Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
Trump Administration
Author Message
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,692
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 111
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #10561
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 01:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 01:20 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 11:10 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 10:59 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 10:53 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Deflect? Hard enough to get you guys to talk about anything that makes sense, if it reflects even a tiny bit well on Trump, like the economy or China or USMCA. Nope, always return to Orange Man Bad.

Gimme a "D", gimme an "E", gimme a...

Get where I'm going?

I ask about whether you think Trump cares about corruption after posting an article that discusses changing US policy that is meant to fight foreign corruption, and how do you respond? Two responses that don't actually answer the question.

Just SO quick to to C, O, N, D, E, M, ...get where I am going with this.

I didn't care about the little tempest in teapot and the loaded question about a topic of which I know nothing, but I did have something I wanted to post and was not sure which thread was best.

Deflection implies I was uncomfortable with the topic and wanted to change it. Not the case, sweetheart.

But I did go ahead and respond as best I could, while you were so quickly pulling the trigger on me. (can I say trigger?)

Good morning to you, too.

Asking whether or not you think Trump cares about corruption is NOT a loaded question. My goodness.

If you had wanted to not deflect from my statement, just submit your post as a new post and not a response. But you did deflect by only talking about the reporting source (Bloomberg) and not the subject (FCSA).

Sweetheart, you did not respond at all to my post about Trump and his admin either not liking the the FCSA or wanting to modify it.

So again, do you think Trump cares about corruption based on this reporting?

\Post 10557

edit; after posting, I realized that you would only be satisfied with a yes or no answer.

Yes.
Now I have answered your question, your turn.

based on the reported actions of Joe and Hunter Biden in and about the Ukraine, do you think he cares about corruption?

No, I don’t think Trump’s actions in Ukraine, with respect to the Bidens, indicates he cares about fighting corruption. I think his actions have been entirely self-serving in that regard, and he is actually more interested in furthering foreign corruption, than fighting it.

His admin has pushed to cut funding to a Ukrainian program focused on fighting corruption in Ukraine. His admin rolled back transparency laws in 2017 for the oil and gas industry. And, most recently, we have found out that he has no interest in the FCSA, which is one of the most powerful anti-foreign corruption laws we have.

If Trump was legitimately interested in fighting foreign corruption, we would have examples of him strengthening these areas, not complaining that our laws keep our companies from playing in a corrupt game of bribery and quid pro quo.
01-18-2020 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,853
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3214
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #10562
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 02:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  No, I don’t think Trump’s actions in Ukraine, with respect to the Bidens, indicates he cares about fighting corruption. I think his actions have been entirely self-serving in that regard, and he is actually more interested in furthering foreign corruption, than fighting it.

But you would probably think that regardless of what the facts were.

Quote:His admin has pushed to cut funding to a Ukrainian program focused on fighting corruption in Ukraine. His admin rolled back transparency laws in 2017 for the oil and gas industry. And, most recently, we have found out that he has no interest in the FCSA, which is one of the most powerful anti-foreign corruption laws we have.
If Trump was legitimately interested in fighting foreign corruption, we would have examples of him strengthening these areas, not complaining that our laws keep our companies from playing in a corrupt game of bribery and quid pro quo.

There is a fairly widespread and well-supported belief that FCPA goes too far in some areas and serves as a significant and counterproductive barrier to US companies seeking to do business honestly in foreign countries. I happen to agree with that belief. You obviously don't. I doubt I'm going to change your mind, and. you're not going to change mind, so we should probably just agree to disagree.
01-18-2020 02:51 PM
Find all posts by this user
mrbig Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,662
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 127
I Root For: Rice
Location: New Orleans
Post: #10563
RE: Trump Administration
Like Lad, I am also curious how the FCPA overreaches. He asked earlier and did not get any responses.
01-18-2020 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,692
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 111
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #10564
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 02:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 02:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  No, I don’t think Trump’s actions in Ukraine, with respect to the Bidens, indicates he cares about fighting corruption. I think his actions have been entirely self-serving in that regard, and he is actually more interested in furthering foreign corruption, than fighting it.

But you would probably think that regardless of what the facts were.

