Connect with us

Politics

AOC Blasts NBC News for Misleading Tweet About Her DNC Speech

Published

on

  • Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez gave a speech at the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday formally seconding the nomination for Sen. Bernie Sanders.
  • Many people on social media and some news outlets created confusing by claiming she had endorsed Sanders over Joe Biden, the presumptive nominee.
  • In reality, Ocasio-Cortez was following a convention rule that says any candidate who receives a certain amount of delegates can be nominated at the convention and the nomination must be seconded.
  • In fact, the DNC had explicitly asked Ocasio-Cortez to deliver a speech nominating Sanders and had issued a press release earlier in the day announcing the decision.
  • Following the confusion, Ocasio-Cortez accused NBC News of spreading misinformation by sharing a tweet falsely claimed she had not endorsed Biden and blasted the network for waiting nearly four hours before issuing a correction and deleting the tweet.

Ocasio-Cortez’s DNC Speech

Following her speech at the Democratic National Convention, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Ny.) slammed NBC News on Wednesday for spreading “misinformation” in a tweet that suggested she did not endorse Joe Biden, and then failing to issue a correction until hours later in the middle of the night.

In the 90-second speech, Ocasio-Cortez opened by thanking everyone who was working towards what she described as a “mass people’s movement” that is “striving to recognize and repair the wounds of racial injustice, colonization, misogyny and homophobia. And to propose and build reimagined systems of immigration and foreign policy that turn away from the violence and xenophobia of our past.”

“A movement that realizes the unsustainable brutality of an economy that rewards explosive inequalities of wealth for the few, at the expense of long-term stability for the many,” she added. “And who organized a historic, grass roots campaign to reclaim our democracy.” 

“In a time when millions of people in the United States are looking for deep systemic solutions to our crises of mass evictions, unemployment, and lack of health care, en el espíritu del pueblo, and out of a love for all people, I hereby second the nomination of Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont for president of the United States of America,” she concluded.

Her last remark created a flurry on social media, where many users and even some news outlets claimed she had endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), with some saying the move with an intentional snub to Biden, who she did not mention in her speech. 

Shortly after she delivered her speech, Ocasio-Cortez took to Twitter to address the confusion.

“If you were confused, no worries!” she wrote.“Convention rules require roll call & nominations for every candidate that passes the delegate threshold. I was asked to 2nd the nom for Sen. Sanders for roll call. I extend my deepest congratulations to @JoeBiden – let’s go win in November.” 

DNC Rules & Delegate Roll Call

As Ocasio-Cortez referenced in her tweet, under convention rules, any candidate who gets enough delegates can be “nominated” for the party’s ticket. 

While it has been set in stone for a while that Biden will be the nominee because he has already passed the 1,991 delegates needed to secure the nomination, Sanders still had enough delegates to be a nominee, even if there was no shot at him winning.

That is also why when Sanders announced he was dropping out the race, he stayed on the ballot to collect delegates for the convention.

Those delegates are then counted in a formal roll call, which normally takes place in person, but because the virtual convention is viritual, this year it took place remotely with delegates in all 57 states and territories casting their votes Tuesday.

Nominating Sanders, even though everyone knows Biden is going to be the nominee, is a symbolic gesture that acknowledges his run and his influence in the party— which was exactly what Sanders said he wanted when he announced he was suspending his campaign but staying on the ballot.

Contrary to many narratives that circulated online and in the media, Ocasio-Cortez was not using her speech to undermine the party or take a jab at Biden— she was just following a standard practice at the DNC.

In fact, the DNC had explicitly asked her to deliver a speech seconding Sanders’ nomination, which she thanked the party for while congratulating Biden in another tweet.

Ocasio-Cortez also was not the only person to second Sanders’ nomination. The DNC also asked Bob King, the Former President of the United Auto Workers, to do the same. Even beyond that, the convention also published a press release that explicitly said Ocasio-Cortez and King would be giving nominating speeches for Sanders. 

NBC vs. AOC

While it is understandable that Ocasio-Cortez’s speech may have been confusing for those of us who do no read DNC press clips or know the ins-and-outs of convention rules, the news media is held to a higher standard.

Because there had been a press release earlier in the day, and because many media organizations would be aware of a common procedural requirement at the convention, outlets that ran with the narrative that Ocasio-Cortez had gone against party wishes or endorsed Sanders received significant backlash.

The news organization that most flack was NBC News, which posted a tweet Tuesday night that read: “In one of the shortest speeches of the DNC, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez did not endorse Joe Biden.” 

