The SEC charged a cloud executive with insider trading after he allegedly saved his brothers from $600,000 in losses (QYLS)

• The SEC charged a former cloud security executive with insider trading on Thursday.
• Amer Deeba, chief commercial officer at Qualys, allegedly gave his two brothers advanced warning of poor financial results in Q1 2015 and encouraged them to sell all of their shares in the company. 
• The financial results ultimately tanked the company's stock 25% the day after earnings, and saved the brothers a total of $581,170, according to the SEC complaint.

---

A longtime enterprise tech executive was charged with insider trading on Thursday by the Securities and Exchange Commission which alleged that he tipped off his two of his brothers and helped them dump shares in his company ahead of an ugly quarterly earnings report.

Amer Deeba, the defendant, worked at Qualys for 17 years, most recently as chief commercial officer of the cloud security and services company. He had special access to Qualys CEO Philippe Courtot, according to the complaint, and was the only senior executive to sit near Courtot in the office. 

The SEC alleges that Deeba was privy to a significant miss on revenue in the company's Q1 2015 quarter, and encouraged his brothers to sell of their shares on that information before the company announced its results.

Deeba, who has settled the case without admitting or denying the allegations, will be barred for two years from serving as an executive or director at any SEC-reporting company and will pay a penalty of $581,170 — the amount of losses his tip allegedly saved his brothers.

Courtot called Deeba on April 7 and informed him of the low sales figures, according to the complaint. Deeba, who was in Lebanon with his family at the time of the phone call, allegedly passed this information along to his two brothers. Each held shares in the company thanks to gifts Deeba had issued them in 2005, long before the company's 2012 IPO.

Qualys's stock price dropped 25% the day following its May 4 earnings announcement, according to the SEC complaint.

Because they sold their stock ahead of the news, Deeba's two brothers avoided losing a total of $581,170, according to the complaint. Deeba and Qualys could not immediately be reached for comment.

SEE ALSO: The SEC is accusing a startup founder of stealing $48 million from investors to fund private jets and a dairy cow farm

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How LeBron James makes and spends his millions

source https://www.businessinsider.com/sec-charged-former-qualys-executive-insider-trading-allegations-2018-8

Louis CK performed for the first time since admitting to sexual misconduct

• Louis CK performed at the Comedy Cellar in New York City on Sunday night, his apparent first performance since admitting to sexual misconduct last year, The New York Times reported.
• In a Times report from last November, CK was accused of sexual misconduct by five women, some of whom said that he masturbated in front of them. He later admitted to the accusations in a statement. 

---

Louis CK performed a surprise set at the Comedy Cellar in New York City on Sunday night, which The New York Times reported was "apparently" his first stand-up comedy performance since admitting to sexual misconduct in November of last year. 

The Times reported that the crowd greeted him with an ovation before his set began, though one audience member called the club after to object to the set, according to the club's owner, Noam Dworman. 

Dworman told the Times that his set consisted of "typical Louis C.K. stuff," topics which he said included racism, waitresses' tips, and parades. "It sounded just like he was trying to work out some new material, almost like any time of the last 10 years he would come in at the beginning of a new act," Dworman said. 

In a Times report from last November, CK was accused of sexual misconduct by five women, two of whom said that he masturbated in front of them. He later admitted in a statement that the accusations were "true."

CK subsequently lost his production deal at FX Networks, and the release of his feature film "I Love You, Daddy," which contained controversial subject matter addressing sexual misconduct, was canceled by its production company The Orchard. 

CK's return follows that of comedian Aziz Ansari, who was accused of sexual misconduct by a woman in January and performed for the first time since the allegations at the Comedy Cellar in May. 

SEE ALSO: Sacha Baron Cohen tried to get OJ Simpson to confess to murder on the 'Who Is America?' finale

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How a black cop infiltrated the KKK — the true story behind Spike Lee's 'BlacKkKlansman'

source https://www.businessinsider.com/louis-ck-performed-for-first-time-since-admitting-sexual-misconduct-2018-8

I'm a lawyer, and Supreme Court justices shouldn't have term limits — they should have age requirements

• Supreme Court justices serve a life term once nominated and confirmed by the US Senate. 
• Whenever a Supreme Court justice retires or passes away, there is often a political debate about nominations and the court's ideology.
• While some think term limits could discourage justices from retiring with political motivations, and encourage fresh perspectives, this is not necessarily the case. 
• Matthew Stanford, a California attorney, says term limits would not depoliticize the retirement or selection process.
• Instead, he suggests that age requirements could better solve some of these issues, while maintaining a core feature of the Supreme Court: the relative lack of volatility.

---

Whenever a Supreme Court justice retires or passes away, the conversation inevitably turns to term limits. As it should: Most voters favor capping justices' time on the Court, and it has rare bipartisan appeal. Even the current chief justice endorses the idea—or at least he did.

The supposed benefits of term limits are alluring. An 18-year, non-renewable term, for instance, would make vacancies more predictable, granting each president two nominations per term. Assuming nobody dies or retires, no single president could handpick a majority of the Court.