Quote:His admin has pushed to cut funding to a Ukrainian program focused on fighting corruption in Ukraine. His admin rolled back transparency laws in 2017 for the oil and gas industry. And, most recently, we have found out that he has no interest in the FCSA, which is one of the most powerful anti-foreign corruption laws we have.
If Trump was legitimately interested in fighting foreign corruption, we would have examples of him strengthening these areas, not complaining that our laws keep our companies from playing in a corrupt game of bribery and quid pro quo.

There is a fairly widespread and well-supported belief that FCPA goes too far in some areas and serves as a significant and counterproductive barrier to US companies seeking to do business honestly in foreign countries. I happen to agree with that belief. You obviously don't. I doubt I'm going to change your mind, and. you're not going to change mind, so we should probably just agree to disagree.

I asked once already - what parts go too far?

And if Trump didn't have a history before his presidency and after his election, of being a shady land developer or curbing, not promoting anti-corruption measures or transparency, then I would believe him when he says he wants to fight corruption. I mean, I believe he wants to build a wall because he actively tries to build a wall...

Do you have any evidence of him fighting foreign corruption as POTUS?
01-18-2020 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,853
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3214
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #10565
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 03:12 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 02:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 02:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  No, I don’t think Trump’s actions in Ukraine, with respect to the Bidens, indicates he cares about fighting corruption. I think his actions have been entirely self-serving in that regard, and he is actually more interested in furthering foreign corruption, than fighting it.
But you would probably think that regardless of what the facts were.
Quote:His admin has pushed to cut funding to a Ukrainian program focused on fighting corruption in Ukraine. His admin rolled back transparency laws in 2017 for the oil and gas industry. And, most recently, we have found out that he has no interest in the FCSA, which is one of the most powerful anti-foreign corruption laws we have.
If Trump was legitimately interested in fighting foreign corruption, we would have examples of him strengthening these areas, not complaining that our laws keep our companies from playing in a corrupt game of bribery and quid pro quo.
There is a fairly widespread and well-supported belief that FCPA goes too far in some areas and serves as a significant and counterproductive barrier to US companies seeking to do business honestly in foreign countries. I happen to agree with that belief. You obviously don't. I doubt I'm going to change your mind, and. you're not going to change mind, so we should probably just agree to disagree.
I asked once already - what parts go too far?

One thought that I have had would be to adopt the point of view that if it illegal in the most country, then it violates US law, but if it is legal in the host country then it does not. This would still represent a fairly strong anti-corruption position, but would not create 1) a disadvantage for US citizens or companies working there, or 2) resentment among host countries who do not appreciate the insinuation that we are somehow better than, or above, them.

Quote:And if Trump didn't have a history before his presidency and after his election, of being a shady land developer or curbing, not promoting anti-corruption measures or transparency, then I would believe him when he says he wants to fight corruption. I mean, I believe he wants to build a wall because he actively tries to build a wall...

Trump was a land developer. I've seen no indication that he was particularly more or less shady than the industry as a whole.

Quote:Do you have any evidence of him fighting foreign corruption as POTUS?

Yes.

There is certainly what could be construed as fitting corruption in is pushing to have Burisma investigated, because there are certainly multiple facts to suggest corruption there. And he has used China very hard to adopt different standards in dealing with corruption, particularly around te theft of intellectual property. Those are two off the top of my head.
01-18-2020 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,778
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 857
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #10566
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 02:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 01:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 01:20 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 11:10 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 10:59 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Gimme a "D", gimme an "E", gimme a...

Get where I'm going?

I ask about whether you think Trump cares about corruption after posting an article that discusses changing US policy that is meant to fight foreign corruption, and how do you respond? Two responses that don't actually answer the question.

Just SO quick to to C, O, N, D, E, M, ...get where I am going with this.

I didn't care about the little tempest in teapot and the loaded question about a topic of which I know nothing, but I did have something I wanted to post and was not sure which thread was best.

Deflection implies I was uncomfortable with the topic and wanted to change it. Not the case, sweetheart.

But I did go ahead and respond as best I could, while you were so quickly pulling the trigger on me. (can I say trigger?)

Good morning to you, too.

Asking whether or not you think Trump cares about corruption is NOT a loaded question. My goodness.

If you had wanted to not deflect from my statement, just submit your post as a new post and not a response. But you did deflect by only talking about the reporting source (Bloomberg) and not the subject (FCSA).