Source: NBC News Twitter

About four hours after posting that tweet, NBC deleted the tweet and issued a correction clarifying that Ocasio-Cortez had in fact been asked by the DNC to second Sanders’ nomination. They also noted that she had previously endorsed Biden. 

NBC also went back on the claim that Ocasio-Cortez’s speech was one of the shortest at the convention by clarifying that it was a similar length to other nominating speeches. Though not noted in the correct, the DNC had explicitly given the representative just 60 seconds for her speech, a time limit she surpassed.

However, many felt that the correction still did not undo the damage it had done, including Ocasio-Cortez herself, who criticized the outlet on Twitter Wendesday.

“You waited several hours to correct your obvious and blatantly misleading tweet. It sparked an enormous amount of hatred and vitriol, & now the misinfo you created is circulating on other networks,” she wrote. “All to generate hate-clicks from a pre-recorded, routine procedural motion.” 

Ocasio-Cortez also said that the DNC had shared the purpose of her remarks with the media well in advance and that NBC knew what was going to happen and that it was standard. “How does a headline that malicious & misleading happen w/ that prior knowledge?” she added.

“So @NBCNews how are you going to fix the incredible amount of damage and misinformation that you are now responsible for?” she wrote in a later tweet. “Because a 1:15am tweet to slip under the radar after blowing up a totally false and divisive narrative across networks isn’t it.”

See what others are saying: (CNN) (The Hill) (Business Insider)

Politics

NY Attorney General Says Investigation of Trump Business Found “Significant Evidence” of Fraud

Published

on

The state attorney general’s office accused the former president and his family business of falsely inflating the value of assets and personal worth to lenders, the IRS, and insurance brokers.


New York Attorney General’s Filing

New York Attorney General Letitia James announced late Tuesday she had “significant evidence” that former President Donald Trump and the Trump Organization “falsely and fraudulently” misrepresented the value of assets “to financial institutions for economic benefit.”

The allegations mark the first time James has made specific accusations against Trump and his business. They come as part of a nearly 160-page filing asking a judge to order the former president — along with Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr. — to comply with subpoenas for the investigation after the family sued James to block her from questioning them.

The filing claims that Trump and the company inflated the value of six properties, including several golf courses and Trump’s own penthouse in Trump Tower, on financial statements to obtain favorable loans, tax deductions, and insurance coverage. 

The document adds that many of the financial statements were “generally inflated as part of a pattern to suggest that Mr. Trump’s net worth was higher than it otherwise would have appeared.”

James outlined several specific examples, such as a financial statement where the value of Trump’s Seven Springs estate in Westchester was boosted because it listed seven mansions on the property worth $61 million that did not actually exist.

That resulted in Trump receiving millions of dollars in tax deductions on that property, as well as another in Los Angeles.

In another notable instance, the attorney general’s office said that the $327 million value of Trump’s penthouse in Trump Tower was calculated off a financial statement that falsely reported his home was nearly triple its actual size.

While the statement claimed the apartment was 30,000 square feet, Trump had signed documents stating it was actually 10,996 square feet.

Alleged Direct Involvement

The allegation regarding the apartment is especially significant because it directly ties Trump himself to the accusations of financial wrongdoing. It is also not the only instance where Trump was implicated.

The filing additionally asserts that Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg — who was indicted last summer on multiple criminal charges relating to the business’ tax dealings — implied the former president was involved in finalizing the false valuations. 

According to the documents, Weisselberg “testified that it was ‘certainly possible’ Mr. Trump discussed valuations with him and that it was ‘certainly possible’ Mr. Trump reviewed the Statement of Financial Condition for a particular year before it was finalized.” 

Another top Trump Organization executive also testified that he was under the impression Trump reviewed the statements before they were finalized.

While the filing provides less direct links to Trump’s children, it does detail their involvement. Specifically, it alleges that Ivanka Trump rented an apartment at Trump Park Avenue and was given an option to buy it for $8.5 million, despite the fact that the property was valued at $25 million.

It also connected Donald Trump Jr. to some of the properties flagged by claiming investigators found evidence he “was consulted” on the Statements of Financial Condition.

Response

Citing these connections, James argued in a series of tweets Tuesday that it is necessary for her inquiry to question Trump and his two children on their alleged involvement.

“We are taking legal action to force Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., and Ivanka Trump to comply with our investigation into the Trump Organization’s financial dealings,” she wrote. “No one in this country can pick and choose if and how the law applies to them.”

