Clinton may have “evolved” on TPP, but her surrogates haven’t, and she hasn’t slapped them down. So we’re entitled to question the sincerity of her new convictions. First example: “Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn touted Hillary Clinton as the “best prepared” candidate to be president, but went past Clinton’s positions in his defense of free trade agreements. [Tampa Bay Times]. “Buckhorn has even acknowledged that promoting free trade won’t help him with traditional Democratic constituencies like unions if he runs for governor in 2018, but could help build political good will in Washington that could pay off when his city applies for federal grants in the future. As he put it in January, ‘relationships are mutually beneficial.'” Ka-ching. Second example: “[F]ormer Missouri Gov. Bob Holden, who backs Clinton, contends that her victories Tuesday in the other four primary states bolster another [trade] narrative [than Sanders]. ‘It sends a very strong message that she has the ability to unite their nation and lead us into the 21st century global economy.'” [St Louis Public Radio]. Oooh! “21st century global economy”! Sounds focus-grouped!



“Myth Busting Sanders’s Single-Payer Plan” [Health Care Now].

“Bernie Sanders’ Wife, Jane, Tours Tent City, Challenges Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Racial Profiling” [Phoenix New Times]. Good read, and also good tactics that she’s out there before next Tuesday’s primary.

The Scorps

“How the ‘New York Times’ Sandbagged Bernie Sanders” [Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone]. “I came to the same conclusions that Steinhauer did initially: that Sanders was skilled at the amendment process and also had a unique ability to reach across the aisle to make deals.” And then the editors got hold of it… Read the whole thing.

And then there’s CNN:

Here’s Sanders’ speech.

The Voters

Public college towns go for Sanders (chart) [The New Republic]. Private college towns do not.

North Carolina voter ID law may have discouraged student voters [Think Progress]. So the Republicans drive to limit voter access helped Clinton. All things work together for good!

“Whatever you want to call this, it isn’t democracy. America has more Democrats than Republicans, and Sanders’s support among Democrats is greater than Trump’s among Republicans: he has a larger slice of a bigger pie. But somehow we seem set to propel Trump to the Republican nomination, making him the standard-bearer for the American right, while relegating Sanders to the status of a historical footnote” [Felix Salmon, Fusion].

“Why I Reject Lesser-of-Two-Evils-ism” [34Justice]. From December 2015, but ever-green. “It’s hard for me to see how we will ever fix our political process and reclaim our democracy by refusing to draw some lines in the sand.”

Trump Panic

“But it is Trump’s claim that he can carry New York that most clearly undermines his promises of victory” [Stuart Rothenberg, Roll Call]. “New York State performs at least 10 points more Democratic than the country does, which means Trump would need to win the popular vote nationally by close to 60 percent to have a chance of carrying New York. And that, of course, will never happen.”

The Trail


“How to Steal a Nomination From Donald Trump” [Bloomberg]. “If the primary season thus far can be understood as a triumph for the candidate who defies the norms of politics, the shadow campaign now underway will reflect the primacy of rules, including some that can be wantonly rewritten to serve the interests of those in charge”

Stats Watch

Industrial Production, February 2016: “Industrial production fell 0.5 percent in February but includes a respectable and higher-than-expected 0.2 percent gain for manufacturing production which pulls this report to the positive column for the economic outlook” [Econoday]. Lots of tap-dancing, followed by “this report, together with positive indications in yesterday’s Empire State report, do suggest, or at least offer the hint, that the worst may over.”

Consumer Price Index, February 2016: “The CPI core is showing pressure for a second month, up a higher-than-expected 0.3 percent in February with the year-on-year rate up 1 tenth to plus 2.3 percent and further above the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent line” [Econoday]. “Gains are once again led by health care.”

MBA Mortgage Applications, week of March 11, 2016: “While rising only 0.3 percent in the March 11 week, purchase applications for home mortgages remain very robust, up 33 percent year-on-year” [Econoday].

Housing Starts, February 2016: “Housing starts & permits are mixed with starts way up but permits, which are the more important of the two, way down” [Econoday]. “Starts rose 5.2 percent to a 1.178 million annualized rate while permits, which were expected to show no change, dropped 3.1 percent to 1.167 million.” And: “rolling averages are the best way to view this series – and the data remains in the range we have seen over the last 3 years. There are no warning signs except the rate of growth of building permits is decelerating” [Econintersect].