Sweetheart, you did not respond at all to my post about Trump and his admin either not liking the the FCSA or wanting to modify it.

So again, do you think Trump cares about corruption based on this reporting?

\Post 10557

edit; after posting, I realized that you would only be satisfied with a yes or no answer.

Yes.
Now I have answered your question, your turn.

based on the reported actions of Joe and Hunter Biden in and about the Ukraine, do you think he cares about corruption?

No, I don’t think Trump’s actions in Ukraine, with respect to the Bidens, indicates he cares about fighting corruption. I think his actions have been entirely self-serving in that regard, and he is actually more interested in furthering foreign corruption, than fighting it.

His admin has pushed to cut funding to a Ukrainian program focused on fighting corruption in Ukraine. His admin rolled back transparency laws in 2017 for the oil and gas industry. And, most recently, we have found out that he has no interest in the FCSA, which is one of the most powerful anti-foreign corruption laws we have.

If Trump was legitimately interested in fighting foreign corruption, we would have examples of him strengthening these areas, not complaining that our laws keep our companies from playing in a corrupt game of bribery and quid pro quo.

Sorry, I was not clear. I was asking if, with respect to his actions and Hunter's actions in the Ukraine, does BIDEN give a flying $%#& about corruption?
01-18-2020 03:48 PM
Find all posts by this user
Fountains of Wayne Graham Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 288
Joined: Jun 2019
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #10567
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 11:03 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In my dealing in Mexico, I often had to bribe somebody, either directly or indirectly. It is a part of their system. Have you ever heard the saying, "When in Rome..."?

Lots of jobs in Mexico pay next to nothing, but are bought(yes, bought) with the expectation that that they can make a decent living off the bribes. Much like here, where waiters are expected to make most of their money from tips. Bribe, tip, what's the difference?

I don't know what this Act says, but it sounds like another effort to spread our morals to the rest of the world. A little bit of moral imperialism.

Frankly, I don't care if one of our companies outbribes a Chinese company to get a contract. Sometimes you have t play the game the way everybody else is playing, not the way your mama says to play.

This is how terrorism gets funded.
01-18-2020 03:54 PM
Find all posts by this user
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,778
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 857
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #10568
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 03:54 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 11:03 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In my dealing in Mexico, I often had to bribe somebody, either directly or indirectly. It is a part of their system. Have you ever heard the saying, "When in Rome..."?

Lots of jobs in Mexico pay next to nothing, but are bought(yes, bought) with the expectation that that they can make a decent living off the bribes. Much like here, where waiters are expected to make most of their money from tips. Bribe, tip, what's the difference?

I don't know what this Act says, but it sounds like another effort to spread our morals to the rest of the world. A little bit of moral imperialism.

Frankly, I don't care if one of our companies outbribes a Chinese company to get a contract. Sometimes you have t play the game the way everybody else is playing, not the way your mama says to play.

This is how terrorism gets funded.

Well, if I were as prickly as Big, I might say you have called me a terrorist supporter.

But I'm not, so I won't say that.

Somehow, I doubt the $20 I slipped to the immigration inspector in Juarez funded much terrorism. More likely it funded the supermercado where he bought his leche and papas. But I do not doubt that the $20 saved me several hours and an inspection, every time.
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2020 04:15 PM by OptimisticOwl.)
01-18-2020 04:12 PM
Find all posts by this user
Foff Offline
Banned

Posts: 60
Joined: Jan 2019
I Root For: You
Location:
Post: #10569
RE: Trump Administration
(01-13-2020 10:46 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Harris is also known for seeking and obtaining unreasonably harsh sentences for minor drug crimes as a prosecutor, at the same time she was using marijuana herself.

false. except for her being a prosecutor. is this intentional lie, or are you simply misinformed??
01-18-2020 04:15 PM
Find all posts by this user
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,853
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3214
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #10570
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 04:15 PM)Foff Wrote:  
(01-13-2020 10:46 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Harris is also known for seeking and obtaining unreasonably harsh sentences for minor drug crimes as a prosecutor, at the same time she was using marijuana herself.
false. except for her being a prosecutor. is this intentional lie, or are you simply misinformed??

