Lets see what those crazy dems are up to;

US Chamber of Commerce and business groups are countering an FTC ruling that now bans employee non-compete clauses.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/bu...ements-setting-legal-showdown-rcna149069


In a ruling Tuesday afternoon, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said noncompete clauses would henceforth be illegal. The measure was necessary, it said, for "protecting the fundamental freedom of workers to change jobs, increasing innovation, and fostering new business formation."



“Noncompete clauses keep wages low, suppress new ideas, and rob the American economy of dynamism,” said FTC chair Lina M. Khan in a statement. “The FTC’s final rule to ban noncompetes will ensure Americans have the freedom to pursue a new job, start a new business, or bring a new idea to market.”

The FTC estimates nearly one in five Americans are subject to noncompetes. They have grown increasingly common in lower wage or hourly work industries like fast food franchises, restaurants, and security firms, where some employers have sought to limit the ability of workers to effectively raise their pay by looking for work at competing establishments.

In addition to banning all new noncompetes, the FTC's rule applies to all existing noncompete agreements. Employers will now have to provide notice to workers bound to a current noncompete that it will not be enforced against them.

The rule was hailed by labor groups and left-leaning policy experts.

"Noncompetes are about reducing competition, full stop. It’s in their name," said Heidi Shierholz, president of the progressive nonprofit Economic Policy Institute. "Noncompetes are bad for workers, bad for consumers, and bad for the broader economy. This rule is an important step in creating an economy that is not only strong but also works for working people."

The AFL-CIO, America's largest labor group, praised the new rule in a post on X Tuesday, saying noncompete agreements "trap workers from finding better jobs, drive down wages, and stifle competition."

But business groups are already hitting out at the ban, saying noncompetes are essential to protecting trade secrets and proprietary information. The groups also say noncompetes ultimately help workers by engendering a more collaborative firm environment and limiting so-called "free riders," or employees who seek to capitalize on a specific company's methods and taking that knowledge elsewhere.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the country’s largest business lobby, said it plans to sue the FTC over the ruling. In a statement, it called the ban an "unlawful power grab."

“This decision sets a dangerous precedent for government micromanagement of business and can harm employers, workers, and our economy," it said.

Separately. a Dallas-based tax services firm filed a lawsuit in Texas federal court — which has proven hostile to Biden administration rulings — challenging not only the ban but the very structure of the FTC itself.

"We stand firm in our commitment to serve the rightful interest of every company to retain its proprietary formulas for success taught in good faith to its own employees,” said chairman and CEO G. Brint Ryan said in a statement.

The FTC's rule is set to go into effect in August, but is unlikely to be enforced until the court challenges are resolved, something that could take years.

new rule to address airline fees

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...rline-cash-refunds-administra-rcna149087

Airlines must cough up cancellation cash and can no longer hide fees under new federal rule

Biden administration cracks down on airline refunds for passengers


April 24, 2024, 6:00 AM EDT
By Jay Blackman and Phil Helsel
A federal rule announced Wednesday will require airlines to quickly give cash refunds — without lengthy arguments — to passengers whose flights have been canceled or seriously delayed, the Biden administration said.

“Passengers deserve to get their money back when an airline owes them — without headaches or haggling,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a statement.

The rule from the Department of Transportation says passengers who decline other reimbursement like travel credits are to get a cash refund.

Image: Salt Lake City travellers
Travelers pass through Salt Lake City International Airport, on Dec. 24, 2021, in Salt Lake City.Rick Bowmer / AP file
It applies to canceled flights or when flights have a “significant change,” the administration said.

A “significant change” includes when departure or arrival times are three or more hours different than scheduled for domestic flights or six hours for international flights, and also cases where the airport is changed or connections added, it said.

Passengers are also to get a refund when their baggage is 12 hours late in delivery for domestic flights.



The new rule comes after promises to hold airlines accountable after major disruptions that made travel hell for passengers, including the 2022 Southwest Airlines meltdown that resulted in almost 17,000 significantly delayed or canceled flights and a missing baggage nightmare.

The Department of Transportation said that the new rule means refunds are automatic, and "airlines must automatically issue refunds without passengers having to explicitly request them or jump through hoops."

Also announced Wednesday was a rule requiring airlines to more clearly disclose so-called "junk fees" such as surprise baggage or other fees, up-front, the department said.

The department said that rule is expected to save fliers around $500 million a year.

The surprise fees are used so that tickets look cheaper than they really are, and then fliers get the unwelcome surprise of fees on checked bags, carry-on bags, or reservation changes — or even discounts that are advertised but the discount only applies to part of the ticket price, officials said.

Airlines will also have to tell fliers clearly that their seat is guaranteed, and they don't have to pay extra to ensure they have a seat for the flight, according to the department.

Airlines for America, an industry trade group, said that its member airlines “offer transparency and vast choice to consumers from first search to touchdown,” and that they do offer cash refunds.

The 11 largest U.S. airlines returned $10.9 billion in cash refunds last year, an increase over the $7.5 billion in 2019 but slightly down from the $11.2 billion in 2022, the group said.

“U.S. airlines are providing more options and better services while ticket prices, including ancillary revenues, are at historic lows,” Airlines for America said.

Left out of the federal changes announced Wednesday are those involving "family seating fees," but the Transportation Department said in a statement that "DOT is planning to propose a separate rule that bans airlines from charging these junk fees."

Travelers have complained to the DOT that children were not seated next to an accompanying adult, including in some cases young children, department officials said last year.

Fees on bags specifically have made up an increasing amount of airline revenues, the DOT said Wednesday in announcing the new rules.

A department analysis found that airline revenue from baggage fees increased 30 percent between 2018 and 2022, while operating revenue — which is from the flights themselves — increased by only half that amount, the DOT said.

Jay Blackman
Jay Blackman is an NBC News producer covering such areas as transportation, space, medical and consumer issues.


Phil Helsel
Phil Helsel is a reporter for NBC News.

Many more "salaried" workers now able to get overtime pay after new ruling


https://abc11.com/biden-salary-overtime-pay-rule-department-of-labor/14725430/


Millions more salaried workers will be eligible for overtime pay starting this summer
About 4 million more workers will qualify for overtime when the rule is fully implemented in January, the agency estimates.

ByTami Luhby, CNN, CNNWire
Wednesday, April 24, 2024 5:05AM






More salaried workers to qualify for overtime pay starting July 1

About 4 million more workers will qualify for overtime when the rule is fully implemented in January, the agency estimates.
Millions of salaried workers will soon qualify for overtime pay under a final rule released by the US Department of Labor on Tuesday.

The new rule raises the salary threshold under which salaried employees are eligible for overtime in two stages. The threshold will increase to the equivalent of an annual salary of $43,888, or $844 a week, starting July 1, and then to $58,656, or $1,128 a week, on January 1, 2025.