Honey for the Bears:

The Fed: “From traders: In conversations with customers this week, we heard a lot of skepticism about the Fed raising rates at all this year. Many sophisticated traders think the FOMC is making the same mistake the BOE did in 2014: Sure, they say they’re going to raise rates, but how can they?” [FTN Financial, Across the Curve].

“Deutsche Bank AG shares dropped as much as 6.2 percent after co-Chief Executive Officer John Cryan said he doesn’t expect the German lender to report a profit this year” [Bloomberg].

“Someone using official codes stole $100 million from Bangladesh’s account at the New York Fed over a recent weekend. Authorities in four countries are still piecing together what happened” [Wall Street Journal, “Crime Scene: Who Stole $100 Million From Bangladesh’s Account at the New York Fed?”]

Today’s Fear & Greed Index: 72, Greed (previous close: 73, Greed) [CNN]. One week ago: 71 (Greed). (0 is Extreme Fear; 100 is Extreme Greed). Last updated Mar 16 at 12:31pm. The leisure suit. Was it a 70s thing?

Health Care

“Obamacare: Little-known provision allows Californians stuck in bad plans to switch” [San Jose Mercury News (MS)]. “Exchange officials say it’s possible to change plans even after the mid-April open-enrollment deadline because of a little-known provision under the ‘qualifying life events’ section for special enrollment.

But the qualifying events also include “misconduct or misinformation” that may have occurred during the enrollment period; “incorrect plan data” that may have been presented when selecting a plan and health insurers violating their contracts.

This is Covered California; I’m not clear whether this applies to all of ObamaCare but at the least it’s good news for Californians.

“More than 1 million patients suffer harm each year in U.S. health care facilities. Often, their harm isn’t acknowledged even as they live with the consequences. ProPublica set out to capture their stories. Here is what we learned” [ProPublica].

Police State Watch

” Almost half of the people who die at the hands of police have some kind of disability, according to a new report, as officers are often drawn into emergencies where urgent care may be more appropriate than lethal force” [NBC]. Eesh. The 26-year-old with Down syndrome who went to go see Zero Dark Thirty only to get whacked by a cop…


“Egypt’s dirty wheat problem” [Reuters]. At a glance, the architecture of the scam looks just like election fraud with an electronic voting machine.

“JPMorgan Chase appoints a former Obama advisor to lead its burgeoning fintech strategy” [Quartz]. How cozy.

Guillotine Watch

Louis XVI. Loser!

Class Warfare

“Shared office space giant WeWork Cos., recently [***cough***] valued at $16 billion, and a handful of smaller startups are experimenting with ‘coliving,’ a concept that involves tiny apartments, shared kitchens and lounges, and a communal atmosphere” [Wall Street Journal, “Venture Capital’s Answer to High-Priced Housing: Dorms for Grown Ups”]. I think I’d prefer a shipping container.


News of the Wired

“Paramount Says Star Trek Fan Flick Violates Copyright On Klingon And ‘Uniform With Gold Stars'” [TechDirt]. But not a very nearly gold chain?

* * *

Readers, feel free to contact me with (a) links, and even better (b) sources I should curate regularly, and (c) to find out how to send me images of plants. Vegetables are fine! Fungi are deemed to be honorary plants! See the previous Water Cooler (with plant) here. And here’s today’s plant:


Trees will be creaking with the weight of the ice…

* * *

If you enjoy Water Cooler, please consider tipping and click the hat. Water Cooler would not exist without your support.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email
This entry was posted in Guest Post, Water Cooler on by .

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.


  1. diptherio

    Reparations for slavery has been a topic of discussion around these parts. For those who want an alternative view to those that normally make the rounds, I suggest this talk from Ed Whitfield of the Fund for Democratic Communities:


    Reparations as productive capital, to put his position in it’s simplest form. Restoration of the commons…and he’s a funny guy and a very good speaker.

    1. Synoia

      Reparation for Slavery: I believe that was Liberia.

      And they mght just want to review who exactly in West Africa was catching the inhabitants and selling them into slavery (hint, not whites).

      Just for grins, Please also google or review Madame Tinubu, or buy the book Ladder of Bones.

      disclaimer: My first cat we named Tinubu – a very good hunter, too.

      1. Jobroke

        It’s true that most slaves were captured and sold by Africans, but they wouldn’t have been without European demand.

