- Newly all-male South Carolina Supreme Court scrutinizes abortion ban months after tossing one out Yahoo! Voices
- All-male South Carolina Supreme Court scrutinizes abortion ban months after tossing one out News 19 WLTX
- Stein won’t defend NC abortion law in court. New court filing explains why WRAL News
- All-Male State Supreme Court Reconsiders Abortion Ban After Lone Female Justice Retires Rolling Stone
- NC obstetrician: I’m challenging NC’s confusing, contradictory abortion law | Opinion Charlotte Observer
- View Full Coverage on Google News
Tag Archives: scrutinizes
Jan. 6 panel scrutinizes Trump’s Afghanistan order post-election
“He disregarded concerns about the consequences for fragile governments on the front lines of the fight against [the Islamic State] and al-Qaeda terrorists,” Kinzinger said. “Knowing he was leaving office, he acted immediately and signed this order on November 11th, which would have required the immediate withdrawal of troops from Somalia and Afghanistan, all to be complete before the Biden inauguration on January 20th.”
Trump’s withdrawal order was reported previously by Axios and in the book “Peril,” by journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa. Kinzinger’s presentation, however, marked a dramatic moment in Thursday’s hearing, as the committee played video and audio segments of testimony provided over the past several months by key officials troubled by the president’s plans, including Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, who served as national security adviser to Vice President Mike Pence.
The Afghanistan plan ultimately was set aside. Milley called the order “odd” and “potentially dangerous,” telling the committee he did not think it was feasible or wise. Kellogg said the proposition was “very contested,” and that carrying it out would have been a “tremendous disservice to [the] nation.”
“It’s the same thing with President Biden,” Kellogg said, comparing the situation to the chaotic and deadly withdrawal carried out at Biden’s direction in August 2021. “It would have been a debacle.”
John McEntee, an adviser to Trump, recalled typing up the order to withdraw from Afghanistan and securing Trump’s signature on it. He did not offer an assessment similar to Milley’s and Kellogg’s in testimony aired Thursday.
Their comments add to public understanding of key military moves that bridge the two presidencies, and the often erratic nature of deliberations under Trump.
The Trump administration, in February 2020, signed a deal with the Taliban agreeing to remove all U.S. troops by spring 2021. It included a handful of concessions, including that the Taliban would hold fire against U.S. troops as they departed. The Afghan government was cut out of those discussions.
Trump later undermined that agreement, tweeting in October of that year that all U.S. troops should be “home by Christmas!” Then-Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper sent Trump a memo advising the president that ongoing Taliban attacks, potential danger for remaining U.S. personnel and risks to U.S. alliances made that timeline unworkable.
Trump fired Esper on Nov. 9, one day after the election loss, installing loyalists at the Pentagon at a moment when administrations typically seek a smooth transition on issues of national security.
Biden decided in April 2021 to follow through with the Afghanistan withdrawal, prompting the collapse of the country’s government four months later. Biden administration officials blamed Trump, saying his deal with the Taliban left few alternatives, while former Trump administration officials sought to distance themselves from the agreement by arguing that it was meant to be implemented only if the conditions warranted.
Trump has criticized Biden for the haphazard exit, calling it a “humiliation” and “total surrender,” and claiming it would not have happened on his watch.
“We could have gotten out with honor,” Trump said at a rally last year. “We should have gotten out with honor. And instead we got out with the exact opposite of honor.”
Alyssa Farah Griffin, a former Trump administration official who has become a frequent critic, tweeted Thursday that as “someone who remains highly critical of Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal,” she’d be curious to hear how Trump supporters defend “Trump’s order for an even hastier withdrawal.”
As someone who remains highly critical of Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal, I’d be curious to hear defense’s on the Right of Trump’s order for an even hastier withdrawal. https://t.co/suCXr4d72o
— Alyssa Farah Griffin (@Alyssafarah) October 13, 2022
Under Trump’s direction, hundreds of U.S. troops were withdrawn from Somalia in the waning weeks of his administration. Some were redeployed to nearby Kenya while continuing to visit Somalia to advise local troops battling al-Qaeda-affiliated militants.
In May, Biden reversed Trump’s Somalia order, deploying hundreds of U.S. troops there. Pentagon officials sought presidential approval to do so, advising that it was becoming increasingly unsustainable to only appear on the ground episodically to carry out operations. The Pentagon has conducted a handful of airstrikes in Somalia since then.
Robinhood fell as SEC scrutinizes crypto, payment for order flow — Quartz
CEO Vlad Tenev will have plenty to discuss with investors and analysts when Robinhood reports third-quarter results tomorrow (Oct. 26). Shares of the Menlo Park, California-based brokerage have fallen about 12% during the past month, going in the opposite direction from rivals like retail-brokerage pioneer Charles Schwab and Coinbase, the crypto exchange.
Robinhood shares are under pressure as the company plans a stock sale by existing investors. A regulatory filing about the share sale noted that more than 70% of the brokerage’s revenue came from payment for order flow (PFOF) and transaction rebates in 2020. That business model has become controversial: Instead of sending customer trades to a stock exchange, those orders get sent to large trading firms (market makers) like Virtu Financial and Citadel Securities. Those firms pay Robinhood for the right to execute the transactions. Some market-structure experts say, thanks to PFOF, retail traders are getting the cheapest stock trading ever. (You can read more about PFOF here and here.) Robinhood handles its crypto orders via a similar process, from which it earns transaction rebates. And regulators, as it happens, also have crypto in their crosshairs.
Scrutiny over payment for order flow is growing
The US Securities and Exchange Commission isn’t entirely convinced retail traders aren’t getting quite as good a deal as they think. Officials worry that PFOF creates a conflict of interest, and SEC chair Gary Gensler told Barron’s that a ban on the practice is “on the table.” “Our markets have moved to zero commission, but it doesn’t mean it’s free,” Gensler said on CNBC. “There’s still payment underneath these applications. And it doesn’t mean it’s always best execution.”
Other US retail brokerages like Schwab and E-trade also make money from PFOF, but Robinhood is more dependent on the practice than most other firms.
The agency is also reviewing whether some apps have become “gamified,” encouraging users to trade more often than they need to, which can cut into investments returns and increase their risk of losses. In response to an SEC request for comments, some academics have argued that SEC should be concerned about brokerage apps that have “behavioral prompts or personalized recommendation algorithms.” For its part, Robinhood said it “does not target customers to induce trading based on who they are or what we predict they will do.”
In the meantime, there are growing questions as to whether the retail trading boom will abate as workers go back to offices. Robinhood said it added 5.1 million accounts in the second quarter, almost twice the number added a year earlier but down from the 5.7 million new accounts during the previous quarter. A key question for Robinhood executives tomorrow is whether the retail trading boom could turn into a bust.