Weasel Mueller use of “does not exonerate him” improper in legal context, Exonerate has exact legal meaning, Throwing bone to weasel fake news media?

Weasel Mueller use of “does not exonerate him” improper in legal context, Exonerate has exact legal meaning, Throwing bone to weasel fake news media?

“Democrat mantra: The end justifies the means.”…Citizen Wells

“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

Speaking of weasel fake news media….

From the NY Times.

“Mueller Finds No Trump-Russia Conspiracy, but Stops Short of Exonerating President on Obstruction”

“Mr. Mueller’s team drew no conclusions about whether Mr. Trump illegally obstructed justice, Mr. Barr said, so he made his own decision. The attorney general and his deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, determined that the special counsel’s investigators had insufficient evidence to establish that the president committed that offense.

He cautioned, however, that Mr. Mueller’s report states that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him” on the obstruction of justice issue.”

Read more:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/24/us/politics/mueller-report-summary.html

I suppose I should have led off with weasel fake news NBC. They interrupted the coverage of the golf tournament with breaking news about the Barr letter.

They took the “bone” Mueller provided (exonerate) and chewed excessively on it.

As soon as I heard this, I knew the Orwellian intent.

From the Barr letter to the the House and Senate Judiciary Committees:

“After making a thorough factual investigation into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but
ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as
difficult issues of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5779688/AG-March-24-2019-Letter-to-House-and-Senate.pdf

This is a legal document, condensed from another legal document produced by Mueller.

Exonerate has a special legal meaning.

From Black’s Law Dictionary:

“To lift, remove the stain of being called out for blame, liability, or punishment. It is more that just freeing an accused person of the responsibility for a criminal or otherwise illegal or wrongful act. It is publicly stating that this accused should never have been accused in the first place. Refer to acquit and exculpate.”

From US Legal:

“Exoneration refers to a court order that discharges a person from liability. In criminal context the term exonerate refers to a state where a person convicted of a crime is later proved to be innocent. Exoneration may lead to controversies when the person exonerated was convicted for death penalty. The term exoneration is also referred in the context of surety bail bonds. In this case, a judge may order a bond exonerated, in such cases the clerk of the court time, stamps the original bail bond power and indicates exonerated as the judicial order.”

PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS NEVER ACCUSED OF OR CONVICTED OF A CRIME!

The end justifies the means.

The narrative continues.

I refer you to Orwell.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Rachel Maddow crying? others in Fake News in despair over Mueller report?, Twitter bans users and James Woods rejoices

Rachel Maddow crying? others in Fake News in despair over Mueller report?, Twitter bans users and James Woods rejoices

“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.”… William Tecumseh Sherman

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

“”You’re a traitor!” yelled the boy. “You’re a thought criminal!””…George Orwell, “1984”

 

From Zero Hedge.

“Twitter Bans User For Laughing At Rachel Maddow’s Tears Of Despair Over Mueller Report

As left-wing news outlets were forced to cover the completion of the Mueller report sans high-level indictments (Trump Jr., for example), Rachel Maddow had a grand-mal meltdown after having been forced by MSNBC to cancel a fishing trip and drive in to work on a Friday night.

Maddow fought back tears as she reported on her own collapsing narrative, to which Twitter user ‘Karli Bonne’ (@kbq2251) posted a video of herself laughing at Maddow’s despair.

As the video began to go viral, Twitter suspended her account.

Bonne then tweeted the video from another account (@kbq225) which was quickly amplified by several people, including actor James Woods, who truly gives zero f*cks now that Hollywood has blacklisted him for being openly conservative.

 

James Woods

@RealJamesWoods

either choking on kitty litter chunks or facing the hard cold reality she’s the worst journalist in television history. Always certain, but rarely right…

20.8K people are talking about this

James Woods

@RealJamesWoods

was actually crying. Crying! Not since her drunken liar goddess got pummeled in the election have I seen such agony etched onto the face of this bonehead. Dear God, this is so much fun…

25.3K people are talking about this

Karli Bonne’⭐️⭐️⭐️@kbq225

Cry me a river!!! They just suspended my account again!! @kbq2251 wth not even a email this time O well here we go again!! Thanks schills I’m still lol no collusion!😂🤣🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/a1ZxE7AsUY

1,816 people are talking about this

ALX 🇺🇸 ❌@alx

The original account (@kbq2251) who posted the video of Rachel Maddow Crying has been Suspended by Twitter.