About 4 million more workers will qualify for overtime when the rule is fully implemented in January, the agency estimates. In its first year, the rule is expected to result in an income transfer of about $1.5 billion from employers to workers, mainly from new overtime premiums or from pay raises to maintain the exempt status of some affected employees.

"This rule will restore the promise to workers that if you work more than 40 hours in a week, you should be paid more for that time," acting Labor Secretary Julie Su said in a statement. "Too often, lower-paid salaried workers are doing the same job as their hourly counterparts but are spending more time away from their families for no additional pay. That is unacceptable."

The current threshold is $35,568 a year, or $684 per week, which was put in place by the Trump administration in 2019.





The salary threshold will be updated every three years, starting July 1, 2027, the agency said.


Business groups are expected to fight the effort, as they successfully did when the Obama administration attempted to significantly hike the threshold. Trade associations quickly pushed back on the latest proposed rule when it was released in August, saying it would raise their members' costs and hurt their operations.

"I suspect that such substantial increases may be a particular burden for many smaller businesses, forcing some to choose between cutting jobs and raising prices," said Ted Hollis, a partner at Quarles & Brady, a law firm. "Some businesses that cannot do either may be forced to close, resulting in unintended but predictable side effects of this government action."

The rule will "exponentially increase" operating costs for small restaurant owners who are "trying desperately" to keep menu prices steady, Sean Kennedy, executive vice president of public affairs for the National Restaurant Association, said in a statement.


"And because DOL created a one-size-fits-all rule based on national income data, rather than regional data, this change is going to disproportionately impact restaurant owners in the South and Midwest," he said.

Ben Brubeck, vice president of regulatory, labor and state affairs at Associated Builders and Contractors, said the rule will disrupt the entire construction industry and noted that the trade group will consider all options, including a legal challenge. The rule will "greatly restrict employee workplace flexibility in setting schedules and hours, hurting career advancement opportunities," he said in a statement.

In 2016, then-President Barack Obama asked the Labor Department to overhaul federal overtime rules and raise the salary threshold to $47,476 a year, or $913 a week. That would have roughly doubled the level that was in place at the time.

But business groups and 21 states sued, and later that year, a federal judge in Texas issued an injunction. The Trump administration said in 2017 that it would not defend the rule and later lifted the threshold to the current level.

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/23/1246655366/ftc-bans-noncompete-agreements-lina-khan

From the article on NPR above; I think that number is really high, though

The FTC estimates about 30 million people, or one in five American workers, from minimum wage earners to CEOs, are bound by noncompetes. It says the policy change could lead to increased wages totaling nearly $300 billion per year by encouraging people to swap jobs freely.

I'm actually very much in favor of banning noncompetes, unless specific consideration (read $$$$$) was given separately, either as a clause or as a separate contract. In that case, I think it should be enforced.

From my own OG conservative viewpoint, I actually think it's the role of government to foster competition, because that drives companies to give a better product and try harder. In this case, it drives companies to be more incentivized to retain better talent. Let's face it. The pro-corporation element running rampant through neo-conservativism has driven both product quality and innovation down. See Boeing, et al.

The trade secrets and proprietary information assertions are a tired excuse. I've seen my corporate counterparts shout those from a rooftop for everything. "Hey, Bob, why didn't you give me that proposal on time?" "TRADE SECRETS AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION!"

"How's the weather?" "TRADE SECRETS AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION!!!!"

It's a lazy excuse. I would also be more than confident that they have other clauses or contracts with their employees that are essential non-disclosure agreements that would ban the sharing of that type of information anyhow. I didn't see anything about this ruling that would nullify those provisions.

Stop with your conspiracy theories!!





"manipulated props", couldn't have said it better myself.

Sad, disgusting and out of control. I wonder if anyone will tell Joe?

As a person that had to fight a Non Compete, I'm glad they are gone. It's like "Golden Handcuffs" that a company can use to control your life. You gotta leave your chosen field for a period of time before you can resume it. Besides they are worthless. There are a lot of ways around them.

Regarding the airline stuff, tell me again what's wrong with an airline paying for an inconvience to their customers?

Regarding the OT thing: Are you suggesting that a person on Salary, being required to work over 40 hours per week and not be paid for it is a good thing?

I guess I just don't see much wrong with these things.

Daman, see my top line about “what those crazy dems are up to.” it was satirical headline.
These are all very good for the working folk.

And they are also supposed to be going after Ticketmaster fees also.

All good things

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-hour-free-Palestine-Massachusetts.html

Libtard story hour.

"Four More Years. PAUSE."

What a dumbass.

.

https://dailycaller.com/2024/04/23/joe-biden-debunked-18-wheeler-campaign-stop-florida/

Demented Joe still claiming he used to drive an 18 wheeler.

We know who the real liars are. They’re all in court daily facing the music.

It's all a distraction from what's going on which they seemingly have nothing to say about.

Charles Payne rips California's proposed exit tax: You can check out any time...

Exit tax? If I want to move my business, I have to pay hush money??

It looks like they are initially doing it to go after billionaires leaving the state. Might be aimed at Musk, honestly.

However, the way it is set up, I think it will be challenged on constitutional grounds. I don't see how the law would stand up to a constitutional challenge either.

I do think the law may be aimed at a legitimate problem, which I call the "locust billionaire/corporation" problem. This is where corporations, like NCR out of Dayton, and a host of others, will move to a state with tax breaks, use it up for all it's worth, and then move to another place when it is more opportunistic and benefits in the current state run out. It ultimately results in a likely net loss for the state, despite the jobs and whatnot. It's not unlike how sports owners threaten to move if their home state/city won't build them a new stadium with taxpayer funds.

This law however seems like an unconstitutional band-aid to a greater problem. The bigger issue is states that seem to undercut others in order to entice corporations away. It is short-term gains for the politicians that get the company to move into the state, where they can say "It's someone else's problem" if the corporation then decides to up and move out down the road. Not sure what the fix is there because that would require states and politicians to cooperate with each other. In the post-Jack Welch environment, corporations and billionaires will shrewdly chase whatever benefits them. That much is consistent and dependable.

Not exactly billionaires.

I understand your explanation and love the locust moniker. I don't understand how this stops it though. Punishing those who leave does nothing to encourage someone else to come -- and in this case -- quite the opposite. It's actually a perfect picture of the "It's someone else's problem" example.

Food for thought in this example: I know I'm leaving because your state sucks. I reinvest a s___ton in tech that fiscal year (completely portable). Take any other advantage to make sure I'm at the lowest income possible, pay the tax, and stick a big middle finger in your face. So, for every ten large businesses that leave, Cali can build a new windmill. Not sure I would call that a net gain. Or do they entice new businesses to come with massive tax breaks? You've already explained how dumb that would be.

Drag queen story time reaching a new level.