Not misinformed at all. I think the record is pretty clear. It was certainly clear enough that Tulsi Gabbard attacked her about it in a debate, after which Harris's campaign pretty much tanked. I suppose I might have said "seeking unreasonably harsh sentences for minor offenders of various sorts."
01-18-2020 04:46 PM
Find all posts by this user
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,692
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 111
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #10571
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 03:29 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 03:12 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 02:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 02:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  No, I don’t think Trump’s actions in Ukraine, with respect to the Bidens, indicates he cares about fighting corruption. I think his actions have been entirely self-serving in that regard, and he is actually more interested in furthering foreign corruption, than fighting it.
But you would probably think that regardless of what the facts were.
Quote:His admin has pushed to cut funding to a Ukrainian program focused on fighting corruption in Ukraine. His admin rolled back transparency laws in 2017 for the oil and gas industry. And, most recently, we have found out that he has no interest in the FCSA, which is one of the most powerful anti-foreign corruption laws we have.
If Trump was legitimately interested in fighting foreign corruption, we would have examples of him strengthening these areas, not complaining that our laws keep our companies from playing in a corrupt game of bribery and quid pro quo.
There is a fairly widespread and well-supported belief that FCPA goes too far in some areas and serves as a significant and counterproductive barrier to US companies seeking to do business honestly in foreign countries. I happen to agree with that belief. You obviously don't. I doubt I'm going to change your mind, and. you're not going to change mind, so we should probably just agree to disagree.
I asked once already - what parts go too far?

One thought that I have had would be to adopt the point of view that if it illegal in the most country, then it violates US law, but if it is legal in the host country then it does not. This would still represent a fairly strong anti-corruption position, but would not create 1) a disadvantage for US citizens or companies working there, or 2) resentment among host countries who do not appreciate the insinuation that we are somehow better than, or above, them.

Quote:And if Trump didn't have a history before his presidency and after his election, of being a shady land developer or curbing, not promoting anti-corruption measures or transparency, then I would believe him when he says he wants to fight corruption. I mean, I believe he wants to build a wall because he actively tries to build a wall...

Trump was a land developer. I've seen no indication that he was particularly more or less shady than the industry as a whole.

Quote:Do you have any evidence of him fighting foreign corruption as POTUS?

Yes.

There is certainly what could be construed as fitting corruption in is pushing to have Burisma investigated, because there are certainly multiple facts to suggest corruption there. And he has used China very hard to adopt different standards in dealing with corruption, particularly around te theft of intellectual property. Those are two off the top of my head.

So, in short, if US-connected company #1 wants to do business honestly in a host country that runs on bribery, we should have the position that says, “sucks to be you,” and allow US-connected company #2, which is less ethical, bribe their way to the top? So we should be turning a blind eye to, and effectually encouraging, corruption?

It makes way more sense to take the position that companies doing business in the US are going to be held to a higher standard when they operate outside the US. This will encourage countries to change their practices if they want to do business with America (which they obviously do), because they won’t have access to high-end firms that won’t risk their access to the American market or profits.

The FCPA is not enforced on American based companies, so we’re able to use the allure of access to the American market to influence how firms like Siemens and Alstom operate (they have been fined hefty sums via the FCPA).
01-18-2020 05:25 PM
Find all posts by this user
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,853
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3214
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #10572
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 05:25 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So, in short, if US-connected company #1 wants to do business honestly in a host country that runs on bribery, we should have the position that says, “sucks to be you,” and allow US-connected company #2, which is less ethical, bribe their way to the top? So we should be turning a blind eye to, and effectually encouraging, corruption?

First, I'm not aware of any country where out-and-out bribery is legal. There are differing levels of what is acceptable and what is not. Do we want to make large parts of the world inaccessible to US companies in order to impose our concepts of morality on everyone else? That is not an effective way to make friends and influence people.

Quote:It makes way more sense to take the position that companies doing business in the US are going to be held to a higher standard when they operate outside the US. This will encourage countries to change their practices if they want to do business with America (which they obviously do), because they won’t have access to high-end firms that won’t risk their access to the American market or profits.

No, it will just encourage European and Asian companies to mock and laugh at US companies, as they are taking business away from them--just like now. And it will encourage the people of those foreign countries to resent our efforts to impose our concept of morality upon them--just like now.

Quote:The FCPA is not enforced on American based companies, so we’re able to use the allure of access to the American market to influence how firms like Siemens and Alstom operate (they have been fined hefty sums via the FCPA).