      2. diptherio

        Oh right, it was Africans that often sold other Africans to the slave traders, so I guess that means all the injustices suffered after that, up to and including the present day, are all taken care of. So glad we don’t even need to think about it. Thanks. [/sarc]

        But seriously, watch Ed. Listen. He doesn’t say what you think he’s going to.

  2. Vatch

    “Why I Reject Lesser-of-Two-Evils-ism” [34Justice].

    This article refers to Jim Hightower’s claim (which is probably true) that 308,000 Democratic voters in Florida voted for Bush. Here’s a link to that article:


    I don’t see a source for the 308,000 claim. Does anyone know where Jim Hightower got this number? I’m not arguing against this, but other people have argued with me when I have claimed that it was Florida Democrats who cost Gore the election, and I would like some rock solid data to back up the claim. Jim Hightower says:

    I’m grateful to Tim Wise, a Nashville writer and activist who dug into the Florida tallies and exit polls to find some stunning results that refute the “Ralph did it” assault. Wise’s full report will appear in a forthcoming issue of Z magazine, but the essence of it is that Gore was the problem, not Nader.

    I can’t find the article by Tim Wise.

    1. grayslady

      From what I’ve been able to find, Florida has had a closed primary system since 1913. It’s difficult to imagine that such a large number of re-registrations wouldn’t have been picked up by the Florida, or national, press.

        1. grayslady

          I realize that; but I still think there had to be a heads up movement in the primary or as a result of the primary–unless Gore said something incredibly offensive to Florida voters prior to the general election.

      1. Vatch

        Thanks, that is almost certainly the relevant article. And it fails to answer my question. Here’s the significant paragraph:

        Or consider Democrats, thirteen percent of whom voted for Bush. In all, Gore lost 308,000 voters from his own party to W., while losing 24,000 Dems to Nader. Now sure, if Gore gets even half of that 24,000 who voted for Nader, because Nader never runs, or drops out at the last minute, then he wins Florida. But by the same token, if he gets even one-half of one percent of the Dems who voted for Bush, he also wins. Why are we only focusing on the votes he didn’t get from the much smaller Nader pool, than the votes he didn’t get from the much larger Bush pool?

        Okay, but again, what’s the source for the 308,000 number? Did I miss something in one of the article’s previous paragraphs?

    2. Ed

      This is an annoying trope.

      Bush got an absolute majority of the vote in all but two states he carried, the exceptions being Florida and New Hampshire. Because the election was really close, any Bush state being carried by Gore, for any reason whatsoever, would have changed the electoral college tally, defections from Gore to Nader being just one of a large number of possible factors. Nader’s candidacy passes into political myth along with “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion” from 1884, or Nixon’s five o’clock shadow in 1960, things that get blown way out of proportion as reasons why close elections were determined, precisely because they are so silly.

      The reality is that any effect of a Nader candidacy would be similar to the Henry Wallace candidacy in 1948, Birney’s in 1884, or Weaver’s in a number of nineteenth century elections. Pretty much the same level of support and the same place on the political spectrum.

      Then there is the supposition that all Nader voters were really, in their heart of hearts, Gore voters. Nader’s support collapsed in the few days before the election. He lost half its support, and these were Democrats coming home. Anything he had left were probably former Perot voters, non-voters, or even people (like myself) whose second choice was GW Bush.

      1. Carolinian

        Don’t forget Fox News calling Florida for Bush before the vote was known, the Supreme Court making its most notorious decision since Dred Scott, Tim Russert wearing a secret Bush button behind his lapel (no really), Bob Schieffer telling us not to get hung up on popular vote totals. 2000 was when the news media finally put their credibility and gravitas in a shredder, finishing the job started with Monica, OJ and all the rest.

        But yes blame it on Gore, not Nader. Gore couldn’t even carry his own state.

        1. Rhondda

          If I recall, that year there was some oddity or change regarding exit polls, too. It was perhaps that year that the main organizations who had been doing them suddenly stopped.

    3. rich

      Why I reject Hillary….

      Wall Street Bankers and Lobbyists Move to Ensure Industry Continues to Regulate Itself

      Not content with continued prosecutorial immunity and trillions in taxpayer bailouts and backstops, Wall Street banksters are making moves to ensure they regulate themselves.

      In case you’re wondering who the real owners of this country are…

      The Wall Street Journal reports:

      ORLANDO, Fla.—Wall Street’s top lobbying group wants a closer relationship with the policy makers that oversee its member firms.