"C'mon kids, all together... FREE PALESTINE!!"


'Queer Storytime for Palestine' slammed by former IDF sergeant: 'Indoctrination'



And look, so proud of themselves for being woke!!

Yeah, I agree. I got the "billionaires initially" reference from the article itself. I closed the tab now, but one of the points said something along the lines of "initially aimed at billionaires and then moves on progressively from there.

I don't think this stops it either, hence the band-aid reference. I perhaps should have expounded on band-aid over a leak in the hoover dam. It really seems more like posturing than anything else, because I think that it's prima facie unconstitutional.

As to your example, I think it's a good one. I don't really know what the overarching long-term goal of this was, if there even was one. Perhaps they had already enticed a lot of corporations to come in via those tax breaks and now they are taking the stick approach, vs the carrot, to keep them from leaving. Again, though, I don't think this will be a practical solution to that dilemma though.

Massive tax breaks have gotten us to where we are now. Billionaires paying lower tax rates than their secretaries. And each and every time they have gotten these tax breaks none of the money has been given in the form of discounts to the consumer or an increase in jobs. Yet they have states competing to give away millions in tax breaks to get them to move there. The loser always ends up bring the every day tax payer.

I agree this law ends up being counterproductive and wasn't well thought out. But someone needs to come up with a plan where states stop greasing the wheels for big business. And let's be honest here, none of this has to do with "I'm leaving because your state sucks". It's all about the money.

Still triggered about Drag Queen story time?

Very reasonable observations. I'm so big on common sense and see such a lack of it across the board.

This from The Center Square... slightly right leaning (although I never know how that matters when facts are presented).



This is a perfect example of:





(Since I know you love the memes )

I had n o idea dawglover loved memes?

We used to have that flag hanging up in our SCIF. It definitely seems like Texas is getting an influx of corporations from elsewhere, California being one of those places. I don't know anything beyond that in terms of the "why" substantively.

Haha. We had it hanging in the kitchen at my restaurant... right next to the "BANG HEAD HERE" target. 🤣

I'm glad the gubment is here to protect my eyes and ears, that video was scaaaary!

Mike Johnson is a Republican. You posted this in the wrong thread.

You may wish to move this to the Cra Cra Republican thread or I could help you with that if you like.

MAGAts playing victim, what’s new?

I was hoping that was the case. Thanks

Demented Biden at it again.

Hostage says the atmosphere inside was rather peaceful compared to many unpeaceful things...

I'd be curious to know what percentage of the protesters are actually students. Can you imagine forking up the money to send your kid to an Ivy League school and then they pull off crap like that? Oh man, the fire that would rain from me...

Columbia University building occupation led by people not affiliated with the university, spokesperson says

The demonstrators who broke into Hamilton Hall on Tuesday were led by people not affiliated with Columbia University, according to a university spokesperson.

“We regret that protesters have chosen to escalate the situation through their actions. After the University learned overnight that Hamilton Hall had been occupied, vandalized, and blockaded, we were left with no choice. Columbia public safety personnel were forced out of the building, and a member of our facilities team was threatened. We will not risk the safety of our community or the potential for further escalation,” the spokesperson said in a statement outlining the New York Police Department’s arrival on campus Tuesday evening.

https://www.cnn.com/business/live-n...30-24/h_a47be8736e6e739ec44ecb5d6a871b77

Over half arrested in UT pro-Palestinian protests had no campus ties, school officials say

Of the 79 people arrested Monday, 45 of them had “no affiliation with UT Austin,” a university statement noted.

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/2024/04/30/ut-protests-arrests/

At least half of the demonstrators inside Columbia are not affiliated with the school, law enforcement say

At least half of the demonstrators on the Columbia University campus are not affiliated with the university, a law enforcement official tells CNN.

The number of protesters on campus fades and surges depending on what’s going on, anywhere from 250 to 400 people, the official said.

While there is no official request from Columbia for New York Police Department assistance, teams of officers around the city are preparing to go in once word is given from the university, the official said.

https://www.cnn.com/business/live-n...30-24/h_135f8a215ab692d65079dab7d4802ac9

As a point of reference it states that there were between 250-400 protestors at any given point in time at Columbia University. Law enforcement said that at least half of them were not affiliated with the university. Columbia's student body consists of 36,649 students.

What's next, a peaceful beheading?

Kinda has a Summer 2020 vibe to it.......Oh, memories.

Yes. It seems that being a pig-agitator-terrorist is now a lucrative career choice, and openly funding them is perfectly acceptable. That doesn't excuse responsibility from students that participate though. Well, in most people's opinion anyway.

Eric Adams just spent most of his press conference blaming "professional agitators", it almost sounded like the poor innocent kids on drugs speak from the 90s, when we wanted it to be all the drug pushers' fault and alleviate all personal responsibility. We're still playing that game.

I can see where this is going now. The students will be "victims". Which bodes well for Biden's White House. Zero-dark-thirty for weeks on end will quickly become messages condemning "the agitators". The spoiled brats that started everything will walk away with little to no punishment. And the beat goes on.

We basically had that on Jan 6th. Not that I supported either. Also the people that took over that building are reportedly directed by outside influences not affiliated with the college.

Or a Jan.6th/Charlottesville vibe.

Somebody was beheaded on J6?

Or by "basically", do you mean they tried to cut the head off but couldn't get through the neck bone?

And I agree, this looks like another insurrection. I wonder how accountability will be handled?

It certainly does not. It doesn't excuse anyone who participates in violence or breaking of the law. As with each and every one of such incidents in the past whether conducted by the right or the left, my opinion remains constant. Anyone involved with criminal activity should be prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law.


I certainly agree with you while at the same time find it confusing how people tend to pick and choose when personal accountability and personal responsibility applies and when it doesn't depending on whom is involved.


You will have a certain subset I believe that will be pushing that message. But then aren't we already seeing that exact same thing elsewhere in the opposite direction as we post? As I said, this personal responsibility thing seems to be something people pick and choose who it applies to more and more these days. People use it like having an ace up their sleeve for when they choose to play it.

On a personal note, I support peaceful protests. It's a constitutional guarantee. Even when I disagree with the message or the cause. That goes for Nazi groups, the KKK and white supremacists. Although I hate and abhore their message they have the right to assemble peacefully and share it. Because as soon as I start supporting we stop those we disagree with from standing for their cause, how soon will people be coming after my causes?

But that's not what we have here. We certainly have some who were peacefully protesting and we also have those who weren't. Those who stepped outside of the law deserve to be punished no differently than any other criminal.

People were killed. So “basically” works well here. Unlike “basically nobody has had Covid over the last year” which doesn’t work well.

What "people" were killed? Asking for a friend.

lol. Just thought I'd add some rhetoric since you and Wobbler were busting out some J6 comparisons.