Not enforced on American-based companies? What do you mean by that?
01-18-2020 06:12 PM
Find all posts by this user
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,692
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 111
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #10573
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 06:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 05:25 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So, in short, if US-connected company #1 wants to do business honestly in a host country that runs on bribery, we should have the position that says, “sucks to be you,” and allow US-connected company #2, which is less ethical, bribe their way to the top? So we should be turning a blind eye to, and effectually encouraging, corruption?

First, I'm not aware of any country where out-and-out bribery is legal. There are differing levels of what is acceptable and what is not. Do we want to make large parts of the world inaccessible to US companies in order to impose our concepts of morality on everyone else? That is not an effective way to make friends and influence people.

Quote:It makes way more sense to take the position that companies doing business in the US are going to be held to a higher standard when they operate outside the US. This will encourage countries to change their practices if they want to do business with America (which they obviously do), because they won’t have access to high-end firms that won’t risk their access to the American market or profits.

No, it will just encourage European and Asian companies to mock and laugh at US companies, as they are taking business away from them--just like now. And it will encourage the people of those foreign countries to resent our efforts to impose our concept of morality upon them--just like now.

Quote:The FCPA is not enforced on American based companies, so we’re able to use the allure of access to the American market to influence how firms like Siemens and Alstom operate (they have been fined hefty sums via the FCPA).

Not enforced on American-based companies? What do you mean by that?

To the last item - the FCPA is enforced on companies that do business in America. They do not have to be based in the US to be fined. Hence how Siemens and Alstom were fined.

Quote: Until the early 2000s, the FCPA was rarely enforced. But all of that has changed; some of the most significant U.S. corporate criminal prosecutions of recent years have involved FCPA violations. Many of these have involved foreign companies. For example, in 2008, the German company Siemens paid approximately $800 million to DOJ and the Securities and Exchange Commission to settle FCPA charges. In 2014, the French company Alstom paid $772 million to settle FCPA charges. According to one authoritative source, eight of the top 10 FCPA settlements (as measured by the fines imposed) involved foreign companies.

https://www.afsa.org/fcpa-and-rule-law-abroad

So why does the FCPA encourage foreign-based companies to laugh at US-based ones, when they are being held to the same standard?????
01-18-2020 06:26 PM
Find all posts by this user
Tomball Owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,547
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #10574
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 06:26 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So why does the FCPA encourage foreign-based companies to laugh at US-based ones, when they are being held to the same standard?????

Because not all business is done in the US?
01-18-2020 07:45 PM
Find all posts by this user
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,692
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 111
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #10575
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 07:45 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 06:26 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So why does the FCPA encourage foreign-based companies to laugh at US-based ones, when they are being held to the same standard?????

Because not all business is done in the US?

The FCPA allows the SEC to charge businesses not based in the US for their actions outside the US. So how does it benefit foreign based companies if they’re treated the same as American based ones?

The only way foreign companies are advantaged is if they don’t operate in the largest market in the world.
01-18-2020 08:58 PM
Find all posts by this user
tanqtonic Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,160
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 775
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #10576
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 08:58 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 07:45 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 06:26 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So why does the FCPA encourage foreign-based companies to laugh at US-based ones, when they are being held to the same standard?????

Because not all business is done in the US?

The FCPA allows the SEC to charge businesses not based in the US for their actions outside the US. So how does it benefit foreign based companies if they’re treated the same as American based ones?

The only way foreign companies are advantaged is if they don’t operate in the largest market in the world.

You are wrong to a great extent.

The Siemens case was an SEC action, and the jurisdiction was founded upon Siemens being publicly traded on US stock exchanges.

Alstom jurisdiction got severely curtailed by A 2nd Circuit ruling in August 2018. The Second Circuit emphasized “a basic premise of our legal system that, in general, United States law governs domestically but does not rule the world.” Extraterritorial application of United States law without a significant tether to the United States is exceedingly rare -- pretty much non-existent.

The FCPA dragnet is limited strictly to the statute:

the FCPA provides for jurisdiction ONLY over the following four categories of persons:

American citizens, nationals or residents, regardless of whether their conduct occurred in the U.S. or abroad;

American companies, regardless of whether their conduct occurred in the U.S. or abroad;

Agents, employees, officers, directors and shareholders of American companies, including both U.S. and foreign persons, when they act on the company’s behalf, regardless of whether their conduct occurred in the U.S. or abroad; and

Foreign persons (including foreign nationals and foreign companies) who violate the FCPA while present in the U.S.