The former president has not yet addressed the matter, but a Trump Organization attorney representing Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump responded by arguing the subpoenas violate the constitutional rights of the family and that the filing “never addresses the fundamental contentions of our motion to quash or stay the subpoenas.”

In a statement Wednesday, the Trump Organization denied James’ allegations as “baseless” and accused her of trying to “mislead the public yet again.”

As far as what happens next, James’ office has said it “has not yet reached a final decision regarding whether this evidence merits legal action.”

Because James’s investigation is civil, she can sue Trump, his company, and his children, but she cannot file criminal charges. However, her probe is running parallel to a criminal investigation into the same conduct led by the Manhattan district attorney, who does have that power.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (The Wall Street Journal)

Continue Reading

Politics

Judges Uphold North Carolina’s Congressional Map in Major GOP Win

Published

on

The judges agreed that the congressional map was “a result of intentional, pro-Republican partisan redistricting” but said they did not have the power to intervene in legislative matters.


New Maps Upheld

A three-judge panel in North Carolina upheld the state’s new congressional and legislative maps on Tuesday, deciding it did not have the power to respond to arguments that Republicans had illegally gerrymandered it to benefit them.

Voting rights groups and Democrats sued over the new maps, which were drawn by the state’s Republican legislature following the 2020 census.

The maps left Democrats with just three of North Carolina’s 14 congressional seats in a battleground state that is more evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. Previously, Democrats held five of the 13 districts the state had before the last census, during which North Carolina was allocated an additional seat.

The challengers argued that the blatantly partisan maps had been drawn in a way that went against longstanding rules, violated the state’s Constitution, and intentionally disenfranchised Black voters.

In their unanimous ruling, the panel — composed of one Democrat and two Republicans — agreed that both the legislative and congressional maps were “a result of intentional, pro-Republican partisan redistricting.”

The judges added that they had “disdain for having to deal with issues that potentially lead to results incompatible with democratic principles and subject our state to ridicule.”

Despite their beliefs, the panel said they did not have a legal basis for intervening in political matters and constraining the legislature. They additionally ruled that the challengers did not prove their claims that the maps were discriminatory based on race.

Notably, the judges also stated that partisan gerrymandering does not actually violate the state’s Constitution. 

The Path Ahead

While the decision marks a setback to the plaintiffs, the groups have already said they will appeal the decision to the North Carolina Supreme Court.

The state’s highest court has a slim Democratic majority and has already signaled they may be open to tossing the map.

There are also past precedents for voting maps to be thrown out in North Carolina. The state has an extensive history of legal battles over gerrymandering, and Republican leaders have been forced to redraw maps twice in recent years.

A forthcoming decision is highly anticipated, as North Carolina’s congressional map could play a major role in the control of the House in the 2022 midterm elections if they are as close as expected. 

See what others are saying: (Politico) (The New York Times) (The Wall Street Journal)

Continue Reading

Politics

Biden Administration Says Private Insurers Will Have to Cover 8 At-Home Tests a Month

Published

on

The policy will apply to all the nearly 150 million Americans who have private insurance.


New At-Home Testing Policy

The Biden administration announced Monday that private health insurers will now be required to pay for up to eight at-home rapid tests per plan member each month.

Under the new policy, starting Saturday, private insurance holders will be able to purchase any at-home test approved by the FDA at a pharmacy or online. They will either not be asked to pay any upfront costs or be reimbursed for their purchase through their provider.

The move is expected to significantly expand access to rapid tests that other countries have been distributing to their citizens free of charge for months. 

According to reports, nearly 150 million Americans — about 45% of the population — have private insurance. 

Each dependent enrolled on the primary insurance holder’s account is counted as a member. That means a family of four enrolled on a single plan would be eligible for 32 free at-home rapid tests a month.

Potential Exemptions

All tests may not be fully covered depending on where they are purchased. 

In order to help offset costs, the Biden administration is incentivizing insurance providers to establish a network of “preferred” pharmacies and stores where people in the plan can get tests without paying out of pocket.

As a result, health plans that do create those networks will only be required to reimburse up to $12 per test if they are purchased out of that network, meaning people could be on the hook for the rest of the cost.

If an insurer does not set up a preferred network, they will have to cover all at-home tests in full regardless of the place of purchase.

During a briefing Monday, Press Secretary Jen Psaki said tests should be “out the door in the coming weeks.”

“The contracts [for testing companies] are structured in a way to require that significant amounts are delivered on an aggressive timeline, the first of which should be arriving early next week,” she added.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (NPR) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading