April 2025 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Deutsche Bank Not Liable For ISIS Terror, Judge Finds
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

Deutsche Bank Not Liable For ISIS Terror, Judge Finds <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321582?nl_pk=9aaa8…> By Rae Ann Varona A New York federal judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit accusing Deutsche Bank AG of facilitating the financing of the Islamic State, saying that the families of two journalists and an aid worker the terrorist group killed failed to sufficiently allege that the bank participated in a human trafficking venture. Opinion attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321582?nl_pk=9aaa8…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321582?nl_pk=9aaa8…>

1 0

Pension Protection Fund Says 'Time Is Right' To Review Rules
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

Pension Protection Fund Says 'Time Is Right' To Review Rules <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321099?nl_pk=9aaa8…> By Joel Poultney Britain's pensions compensation fund has said the "time is right" to review a range of key areas of its governing legislation, including how it sets its levy and rules determining how benefits for older pensioners rise. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321099?nl_pk=9aaa8…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321099?nl_pk=9aaa8…>

1 0

Businessman's Daughter Sees £79M 'Sham' Loan Case Tossed
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

Businessman's Daughter Sees £79M 'Sham' Loan Case Tossed <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321150?nl_pk=9aaa8…> By Lucia Osborne-Crowley The daughter of a deceased businessman had her attempt to bring a claim on behalf of one of her father's companies over a "sham" loan thrown out by a London court owing to a rule mandating that only the company itself can bring such a claim. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321150?nl_pk=9aaa8…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321150?nl_pk=9aaa8…>

1 0

Denmark's £56M Cum-Ex Fraud Case Struck Out On Appeal
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

Denmark's £56M Cum-Ex Fraud Case Struck Out On Appeal <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321123?nl_pk=9aaa8…> By Eddie Beaver Denmark's roughly £56 million ($72 million) tax refund fraud claim against an English brokerage was struck out Friday after a London appeals court ruled that an issue "fundamental" to the case had been decided in earlier proceedings. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321123?nl_pk=9aaa8…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/2321123?nl_pk=9aaa8…>