I agree with most of that. I know everything has to be compared to Trump, so I've decided I'm just going to overlook that from now on. You're like the hot girlfriend with bad habits. After a while you just accept the bad habits. 🤣

One of the things I'm strongest on in life -- whether it be business, politics, or relationships -- is precedent. When they need to be set, set them in no uncertain terms. When you allow them to be violated, be aware of the consequences.

We really need to start being more aware of this as a country. Getting beyond the who, whats and whys... is it really okay for students to take over a campus and declare it as their own so they can protest? Is it okay for police to wait hours before they do something about blocking traffic on a bridge because people have glued themselves to a vehicle, or should they just say "alright, this is going to hurt"?

I have a lot of harsh opinions on some of this, I know they probably go against the norm, but we have reached the point of desperately needing to 'over-compensate'.

Not until Memphis served up this......


I used the "What's good for the goose is good for the gander" principal.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-fbi-data-murder-statistics/73443631007/


FBI data shows America is seeing a 'considerable' drop in crime. Trump says the opposite.
Zac Anderson
USA TODAY







Jeff Asher is a New Orleans-based crime data analyst who has worked at the CIA and Department of Defense. He leans towards caution when describing trends in his line of work.

Amid the heated crime rhetoric that is a staple of politics and is continuing this year – former President Donald Trump and his conservative allies in Congress and the media are using dire terms to describe crime trends in America – Asher has been carefully sifting through the data.

The story he tells has been slow to emerge but stands in stark contrast to Trump's narrative.

As early data showed murders declining nationwide last year, Asher was careful about overstating things. But as the big decline continued, he wrote in December that he had “seen enough” and was ready to declare that the U.S. was experiencing a major drop in killings.


“Murder plummeted in the United States in 2023, likely at one of the fastest rates of decline ever recorded,” Asher wrote online.

P

The decrease in murders is "potentially historically large," Asher told USA TODAY, and it's not just killings that are declining. Preliminary 2023 FBI data “paint the picture" of a big decrease in overall crime, he wrote.


That’s not the picture Trump and his supporters are painting on the campaign trail, with voters likely to hear plenty more in the coming months that attempts to cast President Joe Biden as weak on crime. A House Judiciary Committee field hearing scheduled for Friday in Philadelphia is expected to focus on the topic, picking up on a theme the GOP-led panel covered during similar sessions last year in New York and Chicago.

Trump’s crime rhetoric has been escalating as he faces his own criminal jeopardy, with the former president arguing that prosecutors are ignoring the real crime problem in America to pursue a political “witch hunt” against him.


He complained last summer about the "filth and the decay" in Washington, D.C. as he headed back to the nation's capital for his arraignment on federal criminal charges tied to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Campaigning in Georgia last month, where he's fighting additional state-based criminal charges, Trump declared that “crime is rampant and out of control like never, ever before.”

Yet even as the data contradicts Trump’s description of a nation in the grip of terrible crime wave, many Americans are inclined to agree with him, polls show, and crime could be a key issue this election cycle.



"The suburban housewives actually like Donald Trump. You know why? Because I'm the one who's gonna keep them safe,” Trump said recently, referencing a voting block that could swing the election.


The Trump campaign referred questions about Trump's rhetoric conflicting with FBI data to the Republican National Committee, which pointed to articles raising questions about the accuracy of the FBI data and conflicting information in federal reports.

RNC spokeswoman Anna Kelly said USA TODAY was "trying to gaslight Americans into believing that their lived experiences are wrong" and noted "families are rightfully concerned" about crime.

"Biden’s weakness has made Americans less safe, and his policies have failed," Kelly added.

Aggressive crime rhetoric has been a staple of GOP politics going back decades, but Trump’s comments clash with the reality laid out in FBI and other reports of a nation mending after a troubled period.

Pandemic crime wave

Republicans also ran on tackling crime during the 2022 midterm election cycle, and they had data to back up their claims that it was a growing problem.

The United States experienced a spike in violent crimes that coincided with the pandemic and social unrest surrounding police killings of George Floyd and other unarmed African American individuals.


The FBI reported that violent crimes increased an estimated 5.6% in 2020 and remained at that elevated level in 2021, dipping by just 1%.

The 29% estimated increase in murders in 2020 was particularly shocking, and murders jumped another 4.3% in 2021 estimates.

While the increase was alarming, crime was still well below levels seen a few decades ago, said Jeffrey Butts, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and director of the school’s Research and Evaluation Center.

“When COVID hit we saw this spike, so from 2020 to 2022 it was bad but… it still came nowhere near where we were in the 1990s,” Butts said, noting crime soon began to drop again as expected.

Researchers believe the crime increase was a blip caused by pandemic disruptions, Butts said.



“House Republicans are ready to stand up to the criminals who think that this country is theirs for the taking, and the leftists in Washington who are enabling this outbreak of violent crime,” the lawmakers wrote.

Trump has continued that type of rhetoric, even as crime as ebbed.

The FBI’s national crime estimates for 2022 found that violent crime decreased 1.7% and there were 6.7% fewer murders. Complete FBI crime data for 2023 won’t be released until the fall, but quarterly reports show violent crime continuing to drop.

University of New Haven criminal justice Professor Maria Tcherni-Buzzeo said the downward trend in crime means "we are kind of returning to where we were before the pandemic."

Asher cited preliminary 2023 FBI data in predicting that the final numbers for the year could show a "considerable" drop. The third quarter FBI data showed murders dropping an estimated 15.6% compared with the same period in 2022 and violent crime dropping 8.2% overall.


The fourth quarter 2023 report released in March show an estimated 4% drop in property crime, 6% drop in violent crime and 13% decrease in murders from 2022. The fourth quarter report covers the entire 2023 calendar year, and can be considered a preliminary year-end report.

Questions about crime data
The FBI relies on voluntary reporting from police agencies to develop national crime statistics. Some police departments don't report their data, so the agency estimates crime levels in those regions to come up with a national number.



The percentage of police departments reporting their data has been increasing since then, but the information is still incomplete – 79% of agencies reported in the fourth quarter of 2023 – and the agency uses methods to adjust for missing data and publish estimates.


While FBI data showed violent crime decreasing in 2022, another widely-cited crime barometer showed a different picture. The 2022 National Victimization Survey conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, which captures both reported and unreported crimes, found a steep increase in the violent victimization rate.

That survey measures a different timespan, though, starting with crimes that occurred in July of 2021 when pandemic disruptions were more acute and continuing through November of 2022. The 2023 survey won't be released until the fall, and there aren't interim reports like the FBI data.

Because of the different timeframes and other factors, Asher believes the victimization survey and FBI reports shouldn't be compared. He and other crime statistics experts say they are confident in the overall trend laid out in the FBI data of crime decreasing. The data have a margin of error because they rely on estimates, but clearly point in the direction of reduced crime.