      John Rogers,
      chairman of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and a top official at Goldman Sachs Group Inc.,
      on Tuesday called for a standing body made up of bankers and regulators to discuss developments in policy, examination and enforcement. A key responsibility for the panel would also involve regularly providing guidance on post crisis rules and other issues to financial firms.

      Wall Street’s definitely getting “ready for Hillary.”


      Hillary’s Goldman handcuffs,,,,,,,,,,,,Hillary Clinton is still looking into it…


      1. different clue

        That was a whole different bunch of mainly elderly retirees in Palm Beach County who were confronted with a disleading and confusogenic butterfly ballot.

    4. none

      Who cares anyway? The whole Dem election strategy seems to be, put up the worst candidates they can find who have any chance of winning. They prefer to be slightly ahead, but if they miss it’s no big deal. In particular they would like to have congressional majorities but only very slim ones, so the centrists can hold anything important for ransom instead of getting a FU from the rest of the party. They would rather be in the minority than have a sufficiently big majority to pass progressive legislation. The WH works out about the same way.

      1. Vatch

        Who cares anyway?

        Well, I care, because I think there’s a strong case to be made for third party voting, but the specter of Nader in Florida, 2000, is always thrown back at me. I would like to know if there is solid data behind the estimate by Tim Wise and Jim Hightower that 308,000 Florida Democrats voted for Bush in 2000. So far, I haven’t seen any actual data — just speculation.

  3. Arizona Slim

    Personally, I think the co-living idea is a good one.

    Especially in a society with a lot of aging people and young people who aren’t interested in or can’t afford home ownership. At both ends of the age spectrum, there’s a whole lotta entrepreneurship going on. That also lends itself to co-living.

    However, I think it would work best as a housing co-op rather than a for-profit venture.

      1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        Today, it’s two-generational small family.

        Tomorrow, three-plus-generational big family.

      2. Michael

        Said like someone whose parents aren’t evil. And good for you, that you don’t have to live through that. Not all of us have that good fortune.

    1. Lee

      I lived the better part of my twenties in a communal household of political activists. Now, pushing seventy, I occasionally imagine rounding up what’s left of the old crew and getting a house together. Then I imagine them being as grumpy as I am and that is about as close as I get to taking action.

    2. Daryl

      I don’t think it’s a bad idea personally, but I can’t resist pointing out that sharing kitchens with tens of people reminds me of old-style USSR apartments…

      1. Barbara Kurth

        I visited Vilnius when Lithuania was part of the USSR. This arrangement was called communism. In the USA it was called communes and associated with hippies. Now that some “entrepreneurs” can make money with the arrangement, it is very acceptable.

  4. Carolinian

    Does one need to point out the obvious flaw in Salmon’s Fusion article? Here it is, findable after about one minute on the web

    In Gallup’s most recent analysis, 42 percent of Americans identify as independent, compared with 29 percent who say they are Democrats and 26 percent who say they are Republicans.

    Since independents are allowed to vote in most state’s primaries then their preferences also apply to the question of which candidate, Sanders or Trump, is more popular. So when Salmon says

    Whatever you want to call this, it isn’t democracy. America has more Democrats than Republicans, and Sanders’s support among Democrats is greater than Trump’s among Republicans: he has a larger slice of a bigger pie. But somehow we seem set to propel Trump to the Republican nomination, making him the standard-bearer for the American right, while relegating Sanders to the status of a historical footnote.

    he is leaving out independents which are the biggest slice of the “pie.”

    Of course all the stuff about how the parties rig their nomination process is true to which one can only say “duh!”

    The truth is that if Trump wins the most delegates and his party bigs then move to pick someone else then the whole fiction of “democracy” really will be undermined. As for Salmon: better thinking from our pundits.

    1. tejanojim

      Yes, that’s a really foolish argument. Trump wouldn’t win the Democratic nomination, and Bernie wouldn’t win the Republican nomination. What does it matter? Separate conferences, with a championship between the conference winners.

