Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Be careful Democrats: Moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins was disgusted with the grandstanding and complaining at the confirmation hearings. She's one of the handful of Republicans you guys can't afford to alienate.
I have seen liberal politicians who are polar opposites vote the same for party power... the democrats probably threaten them severely for not following the herd... the GOP haven't really used that tactic often but.... times change...
I see holes on both sides of the story as Murray seems to have a different recollection of the story than Price has. I don't trust either of them.
Three issues though:
1. Where was all of this information before? Why do we only find out about these things when someone is nominated for a higher position? If this is all true, which I still don't totally believe, why wasn't it discovered before this? Its equally disqualifying for ANY state or federal employee if its true.
2. According to Price he made the decision only on information that was publicly available because it aligned with the type of care he specialized in and he saw promise in their research. Technically that would not be considered insider trading.
3. He bought at a predetermined price and claims it may or may not have been "below market price" but he didn't know for sure...again, I don't totally buy this, but at a predetermined price can be a huge risk or can result in a huge reward, the act itself isn't nefarious. If you sign a contract to buy at $30/share on a specific date, and another 9/11 happened, you would be down a ton of money regardless of what a great company it was.
Price stated that stock trades met ethics guidelines, how that is accepted for someone that can generate bills directly related to stock holdings is a large question. If you can buy a stock and then pass legislation impacting that stock then that is a real problem as was the case with Zimmer-Biomet.
He also had stock in tobacco companies yet voted against regulation by the FDA.
If it's true that this is allowed under ethics guidelines then civil service are being held to a higher standard than these congressmen.
Be careful Democrats: Moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins was disgusted with the grandstanding and complaining at the confirmation hearings. She's one of the handful of Republicans you guys can't afford to alienate.
I don't think anyone is trying to alienate Susan Collins, but if you are suggesting that it is wrong for Democrats to ask questions of some of these nominees that Republicans refuse to ask, then I vote for raising the issues no matter what she thinks of it.
Look long enough and all the nominees but Sec of Defense are likely as tainted as Trump himself...
I see Trump's decision to ice Christy's transition team and its picks who were vetter as a means to an end: compresding the time to check THESE nominees so that adequate oversight cpuldn't happen
Bannon might be smart enough to plan this
Dont think Preebus is nor Pence...
If you are talking about the exchange with Franken, I don't buy that logic at all. He used his time to hammer her on his views and then complain about not getting enough time for questions, never allowing her even a full complete sentence on that topic.
She was an unmitigated disaster and even Republicans admit it.
Be careful Democrats: Moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins was disgusted with the grandstanding and complaining at the confirmation hearings. She's one of the handful of Republicans you guys can't afford to alienate.
Grandstanding is the very nature of Congressional hearings. Always have been and always will be.
Price stated that stock trades met ethics guidelines, how that is accepted for someone that can generate bills directly related to stock holdings is a large question. If you can buy a stock and then pass legislation impacting that stock then that is a real problem as was the case with Zimmer-Biomet.
He also had stock in tobacco companies yet voted against regulation by the FDA.
If it's true that this is allowed under ethics guidelines then civil service are being held to a higher standard than these congressmen.
That guy was self-dealing big-time, and it is so accepted and taken for granted in Congress, nobody paid attention at the time.
His actions are the very definition of The Swamp. This guy should not be confirmed. He should be investigated by the SEC.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