“The trends are clear, there’s no questioning the trend in good faith in my opinion," Asher said.

Some communities continue to experience elevated crime levels, or increases in certain crimes. Murders are up 9% in Los Angeles, 8% in St. Louis and 23% in Denver this year compared to the start of 2023, according to data compiled by Asher's firm, AH Datalytics. Nationwide, 2023 third and fourth quarter FBI crime reports show motor vehicles thefts increasing.

Overall, though, crime is going down and is at or near pre-pandemic levels, according to the FBI data, experts interviewed by USA TODAY and other leading groups that study the issue.

"Crime rates are largely returning to pre-COVID levels as the nation distances itself from the height of the pandemic, but there are notable exceptions," the non-partisan Council on Criminal Justice wrote in a year-end 2023 analysis of crime trends in 38 cities.

That trend is continuing into 2024.

Big drop in murders
There are 532 fewer murders so far this year in the 218 cities tracked by AH Datalytics, when compared with the same period last year, a 20% decline.

“I would have no problem walking around any big city in the United States right now,” said University of Miami criminologist Alex Piquero, who previously ran the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, which publishes crime data. “The issue that we have is people are diving into social media and they’re not taking the time to digest really what’s happening.”

Piquero said people can "cherry pick" a few cities or crime types to argue crime still is a growing problem, but the national picture shows a steady decrease.

"There’s no doubt in my mind that 2022 was better than 2021, 2023 is going to be better than 2022 and 2024 will be better than 2023, I think every single data point we’re seeing is showing that," Piquero said.

Trump often focuses on crime in a few cities.

Murders are down 18% in New York City and 24% in Washington D.C. so far in 2024, according to police data, yet Trump continues to portray both cities as crime infested.


At his Georgia rally, Trump said businesses are going to leave New York “over crime” and described Washington D.C. as “a nightmare of murder and crime.”

“People from Georgia go down to Washington now and they get shot,” Trump said. “Horrible things are happening.”

Washington D.C. had 274 murders in 2023, the most since 1997, and up from 166 in 2019. So even if the 24% decrease holds for the entire year, the city would still be above the pre-pandemic murder level.

Yet the city's crime problem appears to be ebbing this year, with violent crimes down 25% and property crime down 13% so far when compared with the same period in 2023, according to the D.C. police department.


Trump’s crime rhetoric continued as his trial kicked off earlier this month in New York City on charges stemming from alleged hush money payments to an adult film star to hide an affair.

After the first day of jury selection, Trump emerged from the courtroom and attacked Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

“You go right outside and people are being mugged and killed all day long and he’s sitting here all day with about 10 or 12 prosecutors over nothing," the former president said.

Trump later visited a New York City bodega where a man was stabbed to death to further argue that the city has a crime problem. Earlier this month he held an event in Michigan with law enforcement to highlight crimes committed by undocumented immigrants, seizing on the case of Ruby Garcia, who was killed by her undocumented partner.

Garcia’s sister rebuked Trump for claiming he spoke with the slain woman’s family, which she said is not true.

The downward crime trend could hurt Trump’s efforts to deflect attention away from his own criminal cases by claiming there are bigger crime concerns. But polls show many Americans aren’t convinced crime is down.

A Gallup survey released in November found that 77% of Americans believe there is more crime than a year ago, despite FBI data showing the contrary.

The survey also found that more people say crime is an extremely or very serious problem now than in 2021, when murders actually increased.

That’s despite the fact that only 17% of people say crime is a big problem where they live.

That may be a sign that people’s opinions are driven more by political and media narratives around crime in faraway places than by the data.

Tcherni-Buzzeo said that “it may seem that… Trump makes people feel like crime is up,” but in her experience the mistaken belief that crime is increasing predates the former president’s political campaigns.

Going back more than a decade, whenever she asked students if crime is on the rise, the majority of the class would say yes, even though crime generally has been trending down since the 1990s.

Such beliefs may be “fueled by the fact this is what they see on the news,” she said.


The reality with violent crime is that “the trend is positive” recently and that should be the baseline for policy debates, Asher said.

“That does not endorse the level (of crime), it doesn’t mean there’s not work to do,” he said, adding: “But we don’t argue about whether the Chiefs won the Super Bowl.”

I think of you wish to address personal responsibility it deserves to be pointed out that people are often times selective about it. I'm sorry that the prime example of that we're seeing today is something you think should not be brought up. Okay, so I'm not sorry. But we see a lot of that. Blaming the messenger rather than addressing the message.


That's exactly the point I was trying to make which you seem to find that I should not have.


No it's not. It never is. The problem I see with it more than anything is two fold. One, once they start breaking the law they have nothing left to stand on. And two, which I find much more important is that as we can see by the numbers I pointed out earlier in the thread, the highest number of protestors on the Columbia campus numbered 400. Of that 400 less than or about half were actually affiliated with the university. Columbia University has well over 36k students. When you have a very small minority of students interfering with such a large portion of the student bodies education, action must be taken to address that. I consider it a very selfish act for those select students to think they have the right to interfere in the education of so many others.


Hurt? I'm not sure it should "hurt" per say but they should be removed and charged with whatever offenses apply.


I'm not sure exactly what you mean by overcompensate but that doesn't sound like a legal resolution. We have laws on the books and punishments in place concerning all of our laws. I believe in following those sentencing guidelines which are in place. Now if you are suggesting we stiffen some of the penalties regarding certain laws I would agree with you. There's a legal method by which to approach that. I'm not for arbitrarily being abusive to people because they break certain laws we don't like. As I said, I'm not sure what you meant by "over-compensate".

I believe the sentencing guidelines need to be increased for many laws. I believe the bonds need to go up for all violent offenders. What I don't want to see is laws put in place that would restrict or dissuade people from conducting legal, peaceful protesting.

I'm not a fan of extremism in either direction. As of now I don't think the laws go far enough. By the same token I don't want to see them go too far. As things stand today I think that is the only two choices people consider for the most part. Either too much or too little. And I don't see either of those two choices being good for our country.

Israel backers attack pro-Palestinian camp at UCLA, as NYC police arrest 300

LOS ANGELES/NEW YORK, May 1 (Reuters) - Supporters of Israel attacked a pro-Palestinian protest camp at the University of California in Los Angeles on Wednesday, hours after New York City police arrested some 300 protestors, as days of mounting tensions on some U.S. college campuses boiled over.

Eyewitness videos from UCLA, verified by Reuters, showed people wielding sticks or poles to hammer on wooden boards being used as makeshift barricades to protect the pro-Palestinian protesters before police were deployed to the campus.

On the other side of the country, New York police arrested pro-Palestinian demonstrators occupying an academic building at Columbia University and removed a two-week-old protest encampment that had inspired similar protests at campuses across the country and abroad.

Arrests at Columbia and nearby City College of New York numbered about 300, Mayor Eric Adams said, with many of them charged with trespassing and criminal mischief.