    2. Carolinian

      BTW from Salmon’s own article: Trump has received 4.3 million primary votes so far and Sanders has received 3.3 million–the lesser figure due to lower Dem turnout despite Sanders having a larger percentage of the Dem vote than Trump has of Repub. Therefore going by the people who actually turn out and vote Trump is about 30 percent more popular than Sanders. Of course the primaries so far have skewed heavily Southern so that may not mean much nationally but it shows that when judging things from the state of the race at the moment Salmon’s conclusions are absurd. One can also point out that some percentage of the other candidate votes in the Repub race will end up going to Trump whereas Sanders– in a mostly two candidate race–is shown close to his true support. It is far from clear that Trump has yet shown his “ceiling.”

      At any rate a shoddy article IMO.

  5. Anon

    Re: Fear and Greed Index

    Looks like Mr. Market has shaken off its post-winter doldrums to ratchet up to Extreme Greed as of 3:21PM EDT. 75 isn’t so bad, after all.

    1. MikeNY

      The poodle jumped out of Mr Market’s lap for a minute.

      Mr Market smacked the poodle in the head, and the poodle duly jumped back into Mr Market’s lap, where the poodle cowers and whimpers apologetically.

  6. rich

    IRS Auditing of Big Corporations Plummets Potential Annual Revenue Loss $15 Billion

    Very timely enforcement information obtained from the Internal Revenue Service show that total revenue agent audit hours aimed at larger corporations — those with $250 million or more in assets — dropped by more than one third (34%) from FY 2010 to FY 2015[1].

    As startling as this record was for the bigger corporations, an examination focusing only on the absolute giants of the business world — those with $20 billion or more in assets — showed declines in audit attention that were even sharper. In fact, revenue agent audit time for this group in the FY 2010 – 2015 period were off by almost one half (47%) while the recommended additional taxes dropped by close to three quarters (71%). See Figure 2 and Table 1.


    i see a pattern………

    1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

      What happens when an IRS auditor studiously working through a huge company like Google or Apple or Lockheed’s tax filings gets to the line in the spreadsheet where it says “this income was transferred to Ireland for revenue recognition to avoid paying US taxes”?
      I mean no wonder they only want to work on smaller companies, the cognitive dissonance must give them PTSD

  7. TomD

    Electioneering question for those knowledgeable. When Sanders goes to the Democratic Convention with a large but minority number of delegates, does that empower him to do anything? What do they do other than vote for the presidential candidate?

    1. Jason

      I’m not an expert, but I believe that having more than a quarter of the delegates pledged to Sanders gives him the ability to address the convention without having the speech vetted by the nominee’s staff (probably scheduled at 11:30pm or the like), and to have representatives on the party platform committee.

      1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        Unless some people plan on ‘interrupting’ his speech (peacefully) or taking away his mic.

    2. Gio Bruno

      Well, let’s hope it empowers him to seek provable placement of much of his agenda into the Party platform; as a beginning. (You want me to endorse Hillary? What’s it worth to you?) Politics is leverage by any other name.

      1. participant-observer-observed

        And many of us have not been “paid” yet in eight years! So far, there are no incentives…my vote is not worth diddly to that party.

    1. Mark Alexander

      This is great. I used it to find the email where she asked that Laureate Universities be invited to a “Higher Education Dinner” on Aug. 17, 2009. Raw Story had reported last week that Bill had gotten a $16.5 million job as “honorary chancellor” at Laureate several months later. But they didn’t mention this line from the email:

      “[…]the fastest growing college network in the world, Laureate Universities, started by Doug Becker who Bill likes a lot.”

      So I guess Bill was already on track to this plummy job by then, and the dinner just sealed the deal.

  8. EndOfTheWorld

    As far as HRC “evolving” on the issue of TPP, fuggedaboutit. She says anything her advisers say will help her get elected. What she says now has nothing to do with what she will do if elected. What she says is irrelevant. It is legitimate to not pay any attention at all to what she says.

  9. Jason Boxman

    On patient harm, the gentleman that handles our pest control had a medical facility leave medical gauze or some other foreign body inside him after I think knee surgery. The facility itself blew off his concerns. He had to find another health care facility owned by a different company to get an honest diagnosis. Sadly this isn’t unusual it seems.

  10. rich

    Sequoia Firm’s Valeant Stake Brings Pain in Retiree Lawsuit
    Retiree accuses Ruane Cunniff, DST Systems of self-dealing
    Fund manager accused of stacking 401(k) with Valeant shares

    When Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Inc.’s stock tumbled 51 percent on Tuesday, nobody lost more than fund manager Ruane Cunniff & Goldfarb Inc., which saw $1.26 billion in value wiped out in a day. But the week’s Valeant-related troubles don’t end there for the parent company of the Sequoia Fund.