Your bald statement above is just factually incorrect.

Edited to add specific cite: United States v. Hoskins, No. 16-1010-CR (2d Cir. Aug. 24, 2018).
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2020 09:24 PM by tanqtonic.)
01-18-2020 09:23 PM
Find all posts by this user
Tomball Owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,547
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #10577
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 09:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 08:58 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 07:45 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 06:26 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  So why does the FCPA encourage foreign-based companies to laugh at US-based ones, when they are being held to the same standard?????

Because not all business is done in the US?

The FCPA allows the SEC to charge businesses not based in the US for their actions outside the US. So how does it benefit foreign based companies if they’re treated the same as American based ones?

The only way foreign companies are advantaged is if they don’t operate in the largest market in the world.

You are wrong to a great extent.

The Siemens case was an SEC action, and the jurisdiction was founded upon Siemens being publicly traded on US stock exchanges.

Alstom jurisdiction got severely curtailed by A 2nd Circuit ruling in August 2018. The Second Circuit emphasized “a basic premise of our legal system that, in general, United States law governs domestically but does not rule the world.” Extraterritorial application of United States law without a significant tether to the United States is exceedingly rare -- pretty much non-existent.

The FCPA dragnet is limited strictly to the statute:

the FCPA provides for jurisdiction ONLY over the following four categories of persons:

American citizens, nationals or residents, regardless of whether their conduct occurred in the U.S. or abroad;

American companies, regardless of whether their conduct occurred in the U.S. or abroad;

Agents, employees, officers, directors and shareholders of American companies, including both U.S. and foreign persons, when they act on the company’s behalf, regardless of whether their conduct occurred in the U.S. or abroad; and

Foreign persons (including foreign nationals and foreign companies) who violate the FCPA while present in the U.S.

Your bald statement above is just factually incorrect.

Edited to add specific cite: United States v. Hoskins, No. 16-1010-CR (2d Cir. Aug. 24, 2018).

Thank you.

Heard multiple stories in my 40 year career of a non-US company competing against a US-based company in a country, other than the US, doing things the US-based company couldn’t legally do.
01-18-2020 09:47 PM
Find all posts by this user
Foff Offline
Banned

Posts: 60
Joined: Jan 2019
I Root For: You
Location:
Post: #10578
RE: Trump Administration
(01-18-2020 04:46 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-18-2020 04:15 PM)Foff Wrote:  
(01-13-2020 10:46 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Harris is also known for seeking and obtaining unreasonably harsh sentences for minor drug crimes as a prosecutor, at the same time she was using marijuana herself.
false. except for her being a prosecutor. is this intentional lie, or are you simply misinformed??

Not misinformed at all. I think the record is pretty clear. It was certainly clear enough that Tulsi Gabbard attacked her about it in a debate, after which Harris's campaign pretty much tanked. I suppose I might have said "seeking unreasonably harsh sentences for minor offenders of various sorts."

you might have said something true, but you chose not to

harris did NOT use marijuana while she was prosecutor. so,, lie or misunderstanding?

"unreasonably harsh" is completely wrong about how she treated marijuana. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mercury...cases/amp/
lie or misunderstanding?

don't know why you backpedal to take out the "drug" from "minor drug crimes". doesnt help your case any,,, theres zero support for her being harsh on minor nondrug offenses. try again.
01-18-2020 10:48 PM
Find all posts by this user
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,778
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 857
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #10579
RE: Trump Administration
I think Trump cares about corruption.

But, I think he cares more about US companies doing well. That helps everybody. Stockholders, employees, the US Treasury, everybody.

So maybe he just wants to even the playing field for US companies.

Just a thought.
01-19-2020 12:14 AM
Find all posts by this user
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,778
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 857
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #10580
RE: Trump Administration
I think Trump cares about corruption.

But, I think he cares more about US companies doing well. That helps everybody. Stockholders, employees, the US Treasury, everybody.

So maybe he just wants to even the playing field for US companies.

Just a thought.
01-19-2020 12:15 AM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.