The clashes at UCLA and in New York are part of the biggest outpouring of U.S. student activism since the anti-racism rallies and marches of 2020. The protests were triggered by the Oct. 7 attack on southern Israel by Hamas militants from the Gaza Strip and the ensuing Israeli offensive on the Palestinian enclave.

Students have rallied or set up tent encampments at dozens of schools across the U.S. in recent days, expressing opposition to Israel's war in Gazaand demanding schools divest from companies that support Israel's government. Many of the schools have called in police to quell the protests.

With thepresidential electioncoming in November, Republican lawmakers have accused some university administrators of ignoring antisemitic rhetoric and harassment, some demanding that Columbia's president resign. Many protesters, some of whom are Jewish, reject allegations of antisemitism.

UCLA PROTESTERS REPORT VIOLENT ATTACKS

UCLA officials declared on Tuesday that the encampment was unlawful, violated university policy and included people unaffiliated with the campus.

Footage from the early hours showed counter-demonstrators, many of them masked and some apparently older than students, throwing objects and trying to smash or pull down the wooden and steel barriers erected to shield the encampment.

Some screamed pro-Jewish comments as pro-Palestinian protesters tried to fight them off.

"They were coming up here and just violently attacking us," said pro-Palestinian protester Kaia Shah, a researcher at UCLA. "I just didn't think they would ever get to this, escalate to this level, where our protest is met by counter-protesters who are violently hurting us, inflicting pain on us, when we are not doing anything to them."

Demonstrators on both sides used pepper spray, and fights broke out; pro-Palestinian demonstrators said the counterprotesters threw fireworks at them and beat them with bats and sticks.
Benjamin Kersten, a UCLA graduate student and member of the group Jewish Voice for Peace, called it "a devastating night of violence."

"The encampment would be a peaceful effort were it not for the continuous presence of counterprotestors and agitators," he wrote in a text message. "While Congress holds more hearings on whether Jewish students feel safe enough on campuses, Jewish students are among those withstanding attacks from Zionist protestors."

Police said UCLA called them to restore order and maintain public safety "due to multiple acts of violence" within the encampment. Broadcast footage later showed police clearing a central quad beside the encampment and erecting a metal crowd barrier in front of it.

The atmosphere was calmer on Wednesday. Hundreds of police officers and squad cars were on campus and lining its perimeter. It was unclear how many arrests were made or the number of people who were injured.

COLUMBIA DEMONSTRATORS ARRESTED

In New York, police had arrested dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators holed up in a building at Columbia University and removed a protest encampment that the Ivy League college had sought to dismantle for nearly two weeks.

Columbia President Minouche Shafik asked police to stay on campus until at least May 17, two days after graduation.

"Free, free Palestine!" protesters chanted outside the building. "Let the students go!"

"A lot of people are shaken. I think I'm forever changed by what happened today," said Bo Tang, a history student who has been part of the protesting students research group.

"The university fails to learn its own history and repeats its mistakes with such brutishness," Tang wrote in a text-message from the locked-down campus.

Ben Solomon, a 22-year-old Jewish student at Columbia, said he welcomed the move to clear the protesters from the occupied building and the encampment.

"I'm glad to see universities took decisive action," he said, as more than 100 students and professors gathered in a street adjoining the campus to protest the school's decision to call the police.

Columbia "must prevent this mob from taking back the campus and continuing to disrupt student life," Solomon said.

Shafik said the occupiers had vandalized university property and were trespassing, and her staff shared pictures of piles of furniture turned into barricades inside Hamilton Hall. She said the events filled her "with deep sadness."

"I am sorry we reached this point," she wrote in an email to the university community on Wednesday, saying that property damage was not "political speech" and promising efforts to reunite a frayed campus.

The university earlier warned that students taking part in the occupation faced academic expulsion.

Police were also called in to clear encampments and make arrests overnight at Tulane University in New Orleans, University of Arizona and City College of New York in Harlem.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/po...o-palestinian-campus-protest-2024-05-01/

It was a peaceful attack, lol. I see they're calling the protesting students a "research group". You can't make this stuff up. It really makes me want to pay for these student's loans.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/colum...iers-might-die-without-food-delivery.amp

Student agitator mocked for saying the protesters might die without food and water aid.

What the Reuters article doesn’t say is that Jewish students were being harassed and at least one was sent to the hospital when she was attacked by a group of pro Palestinian protesters earlier that day. There are other such incidents that I have read about.


The counter protesters have every right to be there if the university is going to allow protests. They do not have the right to attack people or property, even if they feel they are retaliating for crimes committed to them. The police should have never let these protests get out of hand if they were indeed called in by administration.

I saw that about the Jewish students. Man, that is some absolute crap. Unbelievable. I am starting to wonder about funding resources as well...

I read where funding was coming from Carnegie, Rockefeller and Soros. I’ll have to look it up again but Soros was the least of the three with something like 300k.

I'm always skeptical of something that says Soros is funding something. I don't like him at all and I think he's a sociopath, but it feels like almost every time something goes down that the far right points to Soros. Plus, wasn't he also a Jewish kid in Nazi-occupied Europe? That doesn't seem to pass the smell test.

I was thinking more along the lines of Iran. I obviously have no proof though.

https://nypost.com/2024/04/26/us-news/george-soros-maoist-fund-columbias-anti-israel-tent-city/amp/

I’ll have to find a more reputable source when I’m done eating.

As far as overseas interests Qutar

https://www.ocregister.com/2024/04/30/qatari-money-and-the-pro-palestinian-campus-takeovers/amp/

https://www.newsnationnow.com/world/israel-palestine/who-is-organizing-pro-palestine-protests/amp/

This link also blames the Rockefeller Trust

As to Soros. I know he is the bogie man to the right but that doesn’t mean he isn’t involved. There are many Jews that do back the Palestinian cause. Many of these groups seem to me to be legitimate ones. Well maybe not pro terrorist.

And I'm not trying to outright discredit what you're saying. Just that I always have a healthy dose of skepticism when he is accused because he's always pointed at by the right whenever anything unfortunate happens. I'll take a look at what you posted here soon.

I'm thinking that weren't celebrating total capitulation as Massie thinks. They were celebrating doing their jobs for once. You gotta consider that Massie is a follower of MTG? That should tell you what you need to know.

J/C

I’d like to know what these students or what anybody worldwide really thinks the USA can do to end the war between Israel and Palestine.

Rep. Henry Cuellar and his wife allegedly took nearly $600,000 in bribes, indictment says

Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas and his wife have been charged with accepting nearly $600,000 in bribes from two foreign entities, according to an indictment in federal court in Texas.

The alleged scheme took place from late 2014 through at least November 2021, the indictment says.