1 0

Trump’s Attacks on Big Law, Universities, and the Media Have a Common Goal: Silence Dissent Against Authoritarian Rule
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2025/03/trumps-attacks-on-big-law-universiti… By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: March 24, 2025 ~ Brad Karp, Chair of Paul Weiss Brad Karp, Chair of Paul Weiss The New York Times’ Sunday, March 23 newspaper featured a lead story on how the 1,000-lawyer Big Law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a Wall Street favorite, had caved to threats in a Presidential Action from Donald Trump, which would have banned lawyers at the firm from entering federal buildings; from reviewing classified documents for their clients by stripping them of security clearance; and effectively blacklisting the firm as a member of Donald Trump’s enemy list. The Chair of Paul Weiss, Brad Karp, negotiated with Trump and got the order rescinded by agreeing to spend $40 million in pro bono work on projects amenable to Trump — along with other subservient concessions. Trump’s move against Paul Weiss followed his similar actions against Big Law firms Perkins Coie and Covington & Burling. Unlike Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie hired another Big Law firm, Williams & Connolly to represent it, and filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration. As a bold symbol that it would not be intimidated by Trump’s revenge tour, Williams & Connolly listed 14 of its lawyers by name on the court filing as counsel to Perkins Coie. Pertinent sections of the lawsuit read as follows: “This case concerns an Executive Order issued on March 6, 2025, entitled, ‘Addressing Risks From Perkins Coie LLP’ (‘the Order’). The Order is an affront to the Constitution and our adversarial system of justice. Its plain purpose is to bully those who advocate points of view that the President perceives as adverse to the views of his Administration, whether those views are presented on behalf of paying or pro bono clients. Perkins Coie brings this case reluctantly. The firm is comprised of lawyers who advocate for clients; its attorneys and employees are not activists or partisans. But Perkins Coie’s ability to represent the interests of its clients—and its ability to operate as a legal-services business at all—are under direct and imminent threat. Perkins Coie cannot allow its clients to be bullied. The firm is committed to a resolute defense of the rule of law, without regard to party or ideology, and therefore brings this lawsuit to declare the Order unlawful and to enjoin its implementation… “The Order imposes these punishments as retaliation for the firm’s association with, and representation of, clients that the President perceives as his political opponents. Many law firms represented candidates, parties, and related political committees and organizations in the 2016 and 2020 campaigns. But the Order targets only one firm—Perkins Coie—because the President views it, more than any other firm, as aligned with the Democratic Party by reason of its representation of the 2016 Clinton presidential campaign and its successful handling of challenges brought by the Trump campaign seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election, as well as victories the firm won for its clients in a significant number of voting rights cases, including cases where Perkins Coie succeeded in upholding existing laws, in connection with the 2020 election.” That Trump’s lawyers lost repeatedly to Perkins Coie lawyers in his court attempts to overturn his loss in the 2020 presidential election, would appear to be one of the prime motivators of his unprecedented attack on the firm using the imprimatur of the Oval Office. Perkins Coie with Williams & Connolly as its counsel decided to fight Donald Trump’s intimidation tactics to crush all perceived roadblocks to enforcing his authoritarian agenda. Paul Weiss, on the other hand, caved quickly. Paul Weiss has likely done far more damage to its reputation by licking Trump’s jack boots than Trump could have inflicted on the law firm over the long-term. The firm was widely ridiculed for its capitulation by conservatives, progressives and even a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute. Walter Olson, a senior fellow at Cato’s Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, wrote this on a Cato blog: “What is clear is that Trump himself believes that his threats have caused a prominent law firm to back down on vital principles of independence and that he has used the powers of the presidency to gratify his wish for revenge against a particular lawyer for having fought him in court. This is calculated to chill and deter vigorous courtroom advocacy against Trump and his allies. It is an abuse of presidential power that imperils the constitutional rights of all Americans. We can only hope that other litigants, if not this one, will press federal courts for rulings speedily vindicating those constitutional rights.” The conservative lawyer, George Conway, posted on X (Twitter): “This Paul Weiss capitulation is the most disgraceful action by a major law firm in my lifetime, so appalling that I couldn’t believe it at first. Any lawyers at that firm—partners or associates—who don’t promptly resign will defile their moral and professional reputations beyond repair.” On Friday, Erwin Chemerinsky, a Los Angeles Times contributing writer, penned this: “We all learned long ago, perhaps on the playground, that giving in to a bully only makes things worse. That is why it is shocking to see capitulation on the part of those being illegally bullied by President Trump. This will only embolden him.” Indeed, Trump was emboldened. After Paul Weiss was shamed widely in the media on Saturday for its capitulation, Trump doubled down on Sunday, issuing a breathtaking authoritarian memorandum to his U.S. Attorney General, Pam Bondi, who has been elevated by Trump from representing him personally as one of his defense counsel in his first impeachment proceeding, to the highest law enforcement officer in the U.S., who is now tasked with carrying out Trump’s revenge against his perceived enemies. The memorandum also went to Trump’s Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, who proved she was cruel enough to serve in the Trump cabinet by admitting in her 2024 book to shooting to death the family puppy as an expedient means of dealing with an unruly pet. Trump’s Sunday memorandum threatens retaliatory measures against lawyers and/or law firms that engage in lawsuits against the Trump administration as it shreds the U.S. Constitution. As of March 15, the website JustSecurity.org listed 135 lawsuits that have been filed against the Trump administration for overstepping its legal and/or constitutional authority. Trump has lost the vast majority of the preliminary rulings by judges in these matters, thus his need to attempt to scare Big Law away from taking these cases or dropping existing cases. Trump is using similar tactics against universities by threatening them with losing federal grants, which can reach into the hundreds of millions of dollars for research. Trump’s actual fear is that campus protests could accelerate exponentially from coast to coast and lead the evening news cycle, tanking his quest for authoritarian rule with little pushback. Columbia University has capitulated to Trump’s demands after being threatened with the loss of $400 million in federal funding. Trump is also upping his threats against the media in an effort to further silence his critics. He has banned the 59-Pulitzer Prize winning Associated Press from attending press conferences in the Oval Office and elsewhere, in retaliation for its failure to follow his directive about his renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Associated Press has not caved and has filed a lawsuit to challenge the restraint on its freedom of speech and freedom to choose its own words. On March 6, while taking questions from the press in the Oval Office, the President called out by name two MSNBC news program hosts that he said “should be forced to resign.” The journalists are Nicolle Wallace and Rachel Maddow, both of whom have doggedly connected the dots on Trump’s grifting and unsavory alignment with his largest campaign donors and with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump’s attack on these two specific journalists followed a more general attack on the MSNBC cable network on February 18 during a Sean Hannity interview. Five days later, Joy Reid, another MSNBC program host – and one of Trump’s key critics – learned that her program had been abruptly cancelled. (See our report: News Host Joy Reid Raises Threat of Trump Selling U.S. to Putin; Ten Days Later Her Show Is Cancelled.) We have been monitoring the evening news reporting at MSNBC since our report on the cancellation of the Joy Reid program. If Trump expected his attacks to silence his on-air critics at the network, he must be furious. The program hosts have, instead, doubled down. They are now showing the thousands of Americans that are turning out for protests and anti-Trump rallies across the United States, despite it not being a national election year. A reported 34,000 people turned out Friday night in Denver as Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders spoke at their “Fight Oligarchy” nationwide tour. Sanders said it was the largest rally he had ever had, notwithstanding the massive crowds he attracted during his 2016 campaign bid for President. The threats to their livelihoods and personal sacrifices being made by those standing up to Trump’s tyranny, makes what Paul Weiss and Columbia University did this past week all the more unconscionable. History will not be kind to the cowards. It never is.

