down state news

Most Popular Past Articles
  • 06:22 - 27.10.2009 News >> Latest

     Warren Buffett is missing the point on tax? The billionare investor is missing the point on paying taxes.     

    Read more...
  • 10:17 - 21.05.2010 News >> Latest

     Reforms put Wall Street in its placePassage of Obama's financial reform bill restores Wall Street to its proper role as the economy's servant – and not its master Thomas Noyes guardian.co.uk, Friday 21 May 2010 Article history Barack Obama described passage of the financial reform bill as a victory over Wall Street's blocking tactics. Photograph: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images The Senate last night passed a comprehensive financial reform bill by a vote of 59 to 39 after weeks of amendments and a series of cloture votes failed to derail the measure.Passage of S.3127, the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010, represents a clear victory for Barack Obama, who made this his next big legislative priority after healthcare. Obama hailed the bill's passage, noting "The recession we're emerging from was primarily caused by a lack of responsibility and accountability from Wall Street to Washington." Legislation usually becomes watered down as it winds its way through the maze of committee markups and amendments. But this bill got stronger as the process unfolded, particularly after the Goldman Sachs scandal involving mortgage-backed securities came to light. The firm's abysmal performance in front of a Senate committee reminded people why Wall Street needs adult supervision.The most important provision in the bill may be the Volcker Rule, which restricts the ability of banks to trade on their own account. Goldman Sachs became the poster child for this kind of trading when it was revealed that the firm was selling mortgage-backed securities designed by an investment partner who was shorting mortgages. These trades led to charges from the Securities and Exchange Commission and prompted a federal criminal investigation into the firm's dubious practices.

    Last year, former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker…

    Read more...
  • 07:49 - 02.09.2009 News >> Latest

      Princess Diana: death 'was not an accident' says leading lawyer  The death of Diana, Princess of Wales, was not an accident, according to the memoirs of lawyer Michael Mansfield who represented Mohamed Fayed at the inquest into the crash.   By Alastair Jamieson
    Published: 7:30AM BST 02 Sep 2009
      

    The 1997 accident in the Alma Tunnel in Paris still poses unanswered questions despite lengthy inquest at the High Court, he claims in his book, Memoirs of a Radical Lawyer. The 67-year-old QC, who has represented clients in high profile cases ranging from the family of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence to the Birmingham Six, insisted the inquest had not been a waste of time and that Mr Fayed was entitled to the procedure as “a grieving father”. In the book, which is being serialised in The Times, he wrote: “I found it difficult simply to accept that what happened in the Alma Tunnel in Paris was ‘just one of those tragic things’. Of course it might have been, but then that’s what “they” always hope we will think. “Judging whether a hidden hand is at work is always difficult, but I prefer a healthy and inquisitive assessment of the authorised version, and for me it was mere serendipity to be approached a year after the crash and asked to represent Mohamed Al Fayed for the purposes of an inquest.” He added: “There is still a widespread belief that the inquest was a waste of time and money and came to no different conclusion than previous investigations and inquiries. This is a serious misconception. “On April 7, 2008, the jury did not decide it was just a tragic accident but returned a verdict of unlawful killing by the drivers of both the Mercedes and…

    Read more...
  • 10:28 - 27.08.2010 News >> Latest

     The last refuge of a liberal
    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, August 27, 2010
     Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the "bitter" people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging "to guns or religion or" -- this part is less remembered -- "antipathy toward people who aren't like them." That's a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking. -- Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president. -- Disgust and alarm with the federal government's unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism. -- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia. -- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia. Now we know why the country has become "ungovernable," last year's excuse for the Democrats' failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes? Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities -- often lopsided majorities -- oppose President Obama's social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, Obamacare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a mosque near Ground Zero. What's a liberal to…

    Read more...
  • 06:50 - 07.08.2010 News >> Latest

      Stephen Crowley/The New York TimesGreenspan Calls for Bush Tax Cuts RepealBy SEWELL CHAN Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve, above, said keeping the cuts would drive up borrowing costs and could lead to another financial crisis. Read Article   

    Read more...
DownState News
Home
News
Blog
Contact Us
Search
David Axelrod - All Pro Blocking Back. Print E-mail

 

David Axelrod talks about the New Yorker piece, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed and White House-Justice Department tensions in C-SPAN interview

By Anne E. Kornblut


Is the White House unhappy that Attorney General Eric Holder sought to try the confessed 9/11 mastermind in Manhattan federal court?

Yes, according to an article by Jane Mayer in the latest issue of the New Yorker.

And in an interview late Friday, senior adviser David Axelrod did not dispute that a rift had emerged between the White House and the Justice Department over the 9/11 case, which has recently become a political sore spot for the administration.

Despite a rising tide of opposition to having a trial in Manhattan, which has sent the administration scrambling to find another location, Axelrod said it was not a mistake for Holder to announce the trial would be held there. But Axelrod did not defend it -- or portray it in any way as a decision that came from the White House. "The attorney general was responding under the protocol that was developed between the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense for the prosecution of terrorists," Axelrod said in an interview for C-SPAN's "Newsmakers" series set to air on Sunday.

Acknowledging White House resistance to the Justice Department decisions, Axelrod continued: "Rahm has a perspective that's different. He's the chief of staff. He looks at things from a legislative perspective, he looks at things from other perspectives."

Rahm Emanuel, Mayer reported, strongly opposed giving the 9/11 plotters a civilian trial.

"Believe me, we have disagreements all the time within the White House, within the administration," Axelrod said. "That's as it should be. People have different perspectives, different points of view."

Maybe so. But it is not every day that a senior administration official admits it.

Privately, White House officials have expressed increasing frustration with Holder since last year, in large part because of his decision to investigate whether past CIA interrogation techniques were illegal. In the New Yorker piece, Mayer writes that Emanuel was frustrated not only that Holder took a backward-looking approach toward the CIA investigations but also try Khaled Sheikh Mohammed in federal court -- despite objections from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), an important administration ally on other issues, including the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention center.

A sharp partisan debate over national security policy has arisen over the last few weeks as Republicans have objected to the administration's handling of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian arrested after allegedly trying to bomb a plane as it landed in Detroit on Christmas Day. Sen. Scott Brown rode to victory in Massachusetts in part by criticizing the detainee policy, accusing Obama of giving terrorists "new rights." Other Republicans echoed the claim, based in part on inaccurate reports that Abdulmutallab had stopped cooperating with investigators after he was read his Miranda rights.

Axelrod, in the interview, described all such criticism as unfounded. He repeated a list of earlier suspects handled by the Bush administration in a similar way. "We haven't invested anybody with one more right than they had before we took office," he said. "And we're actually not behaving any differently than the last administration did. Which raises the question: is this really about politics, or is it about dealing with the issue?"

 

 

 
< Prev   Next >
Latest News
Links
UpState News

© 2010 Down State News - created by JiaWebDesign web design and development