The congressman and his wife, Imelda Cuellar, made their initial court appearance on Friday in Houston and were released on a $100,000 bond. They are facing several charges, including conspiracy to commit bribery of a federal official, violating the ban on public officials acting as agents of a foreign principal and money laundering.

In a statement on Friday, Cuellar said: “I want to be clear that both my wife and I are innocent of these allegations. Everything I have done in Congress has been to serve the people of South Texas.”

Cuellar said in his statement that actions he took in Congress were “in the interest of the American people” and vowed to continue his bid for reelection in November. The congressman also defended his wife, saying that, “The allegation that she is anything but qualified and hard working is both wrong and offensive.”

“The actions I took in Congress were consistent with the actions of many of my colleagues and in the interest of the American people,” Cuellar said.

Prosecutors say that Henry and Imelda Cuellar crafted two yearslong schemes to get bribes from foreign entities – an oil and gas company “wholly owned and controlled by the Government of Azerbaijan, and a bank headquartered in Mexico City.”

In exchange for bribe payments from the Azerbaijan oil company, Cuellar “agreed to perform official acts in his capacity as a Member of Congress, to commit acts in violation of his official duties, and to act as an agent of the Government of Azerbaijan” and the bank, the indictment says.

Among those promises, prosecutors allege Cuellar agreed to influence US policy through a “series of legislative measures relating to Azerbaijan’s conflict with neighboring Armenia,” by giving a pro-Azerbaijani speech on the House floor, inserting language “favored by Azerbaijan” into legislation and committee reports, and advocating for “series of legislative measures relating to Azerbaijan’s conflict with neighboring Armenia.”

The Texas Democrat also allegedly promised to influence financial regulations in a way that would benefit the Mexican bank and its affiliates, including by working to pressure the Executive Branch on anti-money laundering enforcement practices that “threatened” their business interest and supporting revisions to the criminal money-laundering statutes.

The couple received the bribe payments through shell companies owned by Imelda Cuellar, prosecutors say. They allegedly used the proceeds from the bribery schemes to pay taxes, pay down debt and spend tens of thousands of dollars at restaurants and retail stores. One purchase was for a $12,000 custom gown, according to the indictment.

Cuellar’s home and campaign office in Laredo, Texas, were raided by the FBI in 2022. The charges against Cuellar are not yet publicly available.

A spokesperson for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries released a statement shortly after Cuellar’s charges were reported, saying that the congressman is entitled to the presumption of innocence. But, spokesperson Christie Stephenson said, Cuellar will temporarily step down from his top spot on a House Appropriations Subcommittee while the investigation is ongoing.

“Henry Cuellar has admirably devoted his career to public service and is a valued Member of the House Democratic Caucus. Like any American, Congressman Cuellar is entitled to his day in court and the presumption of innocence throughout the legal process,” Stephenson said.

The National Republican Congressional Committee swiftly called on Cuellar to resign.

“If his colleagues truly believe in putting ‘people over politics,’ they will call on him to resign. If not — they are hypocrites whose statements about public service aren’t worth the paper they’re written on,” Delanie Bomar, a spokesperson for the NRCC, said in a statement.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/03/politics/henry-cuellar-indictment-doj/index.html

He has been indicted by a grand jury. As such let the man stand trial and face the legal consequences if found guilty of any crimes. This isn't difficult. I have no reason or need to uphold him, make excuses why this isn't fair, call it a witch hunt or claim that somehow he is above the law. That's an easy decision to make.

What an idiot. He’s right up there with Menéndez, who is sadly still in office. A sad time in American politics when the vulnerability of money in our politics is on display for all to see.

Find someone who talks about you the way this clown talks about Stormy Daniels.

He's a true political shill. You couldn't pay me enough to watch that ass clown.

Did he expect her to wear a teddy and thigh highs to court?
Good grief what an A-hole

That was cringe as hell

Gold bars, basement carpeting and more. Here’s what prosecutors say bought off a US senator

Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey faces his second, distinct bribery and corruption trial in seven years starting Monday.

This new case is a complicated affair involving multiple gold bars, envelopes of cash, a Mercedes and a lot more that, prosecutors say, the powerful former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and his new wife (they got married during the alleged bribery scheme) obtained in exchange for helping a halal meat monopoly, granting favors for people from Egypt and Qatar and trying to influence a New Jersey prosecution.

Menendez, who has until June to announce if he’s running for reelection, has pleaded not guilty and denied all of the charges. He told CNN’s Manu Raju on Capitol Hill last week, “I am looking forward to proving my innocence.”

Also pleading not guilty and denying wrongdoing are his wife Nadine, who is also a named as a defendant, and two businessmen, Wael Hana and Fred Daibes, who have ties to Egypt and Qatar, respectively. Another man, New Jersey businessman Jose Uribe, on the other hand, has pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.

Here’s what prosecutors say the senator and his wife got:

Gold bars

Prosecutors say Hana and Daibes gave Menendez and his wife gold bars, which were seized by the FBI from the Menendez residence. After returning from a trip to Egypt and getting a ride home from the airport from Daibes’ driver, prosecutors say Menendez searched online for the price of a gold bar.

Envelopes full of cash

The indictment includes photos of piles of cash next to envelopes spread across jackets on which the senator’s name is embroidered. There are piles of $20 bills and $50 bills in one photo and $100 bills in another photo.

They also found cash in closets, a safe and Nadine Menendez’s safety deposit box. Some of the envelopes, according to prosecutors, bore fingerprints or DNA belonging to Daibes or his driver.

Total cash discovered: More than $480,000 in the home and more than $70,000 in the safety deposit box.

Later court filings that added charges in the case are more specific, describing bags full of cash being found on top of hangers in the senator’s basement and stuffed into boots in the closet.

Convertible Mercedes

The 2019 vehicle, which prosecutors value at more than $60,000, was parked in the driveway at the Menendez home when it was raided.

The indictment describes Nadine Menendez obtaining $15,000 in cash from Uribe in a parking lot the day before she picked the vehicle up and put $15,000 as a down payment. Uribe is alleged to have then hid his monthly financing payments for the vehicle.

Later, after the raid, she would write Uribe a $21,000 check, which prosecutors say was an effort at cleanup, making the gift look like a loan.

Nadine Menendez needed a new car, apparently after hitting and killing a jaywalker in Bogota, New Jersey, in December 2018. A police report was filed but she faced no charges.

Mortgage payment

Prosecutors say the senator and his wife also tried to cover up around $23,000 in help Nadine Menendez got from a halal meat company owned by Hana that bailed her out of foreclosure on a mortgage. Reimbursement checks were paid in December 2022, months after the initial raid on the senator’s house.

Payment for low- or no-show work

Hana’s company paid Nadine Menendez $10,000 on three occasions, according to prosecutors. At the time, they allege, she was acting as a sort of go-between for Egyptian officials, Hana and the senator.