1 0

Trump’s Tariff Plan Guts $5 Trillion in Stock Value in Two Days; Senator Warren Calls for Emergency Action Before Markets Open on Monday
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2025/04/trumps-tariff-plan-guts-5-trillion-i… By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: April 6, 2025 ~ Senator Elizabeth Warren On Wednesday, President Donald Trump unveiled his sweeping tariff plan. By Thursday, Wall Street was stampeding to the exit doors, leaving the Dow Jones Industrial Average down 1,679.39 points by the closing bell. Showing just how dangerous the market is assessing Trump’s tariff war to be, contrarian investors couldn’t even stage a short squeeze by Friday to push stocks back up – something they have been able to do regularly since Trump’s chaos courtiers invaded Washington, promising to “Occupy Mars” as they took a blow torch to their current planet. Friday was indicative of full-on selling panic, with the Dow losing another 2,231 points. The two-day rout in the S&P 500 tallied up to a breathtaking $5 trillion in market value losses, setting a two-day historic record. The plunge in the S&P 500 futures market was so steep before the stock market opened on Friday morning that the yield on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury note sank below 4 percent, trading below 3.90 percent at one point. The loss in yield reflected a stampede into the benchmark security as a safe-haven play, pushing up the cost to purchase it and thus driving down its fixed coupon yield. By Friday night, Senator Elizabeth Warren, the ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee and a former Harvard Law professor, was unveiling a plan for Congress to rip Trump’s tariff-signing pen from his obsessive-compulsive-ready-fire-aim pudgy fingers. The following exchange occurred between Senator Warren and MSNBC host, Lawrence O’Donnell, on his 10 p.m. program, “The Last Word”: Lawrence O’Donnell: The Constitution of the United States, Article 1, Section 7: ‘All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.’ That sentence has meant that everyone elected to federal office in the history of the United States of America has understood that the power to set a tariff or a tax belongs exclusively to the Congress. In the twentieth century the Congress voted to give the President very limited authority to raise tariffs in certain narrowly defined situations including national emergencies – like, for example, World Wars. Almost all of the Trump tariffs do not come close to fitting the exceptional conditions allowing the President to raise tariffs. Therefore, almost all of the Trump tariffs are completely illegal. And with those illegal tariffs driving the United States and the world now toward a global recession, according to JPMorgan’s forecast, the bankers at JPMorgan should be very glad that Elizabeth Warren has a plan. Joining us now, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. She is a top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee. She’s a member of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over tariffs. Senator Warren, what can we do? Senator Elizabeth Warren: Right now, authority is right here in Congress. We don’t have to just stand by and watch everything melt down because Donald Trump has engaged in this crazy round of tariffs. Instead, we can pass a resolution, reel it back in, take away this authority from him – right now – and get things back to normal. We can do that. We just need a handful of Republicans to join us, and we can get this done. And frankly, we should do this. We should do it before the markets open on Monday. Lawrence O’Donnell: Yeah, it’s the kind, it’s a very simple resolution. It’s the kind of thing that each body could pass very quickly. Senator Warren: We could do this fast and remember, we saw a little crack in the Republican Trump wall on Wednesday when we put forward a resolution to be able to stop the tariff war with Canada. Just a narrow one, to try to get the Republicans in. Four Republicans joined us. We’re now looking at Donald Trump crashing not just the U.S. economy but the economy all around the world. This is truly an emergency, and we need Congress to act. All we have to do is pick up a few Republicans, get those Republicans to join the Democrats and roll back with a resolution what Donald Trump has done, and then we restore where the markets were before. Lawrence O’Donnell: We’ve heard from Senator Rand Paul. We’ve heard from other Republicans. There are now four Republicans who are cosponsors on another bill, [that] Senator Cantwell is a cosponsor of, that would, in effect, allow only, I believe, 60 days for the Trump tariff, for Donald Trump to raise tariffs and then, or some period like that, and then they would expire. They would just automatically expire if Congress doesn’t approve them, but that allows for weeks and weeks and weeks of economic destruction worldwide. Senator Warren: That’s right, and chaos. And look, we don’t need to do that. We don’t need to pass a separate law, or a new law, or a different law. The legal authority is already there. All we have to do is pass a resolution in the House and the Senate declaring that the particular device he’s using, of this fake emergency that he was claiming, triggers his ability to do these tariffs, just saying, ‘That’s not so,’ and that will take away his power to do that. Lawrence O’Donnell: And the audience should understand that previous Presidents have not done what Donald Trump is doing for two reasons. None of them were stupid enough to think it was a good idea, and none of them believed that this kind of tariff raising by a President was legal. Senator Warren: Yeah. But you know, Lawrence, this is really a moment when Republicans in the House and the Senate have to ask themselves: Are they really just here to bend a knee to whatever Donald Trump wants, even if it crashes economies all around the world? Or are they here actually to represent the interests of the American people? If it’s the latter, let’s pick up the tool that’s already there, in law, and reel back these tariffs that Donald Trump has put in place all by himself. Lawrence O’Donnell: Senator, I know you’ve brought up an amendment tonight in what’s moving forward on the Republican budget. What is at stake tonight in these votes? Senator Warren: So, remember, this is the next step in the Republicans trying to do massive giveaways to billionaires and billionaire corporations. And pay for it on the backs of cuts to Medicaid for little babies and for seniors in nursing homes, cuts to our public education system, cuts to the Veterans Affairs Department, cuts in medical research. So, tonight is going to be about forcing the Republicans to have to take a series of votes about exactly what they plan to do with this budget. And the vote I want them to take is, I’m going to put forward a proposal that says, ‘Whatever you all end up doing with the budget, at least promise in this, commit, that you will not do any tax giveaways to companies that make a billion dollars or more in profits.’ Let’s see if the Republicans could at least agree to that. Lawrence O’Donnell: Senator, before you go, have you gotten thanks from those investment bankers at JP Morgan for your idea to save them and save the global economy? Senator Warren: No, but you know, this isn’t about thanks. This really is serious, Lawrence, and I’m really worried. Not just about what’s happening in the stock market, but what this will mean for employment across the country, what this will mean for people who are counting on modest savings. I am really worried about what it means for everybody in our country and worried about the implications all around the world. Congress has a chance, right now, to put a stop to this, but the Republicans in Congress have to be willing to stand up to Donald Trump and say, ‘No, you don’t get to break the American economy.’