Possible consequences of steady turnover provide additional fodder for term limit proponents: theoretically, term limits would end socially disconnected rulings and politically motivated retirements, and increase the likelihood of a court with an array of ideologies and fresh perspectives.

But let's consider the possible benefits realistically.

It's likely that term limits would not prevent politically motivated justices from retiring during a favored administration, even by cutting their own terms short.

In fact, scheduling two vacancies per term could actually make this more appealing. Using the current composition of the Court as an example, consider the following hypothetical:

Justices Ginsburg and Breyer have terms that are set to expire before the 2020 election. Assume that the current administration is expected to lose reelection. Preferring not to have their seats filled by a Democratic president, Justices Thomas and Alito, whose terms will expire after the election, retire early. The outgoing president would get two more nominations at the expense of the next administration.

It's easy to imagine the political turmoil that would ensue — especially in light of the emergent view that vacancies created in an election year should only be filled after the ballots have been counted.

And plugging this loophole would be tricky. As recent events might suggest, if there were an unexpected vacancy on the court before the end of a presidential term, neither law nor custom could prevent a determined Senate from nominating a candidate that aligns with their ideology and filling that vacancy before the next inauguration. Only a constitutional amendment could do that.

Otherwise, retirement games wouldn't simply persist; they would worsen. Ironically, term limits would raise the stakes.

Nor is an increase in ideologies or perspectives a given.

Term limits won't depoliticize the selection process — it won't prevent either party from using its preferred litmus tests for identifying potential justices. There is already ample concern about nominee reluctance to discuss candidly their legal philosophies at confirmation hearings. Term limits might create predictable vacancies, yet it's still largely unknown how that could impact prospective nominees

One thing term limits might reduce is the perceived disconnect between the realities of life-tenured justices and ordinary citizens.

But this problem is only partially related to the length of a justice's term, and it assumes that age is a reliable proxy for social consciousness.

Even if that's true, most of the blame belongs elsewhere—namely, the custom of nominating Yale and Harvard graduates holding some combination of prestigious practice, judicial, and/or academic positions. Term limits would do little to bridge the gap that makes the Court seem so otherworldly.

Still, the term limit discussion does raise an important consideration: modern life expectancies. Though undeniably a good thing, longer lifespans mean longer terms for justices. As Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean at Berkeley Law and a constitutional law scholar, explained in The New Republic:

"Life expectancy is dramatically longer today than when the Constitution was written in 1787. The result is that Supreme Court justices are serving ever longer, with the last four to leave the court having served, on average, for 28 years. This trend is continuing with the current court. Clarence Thomas was 43 when he was appointed, and John Roberts and Elena Kagan were each 50 at the time of their appointments. If these justices serve until they are 90–the age at which Justice John Paul Stevens retired–they will have been on the bench for upwards of four decades apiece."

Even assuming, as Chemerinsky seems to suggest, that longer terms are somehow antithetical to our constitutional system, a more modest revision would address this concern, and it would do so without sacrificing the judicial independence that motivated the Founders to include life tenure in Article III of the Constitution.

In fact, other provisions of the Constitution already include such a safeguard: age requirements.

One must be 35 years old to run for President or Vice President, 30 for Senator, and 25 for Representative. (Whether those numbers ought also to be lifted is a discussion for another day.)

If providing a counterbalance to longer life expectancies is the core rationale for term limits, a minimum age—perhaps 60 or 65 years old—could accomplish this without the unintended consequences that term limits threaten.

It also would likely be an easier reform to implement. Although a constitutional amendment would be the most ironclad approach, a statute or even a custom establishing age requirements would likely suffice.

Finally, term limits would eliminate a consequence of life tenure, intended or not, that has become a unique, arguably essential feature of our constitutional republic: the relative lack of volatility, for which the Court is valued.

The Court is insulated from more direct forms of democracy. The elevated role of precedent in the work of the Court underscores this point. Even as the Founders were careful to avoid establishing anything resembling the British Crown, they nevertheless included life tenure in the 1787 Constitution. They presumably understood this to mean that justices and judges alike would largely remain in office for the remainders of their careers. Yet they included it anyway. Age, it would seem, was seen as an asset to the work of the judiciary, a feature of judicial independence rather than an oversight only recently brought into focus by improved life expectancies.

Term limits would abolish this feature despite their more modest purpose. A minimum age requirement would not.

The United States has the oldest written constitution still in use today. It is not enough to demand term limits simply because we are the only democracy that extends life tenure to its judiciary.

Before we proceed to jettison the order of constitutional elders that life tenure has effectively molded within our courts over the past 229 years, we would be wise to consider this less drastic alternative.

Matthew Stanford is a California attorney and Senior Research Fellow at the California Constitution Center. He is a graduate of Berkeley Law and Penn State University.