Spread this video everywhere because Twitter obviously doesn’t want you to see it. pic.twitter.com/Gq6iSYIfMT

5,526 people are talking about this

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter

Chuck Ross@ChuckRossDC

Don’t know whether Maddow was crying or not, but the @kbq2251 Twitter account that claimed she was has been suspended

1,494 people are talking about this

While Twitter’s ban of Karli may have backfired due to the Streisand effect (not the Streisand defect), reactions to Maddow’s meltdown have been hilarious. ”

Read more:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-23/twitter-bans-user-laughing-rachel-maddows-tears-despair-over-mueller-report

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Thrivent Financial vs Perez Department of Labor Acosta DOL, Status of lawsuits, Defense of alternative dispute resolution with mandated arbitration

Thrivent Financial vs Perez Department of Labor Acosta DOL, Status of lawsuits, Defense of alternative dispute resolution with mandated arbitration

“The MDRP is the sole means for presenting and resolving grievances, complaints, or disputes between Members, insureds, certificate owners or beneficiaries and Thrivent or Thrivent’s directors, officers, agents and employees. The MDRP reflects Thrivent’s Christian belief system and strives to preserve Members’ fraternal relationship.”…Thrivent v. Perez Sept. 29, 2016

“Thrivent contends that its commitment to individual arbitration is ‘”important to the membership because it reflects Thrivent’s Christian Common Bond, helps preserve members’ fraternal relationships, and avoids protracted and adversarial litigation that could undermine Thrivent’s core mission.’”…Thrivent v. Acosta Nov. 3, 2017

“pre-dispute mandatory arbitration provisions are inappropriate in insurance policies and incompatible with the legal duties insurers owe policyholders when handling their claims.”…NAIC, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, August 15, 2016

 

From Bloomberg  Sept. 29, 2016.

“Thrivent Financial for Lutherans is accusing the Department of Labor of exceeding its statutory authority by attempting, with its new fiduciary rule, to force all disputes into federal court rather than allowing for alternative dispute resolution methods (Thrivent Financial for Lutherans v. Perez, D. Minn., 0:16-cv-03289, complaint filed 9/29/16).

Thrivent’s lawsuit, filed Sept. 29 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, takes aim at the rule’s “best interest contract” (BIC) exemption”

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/employee-benefits/thrivent-financial-joins-fray-in-challenging-dols-fiduciary-rule?context=article-related

From the lawsuit.

“Thrivent’s Member Dispute Resolution Program
42. Thrivent’s MDRP is incorporated into all of Thrivent’s fraternal insurance contracts through the open contract provision by which Thrivent’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws are incorporated into all Thrivent insurance contracts, as required under state law. The MDRP Bylaw was adopted by Thrivent’s Member-elected Board of Directors as a part of Thrivent’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws in 1999 (at which time Thrivent was known as AAL). In so doing, Thrivent’s Board of Directors determined that the MDRP is in the best interests of Thrivent’s Membership.

43. The MDRP Bylaw, which is Section 11 of Thrivent’s Bylaws, requires binding, mandatory arbitration for any Member disputes with Thrivent. Section 11 “applies to all past, current and future benefit certificates, members, insureds, certificate owners, beneficiaries and the Society. It applies to all claims, actions, disputes and grievances of any kind or nature whatsoever. It includes, but is not limited to, claims based on breach of benefit contract[.]” Bylaws, § 11(b). “No lawsuits or any other actions may be brought for any claims or disputes covered by” Section 11. Id. § 11(c).

44. The MDRP is the sole means for presenting and resolving grievances, complaints, or disputes between Members, insureds, certificate owners or beneficiaries and Thrivent or Thrivent’s directors, officers, agents and employees. The MDRP reflects Thrivent’s Christian belief system and strives to preserve Members’ fraternal relationship.”

