Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

news.bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 112 posts

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#61

Post by solid_fuel »

sculper wrote: post #55
solid_fuel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This urge to defend the indefensible and “both sides” the most corrupt administration in American history is exactly the problem. Go take a look in the mirror.

Worth noting that the commenter you're replying to is only LARPing as a centrist. The comment history of his other (now-banned) accounts are directly at odds with some of the "truths" he claims to have realized. https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=complianceowl https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=owlcompliance

That’s very often the case with these guys. No one can seriously look at the modern political landscape in the United States and seriously claim that both parties are effectively the same, or even that they both bear equal responsibility for the terrible state of government.

The Republicans have been in the business of scrapping the US for parts since the 90’s, it’s just accelerating. At worst, the Democrats have been ineffective opposition and overly captured by corporate interests.

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#62

Post by snypher »

ceejayoz wrote: post #45
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people keep using things like this as their examples. JFK met with Khrushchev. Bush Senior and Reagan had regular contact with Gorbachev. It's not weird for heads of state to talk to each other. What's weird is for Trump to be paying tax dollars to cancel energy projects because he doesn't like windmills or using the FCC to investigate media outlets who criticize him. There are plenty of good e…

Because it's not quite the same; JFK et. al. weren't dumb enough to trust the Russians during those contacts. This administration, though… https://www.nbcnews.com/world/russia/russia-ukraine-war-trum... > President Donald Trump’s special envoy broke with long-standing protocol by not employing his own interpreter during three high-level meetings with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, opting instead to rely on translators from…

>Trump ... Putin without a translator

House of Cards used this same setup just to highlight how untrustworthy the president was acting.

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#63

Post by AnthonyMouse »

ceejayoz wrote: post #53
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You expect Putin of the KGB to presume the person he's speaking to doesn't have a recording device or the ability to remember the words he used and have them translated by someone else later? And if he did think that, wouldn't that be an advantage to the US of doing it that way, to capitalize on the chance he lets his guard down? And if he did let his guard down and Trump failed to capitalize on it, what disadvantage…

> You expect Putin of the KGB to presume the person he's speaking to doesn't have a recording device… Yes, I absolutely expect that sort of security at such a meeting.

You expect the Russians to strip search the President of the United States to check for a listening device when they know that person will be in the room to hear whatever is said anyway, and the US to agree to that?

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#64

Post by AnthonyMouse »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're implying that something would have changed if a different person was shot instead. Structural problems don't work like that. The individual players have the incentives created for them by the system. To change it you need to change the game, not the players.

> You're implying that something would have changed if a different person was shot instead. Structural problems don't work like that It would have sent the message its sender (and his supporters) intended to send. Instead, both sides got a convenient totem. Luigi's supporters get to pretend he was effective. The billionaire class got to consolidate power here and there by pretending he was more than a one off, and by…

You're still implying that it could have accomplished something if the target was someone else. Nobody involved with that company is the central pillar of The System the crumbling of which would allow the true revolution to finally come.

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#65

Post by AnthonyMouse »

ceejayoz wrote: post #51
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is an even more fanciful conspiracy theory since the objection was Trump not bringing his own translator, a person he could otherwise personally select for their loyalty to him.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/us/politics/trump-putin-i... > Only Mr. Trump, who has alternately contradicted his own narrative of what was said and complained about a lack of fair coverage from a meeting only four people witnessed, could permit Ms. Gross to tell anyone about what she heard. The White House has not said whether Mr. Trump has asked her to do that.

So now we can deduce what this is really about.

Translators are civil servants with security clearances, not reporters. When the leaders of Germany and Brazil have a meeting, they may say things they don't intend for China and everyone else to know about, and it isn't the translator's job to report what was said to the media. Unless they've witnessed something on the scale of criminality that they need to act as a whistleblower (in which case they wouldn't need anyone's permission), they should never be telling anyone what happened in the room since their job is to keep those secrets.

The media are fully aware of that, but they're being disingenuous and pretending that allowing a diplomatic translator to act as a media witness is a request anyone is likely to grant. Then Trump predictably responds to that by removing the translator from the room, so now they're complaining about that instead.

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#66

Post by AnthonyMouse »

sbayg wrote: post #54
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like the same class of complaining about something ridiculous. If Putin wants to lie to you about something, do you expect him to speak the truth in Russian and then have his translator tell you something else? What advantage would that have compared with lying to you in Russian and having it translated accurately?

Just because most of critics are brain dead morons doesn’t mean Trump is a great guy or above the same level of scrutiny shown to previous presidents.

That was literally the point. People should stop making farcical complaints that discredit the critics. When you cry wolf every day, eventually the wolf comes.

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#67

Post by tracker1 »

dd8601fn wrote: post #43
tracker1 wrote: post #18

This is just more than a little fucked up... I think we've "limited" liability way too much in terms of corporations... it's the investors that are meant to be protected, executives and board members are not meant to be immune. And I do think in the worst cases, the death penalty should be on the table. edit: to be clear, IMO, corporate power is an expression of govt power, which should be minimized.

At some point the broad strokes of libertarianism became exactly what we expected. Naked corruption and public harm, without consequences.

I'm literally talking about libertarian values and that we aren't getting consequences because they aren't followed.

Libertarians aren't generally in favor of limited liability. Read it again, slower.

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#68

Post by ceejayoz »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #63
ceejayoz wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You expect Putin of the KGB to presume the person he's speaking to doesn't have a recording device… Yes, I absolutely expect that sort of security at such a meeting.

You expect the Russians to strip search the President of the United States to check for a listening device when they know that person will be in the room to hear whatever is said anyway, and the US to agree to that?

I would expect the Russians to monitor for active electronic devices.

Re: DOJ Closing Abbott Labs Case Spurs Wider Corporate Crime Retreat

#69

Post by ceejayoz »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #65
ceejayoz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/us/politics/trump-putin-i... > Only Mr. Trump, who has alternately contradicted his own narrative of what was said and complained about a lack of fair coverage from a meeting only four people witnessed, could permit Ms. Gross to tell anyone about what she heard. The White House has not said whether Mr. Trump has asked her to do that.

So now we can deduce what this is really about. Translators are civil servants with security clearances, not reporters. When the leaders of Germany and Brazil have a meeting, they may say things they don't intend for China and everyone else to know about, and it isn't the translator's job to report what was said to the media. Unless they've witnessed something on the scale of criminality that they need to act as a wh…

> So now we can deduce what this is really about.

The fact that he can't keep his own story straight?

In either instance?

Post reply on HN