SEE ALSO: Here's an evolving count of which senators are voting for Trump's Supreme Court pick

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Meet the woman behind Trump's $20 million merch empire

source https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-justices-should-have-age-requirements-not-term-limits-2018-8

Sacha Baron Cohen tried to get OJ Simpson to confess to murder on the 'Who Is America?' finale

• Sacha Baron Cohen took on OJ Simpson in the season finale for his Showtime series, "Who Is America?" 
• Cohen's Italian photographer character tried to get Simpson to confess to committing murder by repeatedly joking about killing his girlfriend.

---

Sacha Baron Cohen tried (in vain) to get OJ Simpson to confess to committing murder in the season finale for his Showtime series "Who Is America?" on Sunday. 

Disguised in the segment as his Italian photographer character, Gio Monaldo, Cohen sits down with Simpson in Las Vegas. Cohen's character introduces his girlfriend to Simpson and, in an attempt to get her to recognize Simpson, says that Simpson was a Buffalo Bill and an actor in the "Naked Gun" films. The girlfriend doesn't recognize Simpson — who was found not guilty of murdering his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman in 1995 — until Cohen makes repeated stabbing motions with his hand.

"She knows that, oh Jesus," Simpson replies, shaking his head and laughing.

After his girlfriend leaves the room and Simpson calls her "gorgeous," Cohen makes a series of jokes about killing her in an attempt to get Simpson to agree with him.

"She's gorgeous but sometimes I want to kill her," Cohen says. "I want to send her on a private helicopter and throw her over the Grand Canyon — oopsie daisie!" Cohen high-fives Simpson, but Simpson laughs and says "stop" repeatedly. 

In another hypothetical murder scenario, Simpson goes along with Cohen's character by saying that Monaldo's girlfriend might go bungee jumping with a cord that's too long. 

The segment concludes with Cohen asking Simpson "how [he] got away with" his wife's murder. 

"Me and you, we got something in common," Cohen says. "We both, how you say, 'ladykillers.'"

"No, I didn't kill nobody," Simpson says, laughing.

"Ah, I didn't either," Cohen replies.

Watch the episode on Showtime.

SEE ALSO: How OJ Simpson says he would've murdered Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman — 'if' he did it

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How a black cop infiltrated the KKK — the true story behind Spike Lee's 'BlacKkKlansman'

source https://www.businessinsider.com/sacha-baron-cohen-tried-to-get-oj-simpson-to-confess-who-is-america-2018-8

Robert Mueller is a demanding boss who makes employees work nights and weekends

• The special counsel Robert Mueller is a demanding boss, according to a profile from The New York Times published on Saturday.
• Mueller reportedly expects his employees to work late nights and weekends.
• He also reportedly has little patience for those who aren't prepared for meetings.

---

The special counsel Robert Mueller is a demanding boss who requires his employees be fully prepared for meetings and work long hours, according to a profile from The New York Times published on Saturday.

The Times reports that the prosecutors working under Mueller on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election work late nights and weekends. According to the publication, Mueller's expectations aren't new.

As a US attorney, he would reportedly walk around the office early in the morning and during the evening to see who was working. And during his tenure as the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, he received two briefings each day, which made agents and analysts work grueling and unconventional schedules, according to The Times.

The Times also reports that Mueller has little patience for those who aren't prepared for meetings.

"The thing that would set him off was when someone would come in for a briefing unprepared,” John S. Pistole, a former deputy FBI director, told The Times. "Or worse, come in unprepared and act like they were prepared."

Efficiency is a priority for Mueller, who conducts short, 15-minute meetings with no small talk, and expects prosecutors to work quickly, according to The Times.

So far, the investigation led by Mueller into election interference has resulted in charges against four Americans who were once associated with President Donald Trump's campaign or administration, including Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chairman, who was found guilty on eight federal counts of bank and tax fraud on Tuesday.

Russian nationals, intelligence officers, and companies have also been indicted by Mueller's team.

SEE ALSO: Here's everyone who has been charged and convicted in Mueller's Russia probe so far

DON'T MISS: Meet the all-star team of lawyers Robert Mueller has working on the Trump-Russia investigation

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Meet the woman behind Trump's $20 million merch empire

source https://www.businessinsider.com/robert-mueller-makes-employees-work-nights-and-weekends-2018-8

Robert Mueller once started a new job by asking every supervisor in the office to resign

• The special counsel Robert Mueller once started a new job by giving many of his employees a rude awakening.
• After being appointed the US Attorney for the Northern District of California in 1998, Mueller asked every supervisor in the office to resign, according to a profile from The New York Times published on Saturday.
• Mueller's decision was reportedly rooted in a management philosophy he learned as a Marine platoon commander during the Vietnam War: It's impossible to get people to perform beyond their capabilities.
• Instead of nagging the office's existing employees to do better, Mueller chose to hire the best employees he could find, despite the risks involved with creating instability shortly into his tenure.

---

The special counsel Robert Mueller once started a new job by giving many of his employees a rude awakening.

In 1998, Mueller was appointed the US Attorney for the Northern District of California. Near the beginning of his tenure, he asked every supervisor in the office to resign, according to a profile from The New York Times published on Saturday. Mueller then reportedly sent an email to everyone in the Justice Department with listings for each major prosecution job in his district.

Mueller's decision reportedly bothered many of his employees, but according to The Times, it was rooted in a management philosophy Mueller learned as a Marine platoon commander during the Vietnam War: It's impossible to get people to perform beyond their capabilities.

Instead of nagging the office's existing employees to do better, Mueller chose to hire the best employees he could find, despite the risks involved with creating instability shortly into his tenure.

Mueller is currently leading an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election, and his previous managerial style may give some insight into the team of prosecutors he has put together to assist him.

Mueller has assembled a formidable team of experienced litigators and investigators, some of whom have drawn the ire of President Donald Trump and his allies due to their previous campaign donations to Democrats.

Trump occasionally tweets about the team, referring to them as "13 angry Democrats," though some have also donated to Republicans.

So far, the investigation has led to charges against four Americans who were once associated with President Donald Trump's campaign or administration, including Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chairman, who was found guilty on eight federal counts of bank and tax fraud on Tuesday.

Russian nationals, intelligence officers, and companies have also been indicted by Mueller's team.

SEE ALSO: Here's everyone who has been charged and convicted in Mueller's Russia probe so far

DON'T MISS: Meet the all-star team of lawyers Robert Mueller has working on the Trump-Russia investigation

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Meet the woman behind Trump's $20 million merch empire

source https://www.businessinsider.com/robert-mueller-once-started-new-job-by-asking-for-mass-resignations-2018-8

Sony Music denied a report that it admitted in court to releasing 3 fake Michael Jackson songs sung by an impersonator

• Sony Music has denied a report that said the company conceded in court that it had released three fake Michael Jackson songs on the singer's first posthumous album in 2010. 
• The controversy stemmed from a 2014 civil lawsuit brought by a fan, who accused Jackson's friend Eddie Cascio of creating and selling songs through Sony and the Jackson estate that the fan contended were sung by a Jackson impersonator.

---

Sony Music Entertainment has denied a report that it conceded in court that it released three fake Michael Jackson songs on the singer's first posthumous album, "Michael," in 2010. 

On Friday, a number of outlets cited the rap blog Hip-Hop N More to erroneously report that Sony admitted in a California appeals court that the three songs on the album, "Monster," "Keep Your Head Up," and "Breaking News," were recorded by a Jackson impersonator. 

"No one has conceded that Michael Jackson did not sing on the songs," Sony Music said in a statement to Variety.  "The hearing Tuesday was about whether the First Amendment protects Sony Music and the Estate and there has been no ruling on the issue of whose voice is on the recordings."

The hearing in question stemmed from a 2014 civil lawsuit brought by a fan named Vera Serova, who accused Jackson's longtime friend Eddie Cascio and his production company, Angelikson Productions LLC, of creating and selling fake music through Sony and the Jackson estate. 

Serova argued in 2014 the Los Angeles Superior Court that the songs were fake and performed by an impersonator named Jason Malachi, according to court documents obtained by several outlets. 

MJ Fan vs. Sony/ MJ Estate/ Cascio/ Porte by Ivy on Scribd

Hip-Hop N More cited tweets that claimed Sony had "conceded that the songs were fakes" earlier in court this week. 

Variety reported the following on Friday:

"According to sources close to the situation, individuals who attended Tuesday’s court hearing seized upon a statement by an attorney for Jackson’s estate in which he said something to the effect of 'even if the vocals weren’t Jackson’s' as proof that they were indeed faked. The sources insist that the attorney was speculating.”

Sony Music has not responded to a request for further comment from Business Insider.

Listen to the three songs on the album "Michael" below:

SEE ALSO: The 50 best-selling albums of all time

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How a black cop infiltrated the KKK — the true story behind Spike Lee's 'BlacKkKlansman'

source https://www.businessinsider.com/sony-denies-report-about-3-fake-michael-jackson-songs-2018-8

Jim Carrey's latest political drawing depicts Trump as a piece of burnt toast

• Jim Carrey's latest political drawing finds President Trump's face depicted as a piece of burnt toast with the caption, "#TRUMPISTOAST," and a link to vote.com. 
• The drawing follows the news that Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, and former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, were each found guilty of eight federal crimes this week. 

---

Actor Jim Carrey's latest satirical drawing finds President Trump's face depicted as a piece of burnt toast with the caption, "#TRUMPISTOAST" and a link to vote.com. 

Carrey's drawing follows the news on Tuesday that Trump's former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to eight federal crimes and implicated Trump as an unindicted co-conspirator to two campaign finance law violations. Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was also found guilty of eight federal crimes on Tuesday. 

#TRUMPISTOAST https://t.co/SWANdDZ3MD pic.twitter.com/TjtSe10jdO

— Jim Carrey (@JimCarrey) August 23, 2018

Carrey also mocked Trump over Manafort and Cohen on Wednesday with a drawing that depicted Trump hanging upside down from a pole in a straitjacket with an American flag wrapped around his ankles.

Manafort, GUILTY! Cohen, GUILTY! Flynn, Guilty! Gates, Guilty! What’s happening to All the Best People? “Ladies and Gentlemen! Children of all ages! Can the Great Spewdini spew enough lies to escape the straight-jacket of his un-Presidented criminality?” pic.twitter.com/qLiaEDfsuA

— Jim Carrey (@JimCarrey) August 21, 2018

Carrey's inclusion of a link to vote.com in his latest drawing is fitting, since it's unlikely that Trump could face charges as a sitting president. Many political analysts see the 2018 midterm elections as a referendum on a potential impeachment of the president, though Democrats in the House have openly downplayed the possibility of impeachment as they seek to take back Congress.

Carrey has been a vocal critic of the Trump administration and the Republican Party this year. Political drawings have been his main form of criticism and have helped him amass close to 18 million followers on Twitter.

SEE ALSO: Jim Carrey shares new drawing of Trump hanging upside down by an American flag

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How a black cop infiltrated the KKK — the true story behind Spike Lee's 'BlacKkKlansman'

source https://www.businessinsider.com/jim-carrey-political-drawing-depicts-trump-as-a-piece-of-burnt-toast-2018-8

Rudy Giuliani reportedly said he and Trump discussed a possible pardon for Manafort, but said they're unsure about the political fallout

• President Donald Trump and his lawyer Rudy Giuliani talked about the pros and cons of pardoning Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.
• Manafort was convicted on eight counts of financial fraud a day earlier.
• Trump has since distanced himself from Manafort and asserted that "it doesn't involve me," when asked about the crimes for which Manafort was convicted.

---

President Donald Trump and his lawyer Rudy Giuliani talked about the pros and cons of pardoning Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.

According to the newspaper, Giuliani echoed Trump's assertion that he believes Manafort was treated "horribly" by the justice system.

On Tuesday, Manafort was convicted on eight counts of financial fraud. He was charged with 18 counts, but the judge declared a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict for ten counts.

Trump has since distanced himself from Manafort and said "it doesn't involve me."

"But it's a very sad thing that happened," Trump said. "This has nothing to with Russian collusion."

In several tweets on Wednesday morning, Trump referred to Manafort as "a brave man," and contrasted his behavior with that of Michael Cohen, his longtime personal attorney, who implicated Trump as a participant in his crimes in a plea deal he signed a day earlier.

Cohen claimed that his campaign finance violations, related to a $130,000 payment made to the porn star Stormy Daniels in exchange for her silence — were made "at the direction of the candidate" with "the purpose of influencing the election." Lanny Davis, Cohen's attorney, later confirmed that candidate was Trump.

A pardon for Manafort would not be an unprecedented action from Trump. During his tenure, he pardoned Joe Arpaio, the controversial Arizona sheriff who took up an anti-immigration stance; Dinesh D'Souza, a right-wing personality who pleaded guilty to campaign finance fraud; and Scooter Libby, former Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff who was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice.

But the inherent risk tied to a Manafort pardon is not lost on Giuliani and Trump, according to The Times' report, which said Trump was "uncertain about the political fallout" from such a move.

Manafort will face a new judge and jury in another trial in September on charges including obstructing justice and failing to register as a foreign agent.

SEE ALSO: Michael Cohen's lawyer says his client has information about Trump 'that should be of interest' to Mueller

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Meet the woman behind Trump's $20 million merch empire

source https://www.businessinsider.com/will-trump-pardon-paul-manafort-2018-8

Michael Cohen's lawyer says his client has information about Trump 'that should be of interest' to Mueller

• Lanny Davis, Michael Cohen's attorney, says his client has information "that should be of interest" to special counsel Robert Mueller, following his plea deal with federal prosecutors.
• "Mr. Cohen has knowledge on certain subjects that should be of interest to the special counsel, and is more than happy to tell the special counsel all that he knows," Davis said during an interview on MSNBC.
• In a later interview on CNN, Davis suggested Cohen's tenure under Trump's wing entitled him to details that have yet to be revealed to Mueller and his broader Russia probe.

---

Lanny Davis, Michael Cohen's attorney, says his client has information "that should be of interest" to special counsel Robert Mueller, following his plea deal with federal prosecutors on Tuesday.

Cohen pleaded guilty to five counts of tax evasion, one count of bank fraud, one count of making an unlawful corporate contribution, and one count of making an illegal campaign finance contribution.

Cohen claimed that his campaign finance violations, related to a $130,000 payment made to the porn star Stormy Daniels in exchange for her silence — were made "at the direction of the candidate" with "the purpose of influencing the election." Davis confirmed that candidate was Trump.

"Mr. Cohen has knowledge on certain subjects that should be of interest to the special counsel, and is more than happy to tell the special counsel all that he knows," Davis said during an interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.

In a later interview on CNN, Davis suggested Cohen's tenure in Trump's inner circle made him privy to details that have yet to be revealed to Mueller and the broader Russia probe.

"Michael Cohen, being a lawyer for Donald Trump for many, many years, knows almost everything about Mr. Trump," Davis said.

Cohen's plea deal with prosecutors does not so far include a cooperation agreement.

Legal experts say that could be for one of two reasons: either Cohen chose not to cooperate, or prosecutors do not feel that he has enough information to offer them in exchange for a further reduction in sentence.

The longtime former federal prosecutor Jeffrey Cramer said Tuesday that if Cohen chose not to cooperate, it may be because he is still holding out for a pardon from Trump.

"If Cohen flips on Trump, that pardon flies out the window," Cramer said.

But Davis's comments to Maddow suggest his client may still be angling for a better plea deal by making it clear he has information of value to Mueller.

Cohen is currently a subject of interest in several threads of the Russia investigation, including the Trump Organization's push to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, the creation of a Russia-friendly "peace plan" during the early days of Trump's presidency, and his potential involvement in an unconfirmed trip to Prague during the summer of 2016 to meet with Kremlin-linked officials.

Last month, it also emerged that Cohen said Trump knew in advance about a Russian lawyer's offer to the Trump campaign of dirt on then Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election.

CNN, citing sources with knowledge of the matter, reported that Cohen claims he was one of several people who were present when Donald Trump Jr. informed Trump of the offer. Cohen reportedly says that Trump greenlit the meeting after hearing about it from his son.

If Cohen gives Mueller information of value, the special counsel could then push for a reduction in his sentence.

Cohen was released on a $500,000 bond and is scheduled for sentencing on December 12.

SEE ALSO: Michael Cohen pleads guilty and says he broke campaign finance law at Trump's direction

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A North Korean defector's harrowing story of escape

source https://www.businessinsider.com/cohen-lawyer-lanny-davis-my-client-has-info-about-trump-that-should-be-of-interest-to-mueller-2018-8

Facebook says it has removed hundreds of pages and accounts involved in coordinated information campaigns from Russia and Iran (FB)

Facebook has detected multiple coordinated information campaigns, including those originating in Iran and Russia, it announced on Tuesday.

The company said it has removed hundreds of pages and accounts that it says were involved in "coordinated inauthentic behavior" on its flagship social network, as well as on its Instagram photo-sharing service.

Facebook said the Russian and Iranian-based efforts were distinct, and that it has not detected any links between them, but that they both used similar tactics. 

This story is developing...

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This machine turns a truck into a tent in seconds - here's how it's installed

source https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-detects-information-campaigns-russia-iran-2018-8

The SEC has charged a former rising star VC, accusing him of 'misappropriating millions of dollars' and barred him for 5 years

• The SEC announced charges and a settlement with Michael Rothenberg, the founder of Rothenberg Ventures.
• The SEC charged Rothenberg with overcharging investors to fund personal projects. Rothenberg did not admit or deny the allegations in the settlement.
• Rothenberg will be barred from the brokerage and investment advisory business for five years.

---

Michael Rothenberg, the founder of a flashy San Francisco VC firm that imploded under a cloud of controversy in 2016, has settled charges with federal regulators alleging that he misappropriated millions of dollars from investors.

The SEC announced on Monday  that it has charged Rothenberg with overcharging investors to fund personal projects, including a virtual reality company. The settlement includes barring Rothenberg from the brokerage and investment advisory business for five years, after which he will have a right to apply again.

Rothenberg "misappropriated millions of dollars" from the funds he raised from nearly 200 investors, including using an estimated $7 million of "excess fees" spent to support his personal business ventures and "to pay for private parties and events at high-end resorts and Bay Area sporting arenas," the SEC said in a press release. 

Rothenberg was not immediately available for comment. 

The 34-year old founder of Rothenberg Ventures did not admit or deny the SEC's allegations in the settlement, which must be approved by a federal district court. The amount of civil penalties that Rothenberg could be on the hook for will be decided by the court. 

"It's refreshing to see a government agency function the way it's supposed to"

Rothenberg Ventures was a high-flying venture firm that publicly imploded in 2016. It was known for its over-the-top parties and spending — as well as its young, charismatic founder, Mike Rothenberg. Back in 2016, the company admitted to its investors that the Securities and Exchange Commission was looking into the company, according to an email obtained by Business Insider, 

On top of that, multiple employees filed wage complaints against the company with the state of California, several people told Business Insider, and they also cooperated with the SEC investigation.

One of them who was involved in this process told us, "The SEC was extremely professional and easy to work with. It's refreshing to see a government agency function the way it's supposed to."

The firm, which had over $50 million under management, ran out of operating money, and all its employees except its lawyer were told they were put on "unpaid leave" a year ago, according to a lengthy account of the firm's troubles on Backchannel.

Business Insider talked to several former employees of the company who described their experiences with Rothenberg using words like "charming" and "convincing," "vengeful," "a messed-up human being," "megalomaniac," "master manipulator" and "lack of empathy."

EXCLUSIVE ON BI PRIME: 'The future will be won or lost on this technology. I'm very concerned': The founder of a $9 billion company warns that China is on track to dominate the US in AI

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What's going on with Elon Musk

source https://www.businessinsider.com/sec-charges-settlement-san-francisco-vc-michael-rothenberg-2018-8

The US Department of Housing and Urban Development is suing Facebook over 'unlawful' advertising tactics (FB)

• Federal regulators have served Facebook with a complaint over the company's ad targeting tools available to housing advertisers.
• The Department of Housing and Urban Development's complaint sides with advocacy groups that brought a lawsuit against Facebook in March.
• The lawsuit claims that Facebook violates fair-housing laws, which follows a massive investigation by ProPublica.

---

The Justice Department filed a "statement of interest" on Friday that sides with housing groups who claim that Facebook's advertising platform violates fair-housing laws.

The statement allows a suit filed in March, led by the National Fair Housing Alliance, to live on. According to the housing groups, Facebook’s tools allow advertisers to target by sex, religion, familial status and national origin, which violate fair-housing laws.

The company has been in hot water over its housing advertising practices since 2016, when ProPublica published a report about Facebook’s monitoring of housing ads. Since then, Facebook has updated its policies and added machine learning that identifies housing, credit, and employment ads, but a follow-up report from ProPublica in November found that ads continued to not be policed.

Geoffrey Berman, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said that Facebook's practice, "creates and harvests user data to develop profiles for each user, categorizing them into groups based on demographics, interests, behaviors and other criteria." He added that "categorizing of Facebook users based on protected characteristics" violates the Fair Housing Administration (or FHA). Specifically, the Justice Department commented on the Communications Decency Act portion of the lawsuit — not the entire lawsuit.

"There is no place for discrimination on Facebook; it's strictly prohibited in our policies," Facebook said in a statement. "Over the past year we’ve strengthened our systems to further protect against misuse. We're aware of the statement of interest filed and will respond in court."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: NYU professor says Facebook should pay taxes for making us less productive

source https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-sued-by-us-department-of-housing-and-urban-developement-over-unlawful-advertising-tactics-2018-8

Tinder and Match Group were a poor match from the beginning, according to the new $2 billion lawsuit filed by the dating app's founders (MTCH, IAC)

 

The legal dispute between Tinder and parent company Match Group is new, but the bad blood between key figures at the two companies apparently isn't.

Three of Tinder's cofounders, along with a group of current and former key employees, believe that the management of Match Group and its corporate parent, IAC, have repeatedly reneged on formal agreements and shorted them of money and ownership since the founding of the dating-app company in 2012, according to a lawsuit filed on Tuesday. The bad-faith dealing by Match and IAC culminated in the alleged scheme that forms the centerpiece of the suit — Match Group's alleged attempt to undermine the value of the stock options held by Tinder employees.

The Tinder founders and employees are seeking $2 billion in compensation plus additional punitive damages in the suit.

Match Group and IAC "cheated the Tinder plaintiffs out of their contractual right to participate in the future growth of the company they built," the Tinder founders and employees allege in their suit. "Defendants willfully breached their contracts and their legal duties, pocketing billions of dollars earned by the Tinder plaintiffs and other Tinder optionholders."

A Match Group representative denied the allegations in a statement and suggested that the suit was the result of envy, not bad-faith dealing.

Two of the plaintiffs in the suit are no longer with the company, the representative noted in the statement. Sean Rad, Tinder's founder and former CEO, was "dismissed" more than a year ago; and Justin Mateen, left "many years" ago, the representative said.

Rad and Mateen "may not like the fact that Tinder has experienced enormous success following their respective departures, but sour grapes alone do not a lawsuit make," the representative said. "Mr. Rad has a rich history of outlandish public statements, and this lawsuit contains just another series of them. We look forward to defending our position in court."

Match and Rad repeatedly clashed

Match and Rad and his team were at odds almost from the beginning and repeatedly clashed, according to the suit.

Here are some of the key moments and allegations, as laid out in the Tinder team's legal complaint:

• Although Rad initially developed Tinder in 2012 while working for Hatch Labs, an IAC-owned incubator, and his basic concept won a hackathon contest Hatch sponsored, IAC and Hatch initially declined to foster the development of the app or to allow Rad to seek outside funding for it.
• Instead Hatch said Rad could develop it with a team he was already on that was working on a separate app — and only in their free time.
• Because of that arrangement, Rad proposed that the Tinder founding team get a majority stake in the app, with Hatch being a minority investor. IAC and Hatch agreed to those terms.
• But in 2013, after Rad and his team had launched the Tinder app and seen initial success with it, IAC reneged on those terms. When it incorporated Tinder, it didn't assign any ownership to the founders, insisting that it owned all of the app and company. It only assigned the founding team "stock appreciation rights," which the plaintiffs claim were worth far less than the value IAC had promised them. 
• In 2014, Rad and his team got Match to agree to grant them stock options in Tinder — but only after a bitter six-month negotiating battle.
• In 2015, Rad proposed that Match allow Tinder option holders to sell their stakes to outside investors. The options agreement allowed Tinder's founders to do that, but Rad wanted to open it up to all Tinder employees. Match initially agreed. But then it changed the terms. It would either allow all employees including the Mateen and Rad to sell their vested options at a $1.75 billion valuation for the entire company — or it would allow all employees except Rad and Mateen to sell their options at a $3 billion valuation. Rad and Mateen chose the latter option, allowing employees to cash out.
• In mid-2016, Rad proposed that Match again allow Tinder option holders to sell their vested options — this time back to Match. Match agreed, but didn't follow the terms under the stock option agreement for valuing Tinder. Match came up with a $1.6 billion valuation — little more than half the valuation it had recognized nearly a year before, despite Tinder's growth over that time. Rad and other Tinder executives advised employees not to take advantage of the selling opportunity.
• In December 2016, Match ousted Rad and several key executives at Tinder just months before the first scheduled option selling opportunity under the 2014 options agreement.
• In early 2017, Match proposed to value Tinder at $1.8 billion for the upcoming scheduled options sale. After Rad rejected that amount, Match then provided "false, misleading, and incomplete information" about Tinder's finances to ensure a lowball valuation.
• Match ended up valuing Tinder at $3 billion for the option sale — the same valuation it had recognized two years earlier, despite the app's growth in revenue and usage.
• After finalizing the $3 billion figure, Match merged Tinder into itself, effectively cancelling the future planned options sales.