“47. A key benefit of the MDRP is that it preserves the fraternal relationship between Thrivent and its Members by avoiding adversarial litigation that could threaten to undermine the organization’s core mission. Thrivent’s Bylaws provide that no lawsuits or other actions are permitted for claims or disputes covered by the MDRP. Thrivent’s MDRP provides for resolution of disputes on an individual basis, involving Thrivent and the Members. Representative or class actions are not permitted under the MDRP Bylaw, which provides that “no disputes may be brought forward in a representative group or on behalf of or against any ‘class’ of persons, and the disputes of multiple members, insureds, certificate owners or beneficiaries (other than immediate family) may not be joined together for purposes of these procedures.” See Bylaws, § 11(e).
48. The MDRP is consistent with Thrivent’s fraternal nature, consistent with the Christian belief system of its Members, and reflects the careful balancing between Thrivent’s and its Members’ desire for a prompt, fair and efficient resolution of disputes, on the one hand, and the protection of the interests of all Members on the other. As such, the MDRP is an integral part of Thrivent’s governance structure. Experience has shown that the MDRP not only provides a fair and efficient process for dispute resolution, but is also in the best interest of Members.”

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/Thrivent_Financial_for_Lutherans_v_Perez_et_al_Docket_No_016cv032?1552582945

DOL temporarily stopped enforcing anti-arbitration provision.

“Thrivent Financial for Lutherans convinced a federal judge in Minnesota to temporarily stop the Labor Department from enforcing the fiduciary rule’s anti-arbitration provision against the nonprofit financial entity.

Thrivent showed the threat of irreparable harm to its business model, both now and in the future, was sufficient to have its request for a preliminary injunction granted, Judge Susan Richard Nelson held Nov. 3 (Thrivent Fin. for Lutherans v. Acosta, 2017 BL 396118, D. Minn., No. 0:16-cv-03289-SRN-DTS, order granting preliminary injunction 11/3/17″

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/employee-benefits/thrivent-financial-wins-battle-over-labor-dept-arbitration-ban?context=article-related

Status report January 2, 2018.

“While the administrative process continues forward, it is not yet complete. On November 29, 2017, the Department published in the Federal Register a final rule extending the transition period and delay of applicability dates for the relevant prohibited transaction exemptions from January 1, 2018 to July 1, 2019. See 82 Fed. Reg. 56545 (Nov. 29, 2017). The Department believes that this administrative delay will provide the Department time to complete its review of the underlying Fiduciary Rule and related exemptions and its intended proposal of “a new streamlined class exemption.” Id. at 56548. The Department believes that both its review and any proposed changes can be implemented before July 1, 2019. See id. at 56552 (explaining the Department’s belief that the additional time “is sufficient to complete review of the new information in the record and to implement changes to the Fiduciary Rule and/or PTEs, if any, including opportunity for notice and comment and coordination with other regulatory agencies”) ”

https://www.dolfiduciaryrule.com/portalresource/ThriventvPerez2018-01-02ECF112JointStatusReport.pdf

Status report July 2, 2018.

“Pursuant to the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order dated November 3, 2017, the parties submit this joint status report to address whether a continued stay of proceedings is necessary. The parties agree that a continued stay of proceedings is appropriate and anticipate providing a subsequent report to the Court on September 4, 2018.

In its Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting the “implementation and enforcement of the BIC Exemption’s anti-arbitration condition against Thrivent . . . until the conclusion of this litigation or such time as the Court so orders.” ECF No. 111 at 19. The Court also stayed the case, concluding that “[s]taying this matter will allow the administrative process to fully develop, possibly resolving this dispute, and thereby promoting judicial economy.””

https://www.napa-net.org/sites/napa-net.org/files/uploads/thrivent-dol-status-report.pdf

A status report for September 2018 has not been located.

However, the following suggests the Department of Labor is continuing to work on the “Fiduciary Rule and Prohibited Transaction Exemptions.”

RIN Data

DOL/EBSA RIN: 1210-AB82 Publication ID: Fall 2018
Title: Fiduciary Rule and Prohibited Transaction Exemptions
Abstract:The Department of Labor in 1975 issued a regulation defining who is “fiduciary” under section 3(21)(A)(ii) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) as a result of giving investment advice for a fee or other compensation.  On April 8, 2016, the Department replaced the 1975 regulation with a new regulatory definition.  The new regulatory definition was vacated in toto in Chamber of Commerce v. Department of Labor, 885 F.3d 360 (5th Cir. 2018).  The Department is considering regulatory options in light of the Fifth Circuit opinion.
Agency: Department of Labor(DOL) Priority: Other Significant
RIN Status: Previously published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Final Rule Stage
Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No
EO 13771 Designation: Deregulatory
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined     (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1002 (ERISA sec. 3(21))    29 U.S.C. 1108 (ERISA sec. 408)
Legal Deadline:  None
Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite
Request for Information (RFI) 07/06/2017 82 FR 31278
RFI Comment Period End 08/08/2017
Final Rule 09/00/2019

https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201810&RIN=1210-AB82

How will this play out? Who knows.

The NAIC in 2016 stated: “pre-dispute mandatory arbitration provisions are inappropriate in insurance policies and incompatible with the legal duties insurers owe policyholders when handling their claims.”

Hopefully justice will prevail.

***  Update Mar 15, 2019  ***

According to a USDOJ attorney who worked on the lawsuit, it has ended.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Binding arbitration game is rigged against customers, New analysis of almost 9000 arbitration cases confirms biased against consumers, Incentives to slant toward the business

Binding arbitration game is rigged against customers, New analysis of almost 9000 arbitration cases confirms biased against consumers, Incentives to slant toward the business

“pre-dispute mandatory arbitration provisions are inappropriate in insurance policies and incompatible with the legal duties insurers owe policyholders when handling their claims.”…NAIC, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, August 15, 2016

“Companies don’t want to go to court because it puts them on a level playing field. Courts are ruled by law, legal precedent, and legal discovery, which allows litigants to obtain information and evidence from their opponents or from third parties. Discovery is a privilege in arbitration, but not a right. Arbitrators can’t enforce subpoenas, meaning you have to file a lawsuit just to get a third party or a piece of information into the hearing. In open court, you don’t have to jump through nearly as many hoops. Further, judgments in court are often more favorable to the consumer, both in the rate of success and the dollar amount of judgments.”…North Carolina Consumers Council

“Thrivent contends that its commitment to individual arbitration is ‘”important to the membership because it reflects Thrivent’s Christian Common Bond, helps preserve members’ fraternal relationships, and avoids protracted and adversarial litigation that could undermine Thrivent’s core mission.’”…Thrivent v. Acosta Nov. 3, 2017

 

From Stanford Business March 8, 2019.

“Why the Binding Arbitration Game Is Rigged against Customers

A new study documents how companies shop for sympathetic arbitrators, and how the arbitrators compete for their business.”

“It’s the “mandatory arbitration” clause, and it’s in contracts that cover trillions of dollars of business. In the event you have a dispute with the company, it says, you agree in advance to surrender your right to sue and to submit your grievance to a supposedly neutral private arbitrator.

Almost every financial firm insists on mandatory arbitration, but so do legions of businesses in other realms: AT&T and Verizon, Amazon and Apple, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, even Spotify and Shazam.

Now, a new analysis of almost 9,000 arbitration cases from the securities industry confirms what many have long suspected: The system is biased against consumers — and not just because big companies have more money to spend on lawyers.

When it comes to arbitration, the study finds, companies have a big information advantage in fishing for arbitrators who are likely to rule in their favor.

Making matters worse, the arbitrators themselves know that being pro-company in one case greatly increases their chances of being picked for future cases.

An Incentive to Slant

“This is not like having judges, who get paid the same no matter what happens,” says Stanford Graduate School of Business finance professor Amit Seru, who collaborated on the study with Mark Egan at Harvard Business School and Gregor Matvos at the University of Texas at Austin. “Here, you only get paid if you’re selected as an arbitrator. They have incentives to slant toward the business side, because they know that those who don’t do so won’t get picked. Everyone knows what’s happening.”

In their study, the researchers scrutinized thousands of customer disputes with stockbrokers and investment advisors. The data came from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, which oversees the industry’s arbitration process.

The researchers began by confirming that some arbitrators are measurably more business-friendly than others. Comparing cases on an apples-to-apples basis, the researchers estimated that business-friendly arbitrators awarded customers about 12% less money than their more pro-consumer counterparts. On an average case, that equates to about $90,000.

That was just the start, however. Even though the list from which arbitrators are picked is random, pro-business arbitrators were about 40% more likely to be chosen, so their bias had a disproportionate impact. If the arbitrators had been picked purely at random, the researchers estimated, the average award to each customer would have been $50,000 higher.”

Read more:

https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/why-binding-arbitration-game-rigged-against-customers

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Neurotoxin Aluminum in vaccines, Mother’s food, Breast milk and infant formulas and other products ingested in utero and after birth, Cumulative 4925 micrograms by 18 months in injections

Neurotoxin Aluminum in vaccines, Mother’s food, Breast milk and infant formulas and other products ingested in utero and after birth, Cumulative 4925 micrograms by 18 months in injections

“Aluminum, used as a adjuvant in many vaccines, is a neuro toxin. Why are we injecting it in tiny babies?”…Citizen Wells

“Mercury is a highly toxic element; there is no known safe level of exposure. Ideally, neither children nor adults should have any mercury in their bodies because it provides no physiological benefit.”…National Institute of Health

“”You’re a traitor!” yelled the boy. “You’re a thought criminal!””…George Orwell, “1984”

 

I have argued for some time that autism may be caused by the cumulative affect of putting too many harmful substances in babies in utero and shortly after birth.

At least 2 of those substances, mercury and aluminum are neuro toxins.

It never made sense to me to put neuro toxins in vaccines and then bombard young babies with too many of the vaccines at once or over a short period of time.

And also to ignore other methods of ingesting neuro toxins such as those absorbed by their mothers and passed along in utero or in mother’s milk after birth.

I am not against vaccines.

I am against stupid.

https://citizenwells.com/2018/04/30/vaccines-link-to-stupid-autism-link-to-stupid-mercury-and-toxic-substances-link-to-stupid-adults-link-to-stupid-there-is-an-epidemic-of-stupid-in-this-country-and-we-are-not-protecting-our-childre/

Do vaccines cause autism?

It is clear that the substances in vaccines, especially the neuro toxins,  probably are contributing factors. Especially when we bombard the young and helpless.

Increased amounts of aluminum in the brain are now linked to Alzheimers.

From Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Childrens Health Defense.

“A variety of recent studies have focused on aluminum overload prenatally and perinatally. Nowhere is the overexposure to aluminum more apparent than in childhood vaccines. A two-month-old infant may receive up 1,225 micrograms of aluminum from the adjuvants in vaccines at a single well-baby appointment and a cumulative 4,925 micrograms by 18 months of age—astronomical levels that have never been assessed for safety. A 2018 analysis concluded that the reasoning that has allowed such high levels of aluminum to remain in childhood vaccines is deeply flawed and “place[s] infants at risk of acute, repeated, and possibly chronic exposures of toxic levels of aluminum.”

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/aluminum-and-mercury-synergy-a-perfect-storm/

From the CDC.

Common substances found in vaccines include:

Aluminum gels or salts of aluminum which are added as adjuvants to help the vaccine stimulate a better response. Adjuvants help promote an earlier, more potent response, and more persistent immune response to the vaccine.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm

From the US Department of Health Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

“Health Effects

The most sensitive target of aluminum toxicity is the nervous system.
Impaired performance on neurobehavioral tests of motor
function, sensory function, and cognitive function have been observed
in animals. Neurobehavioral alterations have been observed following exposure
of adult or weanling animals and in animals exposed during gestation
and/or lactation.”

“Children’s Health

Children who are exposed to high levels of aluminum exhibit symptoms
similar to those seen in adults, including neurological effects and skeletal effects.

We do not know if children are more susceptible than adults to aluminum
toxicity.”

https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxguides/toxguide-22.pdf

From the NIH.

“Infants’ exposure to aluminum from vaccines and breast milk during the first 6 months.”

“The success of vaccination programs in reducing and eliminating infectious diseases has contributed to an ever-increasing number of vaccines given at earlier ages (newborns and infants). Exposure to low levels of environmental toxic substances (including metals) at an early age raises plausible concerns over increasingly lower neuro-cognitive rates. Current immunization schedules with vaccines containing aluminum (as adjuvant) are given to infants”

“Pragmatic vaccine safety needs to embrace conventional toxicology, addressing especial characteristics of unborn fetuses, neonates and infants exposed to low levels of aluminum, and ethylmercury traditionally considered innocuous to the central nervous system.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20010978

From the World Journal of Pediatrics.

“Aluminum exposure and toxicity in neonates: a practical guide to halt aluminum overload in the prenatal and perinatal periods”

“Background: During the last years, human newborns have been overexposed to biologically reactive aluminum, with possible relevant consequences on their future health and on their susceptibility to a variety of diseases. Children, newborns and particularly preterm neonates are at an increased risk of aluminum toxicity because of their relative immaturity.”