1 0

Watch "Big Bear Bald Eagle Live Nest - Cam 2 - Wide View" on YouTube
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

https://www.youtube.com/live/LCGYWfbyBWc?si=Qx4P7OgFVMbyeosF Watch "Big Bear Bald Eagle Live Nest - Cam 2 - Wide View" on YouTube

1 0

Watch "SHADOW SAVES SUNNY FROM THE JUMPING FISH 🐟🐥🦅4.3.25 FOBBVCAM" on YouTube
by Gunnar Larson 07 Apr '25

07 Apr '25

https://youtu.be/ZLio-QtuXPw?si=r14sNCd1lAFGAb6f Watch "SHADOW SAVES SUNNY FROM THE JUMPING FISH 🐟🐥🦅4.3.25 FOBBVCAM" on YouTube

1 0

Ex-JPMorgan Atty Gets Probation For NYC Housing Fraud
by Gunnar Larson 06 Apr '25

06 Apr '25

Ex-JPMorgan Atty Gets Probation For NYC Housing Fraud <https://www.law360.com/legalethics/articles/2320800?nl_pk=87c9365b-e736-431…> By Frank G. Runyeon A former Bronx prosecutor and JPMorgan attorney was sentenced in New York state court Thursday to probation and community service for fraud and grand larceny, after she pled guilty to using forged records to obtain low-rent apartments. Court Document attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/legalethics/articles/2320800?nl_pk=87c9365b-e736-431…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/legalethics/articles/2320800?nl_pk=87c9365b-e736-431…>

1 0

How Del. Law Rework Limits Corporate Records Requests
by Gunnar Larson 06 Apr '25

06 Apr '25

How Del. Law Rework Limits Corporate Records Requests <https://www.law360.com/mergersacquisitions/articles/2316864?nl_pk=34b724c6-…> Newly enacted amendments to a section of the Delaware General Corporation Law that allows stockholders and beneficial owners to demand inspection of Delaware corporations' books and records likely curtails the scope of such inspections and aids defendants in framing motions to dismiss at the pleading stage, says Jonathan Richman at Brown Rudnick. Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/mergersacquisitions/articles/2316864?nl_pk=34b724c6-…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/mergersacquisitions/articles/2316864?nl_pk=34b724c6-…>

1 0