MindMover
MindMover's JournalBoehner vows to take Holder to court
Source: Politico
House Speaker John Boehner says Republicans will push a contempt case against Attorney General Eric Holder in federal court over his decision to withhold documents in the "Fast and Furious" gun trafficking investigation.
In an interview aired Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation," the Ohio congressman said he expected fellow Republicans would file a lawsuit in federal court following the House's vote last week to hold Holder in contempt of Congress. That suit, he said, would likely come over "the next several weeks."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2012/07/boehner-says-gop-will-go-to-court-over-holder-127826.html
Mitch McConnell: GOP Only Needs 51 Votes to Overturn Mandate
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell indicated today that Republicans believe they will only need 51 votes to overturn the centerpiece of the 2010 health care law.
In an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," the Kentucky Republican repeatedly referred to the mandate that individuals buy health insurance as a tax, citing the recent Supreme Court decision.
If Republicans take the majority in the Senate in the 2012 elections, McConnell said, he would use budget reconciliation to overturn the law — a move that would not be subject to the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster.
"Reconciliation is available because the Supreme Court has now declared it a tax," McConnell said. "They have unearthed the massive deception that was practiced by the president and the Democrats to constantly deny that it was a tax. ... And as a tax, it is eligible for reconciliation."
http://www.rollcall.com/news/-215873-1.html
===================================================
If there ever was a most vile and evil man in politics, this man personifies that title....
Banking scandal: how document trail reveals global scam
It's not a comfortable weekend for the men heading some of the world's biggest banks. Barclays has already been hit by a £290m fine for rigging interest rates but that could be dwarfed by a series of global lawsuits which could cost banks billions.
The interest rate rigging scandal that has engulfed Barclays was the result of a coordinated attempt at collusion by traders working for a coterie of leading banks over at least five years, according to a series of lawsuits and legal rulings filed in courts in Asia and North America.
The lawsuits allege the fraud was extensive, spanning at least three continents and involving trades worth tens of billions of pounds. The allegations raise further serious questions about the banks' ability to police themselves and the role of senior management in monitoring the activities of their employees.
In a 28-page statement of facts relating to last week's revelation that Barclays had been fined a total of £290m, the US Department of Justice discloses how a network of traders working on both sides of the Atlantic conspired to influence both the Libor and Euribor interest rates – the rates at which banks lend to each other. It was, in effect, a worldwide conspiracy against the free functioning of the market.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/30/banking-scandal-barclays-lawsuits-libor?CMP=twt_gu
Supreme Court upholds major part of Obamacare
Source: WTOP
UPDATE - The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the U.S. law mandating that most people have health insurance or pay a penalty.
It still has to rule on the validity of the law's significant expansion of Medicaid.
This story will update. Stay with WTOP for more.
WASHINGTON (3:27 a.m.) - They've known the outcome for three months. Now it's time for the nine Supreme Court justices to share it with the world.
Barring some incredibly strange twist, shortly after 10 o'clock in the morning Thursday, Chief Justice John Roberts is expected to reveal the high court's verdict on President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.
Read more: http://wtop.com/267/2567663/Obamacare-showdown-at-high-court
Hey Scalia, Four Reasons Your Gang's Obamacare Ruling Is Like A Prostate Exam
So, it’s the eleventh hour on the Supreme Court’s much-awaited verdict on The Affordable Care Act, often referred to as Obamacare.
Are you, like me, panting on the edge of your chair? Right now it feels more like waiting for the results of my prostate exam. If the law is upheld (a good result), life will go on with all its attendant pleasures and travails. If the law, or more likely, parts of it, are struck down, like an exam’s bad news we are still left with a series of options, some less appealing than others. In any case, like the exam, the process has been annoying, and I for one will be happy when it’s over. Mostly, because its been an unneccessary pain in the butt.
No matter which way the Supremes rule, as noted by others in Forbes and elsewhere, and reiterated here, the American way of providing and paying for health care is in the midst of a transformative transition that is unlikely to be impeded. The cost burden, to the federal government and states, and to employers, and individuals who must buy their own insurance or care, is by necessity, not by legislation, driving changes designed to encourage, and in many ways, force providers and payers to have more skin in the game. When money is an important factor in deploying care, just like it is when selling or buying a car or house or even blue jeans, cost and quality suddenly comes into play, allowing the invisible hand of capitalism to play a constraining role. Obamacare, with its limitations and warts, at least doesn’t do anything to slow this process, and it can be argued that it does a bunch of things to speed it up.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelwaldholz/2012/06/27/hey-scalia-four-reasons-your-gangs-obamacare-ruling-is-like-a-prostate-exam/
SCOTUS decides..Mandate Survives....a tax...5-4...Roberts..Yes....on insurance awareness day...
BREAKING: Supreme Court orders Florida to stop counting, declares Obamacare President of the United States.
CNN & Chicago Sun Times say Dewey next President....
@ChristophersenJ #Obamacare encourages reckless behavior. No matter what stupid thing u do, u'll be taken care of (by taxpayers) guaranteed!
If court upholds law, 31 mil previously uninsured have path 2 insurance in 2014. 31 million. #obamacare #scotus #countryfirst
LIVE COVERAGE
http://www.wgntv.com/news/livestreaming/
http://news.yahoo.com/the-supreme-court-s-obamacare-decision--live-coverage-from-scotusblog.html
SCOTUS BLOG
http://www.scotusblog.com/cover-it-live/
Interesting NYT piece on how the court could decide....
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/06/14/us/how-the-supreme-court-could-rule-on-the-health-care-law.html
So which way is it......
Okay, Folks, Let's Put Aside Politics And Look At The Facts... [CHARTS]
The most important issue in this year's election is the economy.
Unfortunately, this topic has now been "politicized," which means that you can't talk about it without being instantly cheered or jeered by fans of each respective political team.
But the economy is much more important than this year's election or either political team.
And both teams are responsible for the mess we're in--and so, I am sorry to say, are the rest of us.
And fixing that mess is going to take decades, regardless of who's in power.
http://www.businessinsider.com/politics-economics-facts-charts-2012-6?op=1
Obamacare Ruling Put Off Until Thursday
Source: Medpage
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court did not issue a decision on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on Monday. The fate of the landmark law will not be known until the court's final session on Thursday.
Reporters and court-watchers waited on pins and needles for the ACA decision on Monday morning, but the court issued other rulings instead.
Technically, the court could put off the decision until next term, but experts say that is very unlikely.
On Thursday, the court could rule in one of three ways concerning the individual mandate, which requires everyone to have health insurance:
Read more: http://www.medpagetoday.com/Washington-Watch/Reform/33457
Supreme Court to States, Screw Off.....
In a case billed as "Citizens United II," the US Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear new arguments on the wisdom of its 2010 Citizens United decision, the court's most controversial campaign finance ruling in years. By a 5-4 vote, the court summarily reversed a decision by the Montana Supreme Court upholding that state's century-old ban on independent political spending by corporations. This deals a blow to reformers who hoped to undo or chip away at Citizens United and stem the expansion of special interest money in elections.
The case, known as American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock, began with an act of defiance. After the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that bans on independent political spending by corporations were unconstitutional, 23 states stopped enforcing the bans they already had in place. Not Montana, which continued to enforce its Corrupt Practices Act, a longstanding law that banned independent corporate political spending. When American Tradition Partnership (ATP), a conservative nonprofit committed to fighting "environmental extremism," challenged the law, the state supreme court upheld it. That led ATP to petition the US Supreme Court to hear the case on appeal.
The high court faced several options with the American Tradition Partnership case. One was summary reversal—an immediate overturning of the Montana Supreme Court's ruling without hearing any new arguments. Another option was to allow new arguments on the case, which would essentially be a rearguing of part of the core logic in Citizens United—namely, that independent political expenditures "do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption."
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/supreme-court-citizens-united-montana?
Analysis: Be afraid: Some in U.S. see shades of 2008 in euro crisis
Reuters) - Grim. Serious. Terrifying. Nerve-rattling.
These are the words some prominent American investors and strategists are using to describe the worsening debt crisis in the euro zone and its impact on the global economy.
While growth has been slowing in China and the United States and companies warn about the effect on earnings, there is a mounting sense among the financial community that politicians and markets are operating on two completely different timelines.
They see a fractured Europe fiddling in the near term, attempting to seal one fissure as another larger one appears while they talk about a five-to-10-year timeframe for real solutions, such as a more fiscally integrated euro zone. They see investors who want solutions in the next few weeks and months or else nations like Spain and Italy could find they cannot borrow at all on capital markets, starting an economic firestorm that would make today's problems seem mild.
Some even suggest markets are taking on shades of the 2008 global crisis, with the potential for a collapse in investor confidence, bank runs in Europe and a seizure for the global financial system.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/24/us-global-economy-fear-idUSBRE85N0M420120624
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Jul 31, 2011, 05:36 PMNumber of posts: 5,016