“Introduction

Human newborns are experiencing a massive exposure to biologically reactive aluminum, with possible relevant consequences on their future health and susceptibility to a variety of disease states.[1] Although it is not absolutely well established that aluminum causes adverse effects on human health, children, newborns and particularly preterm neonates are at an increased risk of aluminum toxicity because of anatomic, physiologic and nutrition-related factors
not present in other populations.[2] Preterm infants have recently been included among the four groups of people at elevated risk of systemic aluminum intoxication after repeated ingestion of monomeric aluminum salts.[3] Aluminum overload has been demonstrated in neonates, particularly in premature infants undergoing parenteral nutrition or receiving intravenous fluid
therapy”

“In conclusion, it is clear that aluminum represents a significant component of newborns’ exposure to xenobiotics and contaminants, that preterm infants
are at a high risk of aluminum overload with possible pathological consequences, not only in the perinatal period, but even in childhood and adulthood. An
ambitious but measured plan aimed at preventing aluminum overexposure in neonates should be initiated by the community of gynecologists and neonatologists, starting with the following options: alerting the medical
community about the risk of aluminum exposure in the early period of life; and extending with caution information to pregnant women and to mothers about the vulnerability of infants to early exposure to this metal ion, eventually forcing manufacturers to indicate the level of aluminum contamination in every
neonatal product. Such a plan may put perinatologists at the center of a new challenge: to reduce aluminumrelated human pathology, not only in neonates but even in children and adults, probably participating in the prevention of the epidemic increase of neurodegenerative diseases of elderly people.”

http://www.wjpch.com/UploadFile/14-101.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Thrivent Ethisphere “ethics recognition”  2019 World’s Most Ethical Companies, One of best awards money can buy?, Chris MacDonald: take awards “with a grain of salt.”

Thrivent Ethisphere “ethics recognition”  2019 World’s Most Ethical Companies, One of best awards money can buy?, Chris MacDonald: take awards “with a grain of salt.”

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks”… “Hamlet”, William Shakespeare

“the awarding of an ethics accolade to a company that gives you money just doesn’t pass the smell test.”…LA Times October 27, 2014

“The secret of life is honesty, and fair
dealing. If you can fake that you’ve got it made.”…Groucho Marx

 

If your company is ethical, you should not have to advertise it. Customers, employees and those you deal with will know.

From Thrivent February 26, 2019.

“THRIVENT NAMED ONE OF THE WORLD’S MOST ETHICAL COMPANIES® BY ETHISPHERE FOR THE 8TH TIME”

“Thrivent, a not-for-profit membership organization that helps members be wise with money and live generously, has been recognized by the Ethisphere Institute, a global leader in defining and advancing the standards of ethical business practices, as one of the 2019 World’s Most Ethical Companies.

Thrivent has been recognized eight years in a row and is one of only five honorees in the financial services industry.

In 2019, 128 honorees were recognized spanning 21 countries and 50 industries. The 13th class of honorees profoundly illustrates how companies continue to be the driving force for improving communities, building capable and empowered workforces, and fostering corporate cultures focused on ethics and a strong sense of purpose.

“We’re proud to once again be named one of the World’s Most Ethical Companies,” said Terry Rasmussen, president and CEO of Thrivent. “At Thrivent, we are purposeful and intentional about following ethical business practices and ensuring our actions reflect commitment, collaboration and care. Setting this high standard helps us fulfill our mission of serving more Christians on their wise with money journeys.”

Said Ethisphere’s Chief Executive Officer, Timothy Erblich: “Today, employees, investors and stakeholders are putting their greatest trust in companies to take leadership on societal issues. Companies that take the long view with a purpose-based strategy are proven to not only outperform but last. I congratulate everyone at Thrivent for earning this recognition.”

Methodology & Scoring
The World’s Most Ethical Companies assessment is based upon the Ethisphere Institute’s Ethics Quotient® (EQ) framework, which offers a quantitative way to assess a company’s performance in an objective, consistent and standardized manner. The information collected provides a comprehensive sampling of definitive criteria of core competencies rather than all aspects of corporate governance, risk, sustainability, compliance and ethics.

Scores are generated in five key categories: ethics and compliance program (35 percent), culture of ethics (20 percent), corporate citizenship and responsibility (20 percent), governance (15 percent) and leadership and reputation (10 percent). All companies that participate in the assessment process receive their scores, providing them with valuable insights into how they stack up against leading organizations.”

Read more:

https://www.thrivent.com/newsroom/thrivent-named-one-of-the-worlds-most-ethical-companies-by-ethisphere.html

Why does Thrivent go to such lengths to tout this award?

Is Thrivent buying this award?

Does the award really mean anything?

Consider the following:

“For the last seven years, Thrivent has been honored to be named a World’s Most Ethical Company,” said Brad Hewitt, CEO of Thrivent. “As we serve our members and carry out what it means to be an ethical company through our actions and business practices, we are pleased to be recognized as leaders in setting a standard that we hope will continue to develop within the business community.”

_____

“The Ethisphere Insitute, which describes itself as “a leading international think-tank dedicated to the creation, advancement and sharing of best practices in business ethics, corporate social responsibility, anti-corruption and sustainability,” is actually a for-profit company. The institute also lends itself credibility with an “advisory panel” of ethicists, yet several former members say they’ve had little if anything to do with it. Finally, the institute and an affiliated company sell services to and collect fees from some of the same companies Ethisphere extols.”

“The scoring is based mostly on information provided by the companies themselves, and Ethisphere says its questionnaire should take 30 to 40 minutes to complete. Ethisphere then asks companies for documentation to support survey answers and reviews other sources, such as news articles, court records, and Consumer Reports. Ethisphere says it reviewed more than 10,000 corporations for last year’s list.

Brigham acknowledges that the system is imperfect. “Could they be lying to us?” he says. “Sure, they could. … Over time, we’re going to have to figure out how to verify that. And no one is going to pay us to verify it, and if we try to charge them to verify it, we’re going to have reporters like you make it sound like we’re getting paid off.”

Ethisphere says its methodology was developed with the help of a panel of independent experts. But as I dialed up half a dozen of the 20 committee members, I found only one (George Ash) who said he actually contributed to shaping the methodology. Others said they made a suggestion that wasn’t heeded (Thomas Donaldson), or didn’t seriously analyze the methodology (Patrick Barwise, John Dienhart, Chris MacDonald), or didn’t know they were on the panel (Karen Paul). Ethisphere says that it assumed panel members who didn’t respond to its queries simply agreed with the methodology and that each member explicitly agreed to be on the panel. Since my inquiries, Ethisphere has named a new, smaller panel, and none of the people I spoke to are still on it.”

“It’s tempting, of course, to dismiss all this as just corporate window-dressing, and in fact Canadian ethicist Chris MacDonald, who until recently was on Ethisphere’s advisory panel, warned me to take such awards “with a grain of salt.””

_____

“Apparently, Blue Shield and Ethisphere haven’t quite grasped that the appearance of a conflict can be just as troubling as an actual conflict.

Nor do they seem to understand that the awarding of an ethics accolade to a company that gives you money just doesn’t pass the smell test.

Hey, remember when things like ethics mattered?

Blue Shield doesn’t. Neither does the Ethisphere Institute.”

https://citizenwells.com/2018/05/27/thrivent-buys-ethics-awards-touts-christian-values-the-ethics-of-firms-paying-to-be-honored-for-ethics-ethisphere-institute-worlds-most-ethical-companies-thrivent-touts-these-ethics-awa/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Democrat mouthpiece Greensboro News Record opinion, Judge overturn of Voter ID amendment, “ginned up by phony claims of voter fraud” What???

Democrat mouthpiece Greensboro News Record opinion, Judge overturn of Voter ID amendment, “ginned up by phony claims of voter fraud” What???

“Other payments which are disclosed on Bladen County Improvement Association PAC contribution reports include
the following:

Mary Johnson, witness for 74 ballots, $450;
Lola Wooten, witness for 58 ballots, $500;
Deborah Cogdell, witness for 45 ballots (including both witnesses on 1 ballot), $300; and
Bridgette Keaton, witness for 16 ballots, $630.”…Bladen County NC election protest 2016

“What is your threshold for acceptable voter fraud since 1 vote can win most elections?”…Citizen Wells

“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

I delivered the Greensboro News Record as a youth.

Since its demise as a proper news reporting entity has already occurred, I will celebrate its eventual closing when it happens for what it has become. A mouthpiece for the Democrat Party.

From the Greensboro News Record Opinion column February 28, 2019.

“A judge’s ruling last week that nullifies two amendments to the N.C. Constitution was the wrong solution to the right problems. And it should be overturned on appeal.

One amendment requires voter ID at the ballot; the other permanently lowers the cap on state income tax rates from 10 percent to 7 percent. Both were ill-conceived and unnecessary.

But the voters approved both provisions on a statewide ballot by solid margins. The voter ID amendment passed with 55.6 percent of voters approving. The new cap on state income tax rates passed with 57 percent of the vote. Both should stand unless the amendments themselves fail legal challenges.

The state NAACP sued over the amendments, and Wake County Superior Court Judge Bryan Collins ruled in its favor. Collins wrote in his decision that the state legislature “is so gerrymandered that its members don’t truly represent the people of the state and thus should never have proposed constitutional amendments in the first place.””

“Make no mistake, the voter ID amendment was ginned up by phony claims of voter fraud. It disenfranchises the poor and minorities. And yes, the income tax rate amendment is shortsighted, tying the state’s hands in ways that could prevent it from meeting future needs that require public investment. Both still may be overturned for legitimate reasons.

But the referendum on the amendments in November was not gerrymandered. Every eligible voter had an opportunity to weigh in, regardless of party or district. And the yeas prevailed.

“These amendments were placed on the ballot and passed by an overwhelming majority of North Carolinians,” N.C. GOP Chairman Robin Hayes said in a written statement. “This unprecedented and absurd ruling by a liberal judge is the very definition of judicial activism.”

We don’t agree with Hayes on much. But in this case, he’s right.

The state GOP plans to appeal, and the case ultimately could reach the state Supreme Court, where we hope the voters’ desires will carry more weight.”

Read more:

https://www.greensboro.com/opinion/n_and_r_editorials/our-opinion-judge-s-amendments-ruling-is-the-wrong-remedy/article_c37a8513-697d-5d69-ae77-7e8a9b9da525.html

It is a shame that the Greensboro News Record, the paper I delivered as a youth, is so in bed with the Democrat Party that it cannot report the truth without injecting the party line.

“The state GOP plans to appeal, and the case ultimately could reach the state Supreme Court, where we hope the voters’ desires will carry more weight.”

That just had to put the following party lines (lies) in:

  1. “the voter ID amendment was ginned up by phony claims of voter fraud.”
  2. “It disenfranchises the poor and minorities.”

Voter ID disenfranchises no one! It treats everyone the same.

Phony claims of voter fraud?

“From the Greensboro News Record December 3, 2016.

“MCCRORY ASKS SBI TO LOOK INTO POTENTIAL VOTER FRAUD

The State Board of Elections dismissed a complaint originating from a rural North Carolina county that could have prevented scores of ballots from being counted in close races for governor and auditor.

The board voted 3-2 on Saturday to reject the protest from a Bladen County candidate, who with assistance from Republican Gov. Pat McCrory’s campaign, alleged workers for a political committee that received Democratic funds fraudulently filled out absentee ballots.

Lawyers pushing the complaint suggested the board could throw out as many as 419 mail-in absentee ballots. They said evidence showed that a losing write-in candidate for soil and water conservation district supervisor showed up on nearly 170 ballots and may have originated from only seven people. The lawyers said none of those ballots should be tallied for any races.”

“”We have an obligation to ensure that every vote is counted accurately and that our elections process is conducted legally,” said McCrory. “Any verified instance of voter fraud or other illegal activity should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.””

https://citizenwells.com/2016/12/04/nc-state-board-of-elections-denies-bladen-county-protest-that-implicated-north-carolina-democrat-party-of-possible-fraud-criminal-investigation-mentioned-in-nov-20-meeting-perkins-coie-helped-obama/

From Citizen Wells November 25, 2016.

“NC State Board of Elections meeting audio reveals widespread voter fraud, Greensboro News Record lies again”

“Square what the News Record and the rest of the disgusting mainstream media has “reported” versus the following.

Hey News Record editors. Did you listen to the entire State Board of Elections meeting?

I did.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2016/11/25/nc-state-board-of-elections-meeting-audio-reveals-widespread-voter-fraud-greensboro-news-record-lies-again-339-felons-voted-illegally-nc-democrat-party-complicit-in-bladen-county-fraud-reckless/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/