On Wednesday, June 19, a shareholder proposal sponsored by the National Legal and Policy Center will be presented by NLPC Chairman Peter Flaherty at the Alphabet (Google) annual meeting in Sunnyvale, California. Here is the text of the resolution and supporting statement:
WHEREAS, Company executives have aggressively allied themselves with a variety of progressive social and political causes at the same time sexual harassment is alleged to be a serious problem within the Company by many of the Company’s own employees.
This hypocrisy threatens the Company’s reputation. The fate of The Weinstein Company LLC, which has declared bankruptcy, underscores this risk.
Several public companies have lost billions in market capitalization shortly after executives have been accused of sexual misconduct, prompting lawsuits by shareholders.
Recent events have placed the Company’s policies and practices under scrutiny. In December 2017, then-Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors Eric Schmidt abruptly and unexpectedly stepped … Read More ➡
Democrat Rep. Elijah Cummings (MD), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, is facing accusations that he is using his position in Congress to financially benefit his wife, whose charity may have gained “illegal private benefit” from his committee activities.
Cummings’ wife, Maya Rockeymoore, is the chairman of the Maryland Democratic Party and she “runs two entities, a nonprofit group called the Center for Global Policy Solutions and a for-profit consulting firm called Global Policy Solutions, LLC, whose operations appear to have overlapped, according to the IRS complaint filed by watchdog group the National Legal and Policy Center,” The Washington Examiner reported, adding that Rockeymoore’s charity “received millions from special interest groups and corporations that had business before her husband’s committee and could have been used illegally.”
Andrew Miller will testify before the Grand Jury at 11:00 AM today. Miller’s appearance follows a nearly year-long court battle over the Constitutionality of the appointment former Special Counsel, Robert Mueller.
On Tuesday, May 28, 2019 Miller’s legal challenge was remanded from the D.C. Circuit to the District Court following its February 26, 2019 ruling rejecting the argument.
Miller’s attorney, Paul Kamenar, made a final attempt to quash Miller’s subpoena on the grounds that since Mueller’s investigation is over, and Roger Stone has been indicted, it would be improper under Department of Justice policy and precedent to use the Grand Jury to obtain pre-trial evidence on someone already indicted.
The exception to that rule is if the government is seeking to indict the defendant on other crimes or that were other possible targets for which evidence was needed – opening the door for compelling testimony.
Here are remarks of NLPC Chairman Peter Flaherty at the Facebook annual meeting today in Menlo Park, California in support of NLPC shareholder proposal on workplace diversity:
In response to this proposal promoting ideological diversity, the Company claims that “diversity of ideas is core to our business,” but then goes on cite initiatives that make the company less diverse, not more.
Like the fact that the company publishes data on the ethnicity and gender of the its workforce. Is it not racist and sexist to attribute certain thoughts and ideas to individuals based on their gender or race? Do all African-Americans think alike? How about all women?
Facebook huffs that “we do not collect data on the political ideology of our employees,” as if this would be somehow intrusive.
I’d suggest that it is a lot less intrusive than quizzing employees on the genetic makeup of … Read More ➡
NLPC Chairman Peter Flaherty delivered these remarks today in support of the group’s shareholder resolution on sexual harassment at the Amazon annual meeting in Seattle:
I CAN’T FIGURE OUT WHY MR. BEZOS OPPOSES THIS RESOLUTION TO COMBAT SEXUAL HARASSMENT. AFTER ALL, HE IS THE GREAT PROGRESSIVE AND ENLIGHTENED PUBLISHER OF THE WASHINGTON POST.
MAYBE HE OPPOSES IT FOR THE SAME REASON WE FILED IT. IT ‘S REALLY ABOUT HYPOCRISY.
BEZOS CLAIMS HE IS THE VICTIM OF SEXUAL BLACKMAIL, BUT I GUESS ONLY PROGRESSIVES CAN BE BLACKMAILED.
A LEXIS NEXIS SEARCH OF THE WASHINGTON POST FOR ARTICLES CONTAINING THE NAMES “MICHAEL AVENATTI” AND “STORMY DANIELS” YIELDS 513 RESULTS. IF YOU ADD IN THE SEARCH TERM OF “BLACKMAIL,” YOU GET 24 STORIES. BUT I COULDN’T FIND ONE IN WHICH THE TERM “BLACKMAIL” WAS USED IN REFERENCE TO WHAT AVENATTI WAS DOING TO DONALD TRUMP.
NLPC sent the following letter today to Hugh J. Hurwitz, Acting Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP):
We write to express serious concerns about the procurement process for a federally funded halfway house — or reentry center — in Washington D.C. Based on a review of news reports about the lone, federally contracted halfway house operator in the city, along with other publicly available information suggesting the process may be tainted by political interference, we urge the Bureau of Prisons to conduct a thorough review of this matter.
Hope Village’s decades-long contractual arrangement with the federal government is troubling – not to mention puzzling – given the litany of problems widely associated with the halfway home operator. Often referred to as “Hopeless Village” by local community members and returning citizens who have stayed there, the Southeast Washington halfway house has a long history of substandard care and a … Read More ➡
Andrew Miller, a former aide to Roger Stone, has filed a motion to stay the mandate in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that rejected his constitutional challenge to Special Counsel Robert Mueller in order to seek review of the court’s decision upholding his contempt of court for refusing to appear before the Mueller Grand Jury last June, 2018 in the U.S. Supreme Court.
In the motion, Miller’s attorney Paul Kamenar argued that a stay was justified because the petition to the Supreme Court will present “substantial questions” of Mueller’s constitutionality and that “good cause” exists justifying the short stay of the case from being remanded to the district court.
Kamenar represents Miller on a partial pro bono basis, and is supported by the National Legal and Policy Center.
The motion also cites Brett Kavanaugh to support Miller’s argument that Mueller should have been appointed as … Read More ➡
During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this morning with Attorney General William Barr discussing the Mueller Report, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) pressed Attorney General Barr about whether President Trump committed obstruction of justice by ordering White House Counsel Don McGahn to fire Special Counsel Mueller.
Barr responded that Trump merely ordered McGahn to contact Deputy AG Rosenstein to raise the issue that Mueller has a conflict of interest and that Rosenstein should decide whether that conflict justifies removing Mueller. Barr said that action by the President does not constitute an obstruction of justice. When asked by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to identify the conflict, Barr did not describe it but instead discussed the legal difference between firing a Special Counsel outright and removing him for a conflict to be replaced by another special counsel.
The answer to key question of what was Mueller’s conflict of interest will be answered in … Read More ➡
The delivery of Robert Mueller’s report to Attorney General William Barr does not mean the end of the constitutional challenge to the Special Counsel’s authority by Andrew Miller, who has been subpoenaed as a witness in the investigation.
Paul Kamenar, who represents Miller, commented, “Several days ago the Special Counsel notified us that they are still interested in having Andrew Miller testify before the grand jury regarding Roger Stone whose case is also being handled by the local U.S. Attorney.
We are pursuing further judicial review of our challenge to Mueller’s constitutional authority to issue his subpoena last June despite today’s action that indicates the Special Counsel has terminated his investigation.
Thus, it is not clear at this point whether any further request for Mr. Miller’s testimony will come from the U.S. Attorney’s office should we not prevail, or whether they will decide his testimony is no longer needed.”