Engagement ring

Prosecutors describe a recorded conversation between Hana and a confidential source in which Hana is described as obtaining $150,000 from a man to purchase a car and an engagement ring for Nadine Menendez in exchange for the senator giving a “push” in a New Jersey criminal case that saved the man three years.

Basement carpeting

Prosecutors said in their February court filing that Nadine Menendez arranged for carpeting to be installed in her basement, apparently in exchange for setting up dinners between the senator and officials – and also for his call, according to prosecutors, attempting to interfere in a New Jersey state prosecution.

Furniture

The initial September 2023 indictment makes several mentions of furniture and furnishings provided by Hana and Daibes but does not go into specifics.

Formula One tickets

In a superseding indictment filed in March, prosecutors allege Menendez obtained tickets to Formula One races in 2022 and 2023 for Nadine Menendez’s relative. Menendez made comments supportive of Qatar during that period and lobbied Qatari officials to invest in Daibes’ real estate venture, which they ultimately did.

Daibes is described as sending the senator pictures of luxury watches priced between roughly $10,000 and $24,000, but it is not clear from the filing if Menendez ever obtained a timepiece.
What’s the quid pro quo?

There is a long list of actions prosecutors say Menendez undertook in exchange for all of these alleged bribes. They allege Menendez, in his prior role as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

… lobbied the US Department of Agriculture to maintain Hana’s monopoly on US halal meat exports to Egypt, even though it drove up prices.

… met with Egyptian officials in exchange for cash.

… gave Hana not-classified but also not-public information about employees at the US embassy in Egypt.

… passed on information about US military sales to Egypt to Hana and signed off on certain sales.

… lobbied Qataris on behalf of Daibes’ real estate scheme and supported resolutions in the Senate supportive of Qatar.

… tried to influence court cases in New Jersey related to Uribe and his associates. Uribe, recall, is now cooperating with prosecutors.

… tried to disrupt a federal prosecution of Daibes.

Again, Menendez denies all the charges, and the jury that will get to hear his side of the story will begin to be selected in New York starting Monday. Nadine Menendez’s trial is slated for July.

Perhaps Menendez and his wife can convincingly argue the mortgage and car payments were a loan. Perhaps Menendez will argue he did not know about payments related to dinners and meetings organized by his wife. The envelopes of cash prosecutors say bore Daibes’ fingerprints may be more difficult to explain.

Menendez escaped previous bribery charge

Menendez is used to being under the microscope of federal prosecutors. The Department of Justice ultimately decided not to retry Menendez in 2018 after a previous jury deadlocked over whether he accepted trips and gifts from a friend, an ophthalmologist named Salomon Melgen.

Melgen went to prison in a separate Medicare fraud scheme, but that sentence was commuted by then-President Donald Trump after lobbying by Menendez on Melgen’s behalf.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/12/politics/menendez-gold-cash-what-matters/index.html

The trial is set to start tomorrow.

I love Lawrence! He’s a huge Trump troll after Trump watched his show and took numerous shots at him. He even went to the trial to watch Trump fry. Not a regular watcher, because his audience is more 70+, but I love anybody who can get under GOPer thin skin, especially Trump’s.

Menendez is a guy who has been flaunting that kind of corruption for years now, it seems at least, and just had an air about him that nothing would happen. Something I think that happens to a lot of people in power. Way too cocky.

It seems he took enough rope to hang himself on this one, and it also seems like he should spend the rest of his life behind bars.

From everything I've seen and read about it he looks guilty as hell and I hope he pays the price for it just like anyone else would.

This is something I watched last night that I found to be not only non partisan but quite accurate. It talks about not only the Menendez case but congress in general. It would have fit in the joke thread I suppose but I felt it went a little deeper than that..............

Defence for Bob Menendez casts blame on senator's wife

US Senator Bob Menendez's defence has sought to shift blame for his alleged bribe-taking to his wife, in opening statements at his corruption trial.

Nadine Menendez "kept him in the dark" on financial matters, the politician's attorney, Avi Weitzman, told the jury.

But prosecutor Lara Pomerantz said Mr Menendez, 70, used his wife as a go-between in trading political influence for money, gifts and gold bars.

The long-serving New Jersey Democrat "put his power up for sale", she said.

Mr Menendez is accused of accepting bribes, including gold bars and a Mercedes-Benz convertible, in exchange for helping foreign governments. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The trial, in a Manhattan federal court, could stretch to July. Mr Menendez is required to attend each day.

He was the top-ranking Democrat on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee for more than five years, which gave him sway over US foreign policy. He was removed as chairman after he was charged.

He married Nadine Menendez, who was born in Lebanon before moving to the US as a child, in 2020. She is being tried separately on her own bribery and corruption charges, to which she has pleaded not guilty.

Laying out the government's case against Mr Menendez, Ms Pomerantz took aim at what she described as a "betrayal" of the senator's oath of office.

"This was not politics as usual. This was politics for profit. This was a United States senator on the take," she said.

And, Ms Pomerantz said, the Democrat used his wife to help facilitate the deals. Mr Menendez was "too smart" to send texts and emails regarding the bribes himself, she alleged, so he advised his spouse on what to do.

Mr Menendez's defence team painted a different picture of the senator's marriage, portraying Mrs Menendez as a financially troubled individual who left her husband out of her scramble to resolve money problems and "to get cash and assets any way she could".

"Let me say this about Nadine: Nadine had financial concerns that she kept from Bob," said the defence attorney, Mr Weitzman.

They led separate lives, Mr Weitzman said, with Mr Menendez often focused on helping his constituents from his seat in Washington.

"The government's allegations that the senator sold his office and his loyalty to this country are outrageously false," Mr Weitzman said. "Bob was doing his job, and he was doing it right."

Wednesday's opening arguments followed more than two days of jury selection. Twelve jurors and six alternatives were ultimately chosen, a group that includes an investment banker, a doctor and some therapists.

Mr Menendez has been charged with 18 criminal counts, including bribery, extortion, wire fraud, obstruction of justice and acting as a foreign agent.

Investigators executing a search warrant at his home in September found more than $480,000 (£380,000) in cash stuffed in envelopes and coats, and 13 gold bars worth over $100,000.

Agents also found other apparent gifts, including a Mercedes-Benz and a range of home furnishings.

Prosecutors say the items discovered were part of a scheme to aid the government of Egypt. They also allege Mr Menendez accepted bribes to use his influence to benefit Qatar.

Mr Menendez is on trial with Fred Daibes, a New Jersey real estate developer who allegedly delivered the gold and cash to the senator, and businessman Wael Hana, who allegedly brokered a deal between Mr Menendez and the Egyptian government. Both Mr Daibes and Mr Hana have also pleaded not guilty.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69018443

Man, these guys are spineless. Just take it on the chin, like a man.

We are now living in a world where no bar is too low.