"Defendants, acting in bad faith, breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing inherent in" the options agreement and related deals, the Tinder executives and employees said in the suit.

SEE ALSO: Snapchat is stalling out, and there's not much hope that it'll get back on track

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This machine perfectly pours concrete

source https://www.businessinsider.com/tinder-founder-sean-rad-clashed-match-iac-lawsuit-2018-8

Tinder founders say former CEO 'groped and sexually harassed' an executive at a company party in bombshell $2 billion lawsuit

• Included in a jaw-dropping lawsuit brought by Tinder's founders against its parent company IAC are allegations of sexual misconduct against its former CEO.
• The lawsuit alleges that former Tinder CEO and IAC chairman Greg Blatt "groped and sexually harassed" vice president of marketing Rosette Pambakian, and, after the incident was reported, the parent company conducted an internal investigation, not the independent one that former cofounder and CEO Sean Rad was pushing for.
• Although Blatt was replaced as CEO in January by Mandy Ginsberg, a source tells Business Insider that Blatt was still frequenting Tinder's offices until recently.

---

Tinder's founders and executives have filed a lawsuit against their parent company IAC filled with some jaw-dropping allegations. They are suing for billions of dollars over what they allege was a deliberate attempt by IAC to "cheat them" out of money owed for their stock options.

IAC for its part says that the lawsuit is unfounded, based on "sour grapes" and that Match has paid out "excess of a billion dollars in equity compensation to Tinder’s founders and employees." (See the company's full statement below.)

But included in the lawsuit is another bombshell allegation: that Tinder's former CEO Greg Blatt "groped and sexually harassed" Tinder's vice president of marketing, Rosette Pambakian, at a company party and that the company's human resources and legal council knew about the incident and "covered up" the alleged misconduct.

Specifically, the lawsuit alleges:

"At Tinder's December 2016 holiday party in Los Angeles, Blatt, who had just taken over as Tinder's 'interim' CEO, groped and sexually harassed Rosette Pambakian ... In mid-2017 [Sean] Rad learned about these events ... and immediately reported Blatt's conduct to Match's General Counsel Jared Sine."

The lawsuit alleges that Sine and Match Group conducted an internal investigation led by an HR executive who had worked for Blatt for more than ten years.

Rad, Tinder's cofounder and former CEO who was pushed out and replaced by Blatt, wanted an investigation that was independent, not conducted by Match insiders, according to the lawsuit. He asked to speak to the board about it but his request was refused, the lawsuit states.

The suit then alleges that IAC "even allowed Blatt to contact Pambakian and one of the eyewitnesses [of the alleged incident] whom Blatt pressured to conceal his misconduct." Blatt was allowed to continue his duties as interim CEO during the internal investigation, the lawsuit claims, and "was included on correspondence related to it."

And the lawsuit includes yet another serious allegation: that Match "had previously concealed other sexual misconduct allegations through confidential payoffs and settlements."

A source close to the Tinder executives tells Business Insider that Blatt remained involved with the company until recently, and was frequently seen in the offices. However, Blatt's official involvement with the company is unclear. (We've asked IAC to clarify.) Blatt's long-standing corporate email account is currently no longer active and he is not currently listed on IAC's management pages.

In January, 2018, Match promoted Mandy Ginsberg as CEO.

Here is IAC's full statement about the lawsuit.

"The allegations in the complaint are meritless, and IAC and Match Group intend to vigorously defend against them.

Since Tinder’s inception, Match Group has paid out in excess of a billion dollars in equity compensation to Tinder’s founders and employees. With respect to the matters alleged in the complaint, the facts are simple: Match Group and the plaintiffs went through a rigorous, contractually - defined valuation process involving two independent global investment banks, and Mr. Rad and his merry band of plaintiffs did not like the outcome.

Mr. Rad (who was dismissed from the Company a year ago) and Mr. