24
   

Congratulations, House Republicans!

 
 
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 08:39 am
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 09:11 am
@bobsal u1553115,
I replied to your "attempt" to say the Taliban were recognized. Go give it a read.

Once again as a member of the left, you really can't talk about mean spiritedness. You guys lead the pack. Black people and women can be picked on and shamed as long as they have an R in front of their names.

The tone of the article says as much and the fact that you support it also shows your colors.
bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 09:26 am
@Baldimo,
Nice try. Not only were you so unaware of the Taliban, you don't have a clue beyond knee jerk support of any Teapublican coming down the pike. Had to bring up race again, didn't you?
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 09:33 am
http://moonbattery.com/graphics/shrillary-poor.jpg
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 09:38 am
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--E105d7jaXE/Uj3GXVNl9UI/AAAAAAAAB0c/M22dypWizNU/s640/1236451_405192126247523_2094849419_n-1.jpg
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 01:24 pm

Grassley's Hunt For An Obama Insider Trading Scandal Backfires On GOP



AP Photo / Jacquelyn Martin
Dylan Scott – June 24, 2014, 12:30 PM EDT

Early last year, Wall Street traders somehow found out that the Obama administration planned to make a policy change to Medicare before the news was even announced.

The flurry of stock trades in major health care companies that followed has since caught the eye of federal law enforcement as well as Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who has made investigating the matter one of his pet projects on the Senate Finance and Judiciary committees. In his search, Grassley has gone as far as to cast suspicion on the Obama administration as the source of the leak.

But in a twist, the Wall Street Journal reported last week that federal regulators and law enforcement officials have now focused their attention on a Republican health policy staffer in the House. A lawsuit filed on Friday by the Securities and Exchange Commission, first reported by the Journal, said investigators believe the staffer "may have been" the source of the leak. It also sought to force the staffer to turn over records to investigators, something he and the committee have reportedly refused to do despite being handed subpoenas.

The SEC lawsuit alleges that the House staffer, Brian Sutter, spoke with a lobbyist -- identified by the Journal as Mark Hayes, who happens to be a former aide to Grassley -- on the day of the leak. The suit alleges that Sutter was in touch with Hayes by both email and phone and that they discussed the upcoming Medicare policy change. Hayes then allegedly gave the information to a research firm, which distributed the flash that set off the trading, according to the SEC. A 2012 law, the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, prohibits government officials from disclosing non-public information that could affect stock prices, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Grassley's office declined to comment to TPM about the latest development. He has also reportedly made inquiries into whether an aide to Sen. Orrin Hatch, his senior colleague on the Senate Finance Committee, had any role in the leak. Additionally, according to Politico, he has raised questions about Hayes’s role in the leaks. But the Obama administration appears to have been Grassley's initial and most public target when trying to identify the source of the leak.

Grassley has had suspicions about leaks from the Obama administration regarding health policy changes since at least 2011. For example, in a letter dated Dec. 12, 2011, the senator brought up his hunch with Marilyn Tavenner, who was then acting administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Grassley’s letter said he was in contact with a “whistleblower within CMS” who had accused top administration officials of meeting with lobbyists and hedge fund brokers in non-public settings.

"My concern is that these allegations suggest a continuing pattern in which (administration) officials ... under the cover of reaching out and meeting with stakeholders, have disseminated information to well-connected lobbyists in non-public settings," he wrote.

Grassley’s suspicions were heightened in April 2013 when the Wall Street Journal broke the news about the stock trades that followed the leak of the Medicare policy change. The change reversed proposed funding cuts for private insurers and the leak became a market-moving event. Grassley sent a letter to Tavenner the day after the article was published, saying the incident "raises questions regarding political intelligence brokers’ ability to gather information from CMS in order to predict market moving events" and invoked his December 2011 inquiry.

Grassley took an even more forceful tone at a Senate hearing less than a week later. In the hearing, for Tavenner's confirmation to permanently take the administrator’s role, Grassley spent the entirety of his allotted time peppering her with questions about the leak.

"When information leaks from the administration that has the ability to cause significant market movement, it is wrong and quite possibly illegal," he said. He pointed to the litany of agencies where the leak could have come from -- including the White House itself -- and intimated that Tavenner might have trouble getting to the bottom of the issue given that the leak might lie deep within the administration.

"I obviously do not believe that you can get the folks at (Health and Human Services) or (the Office of Management and Budget) or the White House without some help, so I am going to pursue this," he said. "So you inform them that, if this is beyond CMS, I expect action to be taken, and I am going to get to the bottom of it one way or the other."

Meanwhile, the Justice Department has opened a criminal probe, and the Securities and Exchange Commission is pursuing a civil enforcement action, both in an attempt to get to the bottom of the leak.

On Thursday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Sutter, the top Republican health staffer on the House Ways and Means Committee, had been subpoenaed by both. The Justice Department wants Sutter to testify before a grand jury in Manhattan federal court. The SEC was seeking records from him as well as the House committee.

In a follow-up article on Saturday, the Journal reported the SEC had filed a lawsuit after Sutter and the committee refused to comply with its subpoenas. House lawyers, according to the SEC, had argued that the Constitution protected them from having to comply with the subpoenas. But as part of the suit, the SEC said that it had reason to believe Sutter “may have been" the source of the leak.

A spokesperson for the House Ways and Means Committee declined to comment. The counsel's office for the House, which is representing both Sutter and the committee in the lawsuit, told TPM that the subpoenas "run seriously afoul of the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause, and we expect to respond in due course on that ground, among others." Hayes did not return a call or email seeking comment.
About The Author
K4zw8el802c2lczjp9fi
Dylan Scott Follow @dylanlscott

Dylan Scott is a reporter for Talking Points Memo. He previously reported for Governing magazine in Washington, D.C., and the Las Vegas Sun. His work has been recognized with a 2013 American Society of Business Publication Editors award for Best Feature Series and a 2010 Associated Press Society of Ohio award for Best Investigative Reporting. He can be reached at [email protected].
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 01:35 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Grassley's Hunt For An Obama Insider Trading Scandal Backfires On GOP


Guess we will just have to settle with the IRS scandal and Benghazi. Two things you are trying so hard to distract some. Insider trading pales next to treason and other high crimes.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jun, 2014 09:48 pm
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/images/PresidentHoneyBadger.jpg
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 01:02 pm
@coldjoint,
Hell, I'll settle for those two "scandals", too. They are imaginary after all.

Have you found W's missing 1,500,000 WH emails yet?
bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 01:03 pm
http://obamadiary.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/bqsikmtcqaardx7-large.jpg
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 01:56 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
None of that changes the fact those e-mails were deliberately destroyed. Only an idiot would believe otherwise. And sure enough, an idiot like you believes it.
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 01:58 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Hell, I'll settle for those two "scandals", too. They are imaginary after all.


It is your thought process that is imaginary.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 02:07 pm
@coldjoint,
So tell us oh wise Pinkie, why did Lerner and the IRS decide to destroy them in 2011 when there was no investigation until late 2012. Does Obama have a time machine in your world?
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 02:15 pm
@parados,
Quote:
So tell us oh wise Pinkie, why did Lerner and the IRS decide to destroy them in 2011 when there was no investigation until late 2012.


Because they knew it was coming after complaints from targeted citizens. Also the illegal suppression had already won them the election, why not destroy the evidence? Try again, the manipulation of the timeline doesn't apply. And what about the other six people?

Quote:
Does Obama have a time machine in your world?


No, he has a lying machine, it is called the Obama administration. And shills like you.
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 02:25 pm
@parados,
You know how facts and common sense aren't allowed to interfere with coldfarts feverish dreams!
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 02:30 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
common sense

Common sense will tell you 7 separate sets of e-mails from a certain time period are missing and gone forever would tell anyone just how guilty Obama and his lying thugs are. Discussion over.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 02:53 pm
@coldjoint,
coldjoint wrote:

Quote:
So tell us oh wise Pinkie, why did Lerner and the IRS decide to destroy them in 2011 when there was no investigation until late 2012.


Because they knew it was coming after complaints from targeted citizens. Also the illegal suppression had already won them the election, why not destroy the evidence? Try again, the manipulation of the timeline doesn't apply. And what about the other six people?
So, they knew about the complaints prior to the complaints? Once again the only conspiracy seems to be that Obama isn't telling us about his time machine.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2014 03:05 pm
@parados,
Quote:
So, they knew about the complaints prior to the complaints?


Yep. Kind of like you having a list of talking points and links at your disposal. They are criminals. And remember the NSA ,which they can access, knows all.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2014 01:48 pm
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of No Rights.

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone — not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing.Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we’re just not interested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don’t be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don’t be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won’t have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don’t care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from.

(lastly….)

ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country’s history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!!!!


http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/06/26/bill-rights/
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Jun, 2014 05:11 pm
http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r589/duadmin/azy-2013-10/10460365_10152524062294255_1850659243003175457_n_zps49595571.png
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 09/06/2024 at 01:03:08