    On Monday, a retiree whose money was managed by Ruane Cunniff filed a lawsuit accusing the firm of conflict of interest, self-dealing and breach of trust. Those sins, the retiree alleged in a proposed group suit, fueled an environment that gave short shrift to participants of a retirement plan for employees of a company called DST Systems Inc.

    Which is where Valeant comes in. In an unusual arrangement for a 401(k), the participants didn’t have control over a large chunk of the money invested on their behalf.

    A nontransparent fund managed by Ruane Cunniff was packed with shares of Valeant — as much as 30 percent of its holdings, according to the complaint filed in Manhattan federal court.


    Conflict of interest, self-dealing and breach of trust seems to be the model.

  11. Jerry Denim

    ‘Clinton may have “evolved” on TPP, but her surrogates haven’t, and she hasn’t slapped them down. So we’re entitled to question the sincerity of her new convictions.’

    Actually I think it’s much worse than that Lambert. The media keeps reporting that Clinton is now “against” the TPP but I am unaware of her really coming out against the TPP in any meaningful way. The last Clinton position on the TPP I caught was, she was “against it” but only as “it is written now” without specifying what passages or portions she takes issue with. I heard Clinton say she believes it “isn’t good enough” but without saying what it is that needs fixing. The lapdog media have given Clinton credit for opposing the TPP, while candidate Clinton has left President Clinton room to support any future version of the TPP as long as it has some meaningless modification from the version in circulation now, which as I understand it, is basically still classified. Hhhm.

    1. Daryl

      I believe this is in reference to her coming out against some provision relating to auto parts.

    2. Western Union

      Sherrod Brown came on TV promoting her because of her “good foreign trade sense”. I used to like Sherrod. I wonder what he got offered in trade for his allegiance. Trade is still the issue with Obama Dems and HRC most likely won’t hesitate to support the TPP etc if elected. She’ll say all it needs is some tweaks.. Blah

      1. pretzelattack

        i thought he was progressive, too. obviously not if he supports the tpp. that’s like denying climate change or voting for iraq war and not learning from it, a dealbreaker.

        1. different clue

          Trade-Patriot DemVoters should vote for Brown’s Republican opponent to exterminate Brown’s political career. That might be a warning to other Trade-Traitor Democratic office-holders.

    1. Gio Bruno

      The Republicans think they are immune to voter influenza: No Confirmation Hearings, period.

  12. allan

    Clinton sought secure smartphone, rebuffed by NSA [AP]

    Newly released emails show a 2009 request to issue a secure government smartphone to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was denied by the National Security Agency.

    A month later, she began using private email accounts accessed through her BlackBerry to exchange messages with her top aides.

    Keith Alexander to the (secure) white courtesy phone.

  13. pdehaan

    I still don’t see why the GOP establishment and donor class are so up in arms about Trump.
    I mean, he may not have been handpicked, but is he really the sort of guy that the Koch brothers, Adelson and corporate america can’t strike a deal with? It’s sort of assumed in the press that he would be a bit of a lonely ranger, not needing the money, therefore not corruptible and all that, but really? I doubt there’s ever been a buck he didn’t like. I watched a victory speech on the telly the other day, and it was more like an informercial, where he was promoting his wines, steaks, golf courses and businesses. I also don’t think they’d give a rat’s ass about him being quite a bit of an embarrassment. After Dubya, what can possibly be worse? It must be the money, but I don’t see yet how.

    1. Ulysses

      The GOP establishment “alarm” at Trump is mostly kayfabe. A few of them may fear a personal loss of prestige if he wins, but most realize that either he, or Hillary, will dutifully serve the interests of the transnational kleptocracy for which they all work.

      Bernie isn’t on the payroll of Monsanto, Goldman Sachs, etc., and so the key goal for the political classes is to prevent the potential disruption to their gravy train that his election could pose.

      All of the MSM blathering about Trump is a convenient way for them to continue their non-coverage of Bernie– without it being quite so obvious!

  14. Carla

    Please note the following at the end of the Medium article re: Silicon Valley arrogance:

    “The Development Set is made possible by funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. We retain editorial independence.”

    And this is different than Hillary maintaining her “independence” from Wall Street funders….how, exactly?

    I’m counting on some VERY smart person coming forward to explain it to me.

Comments are closed.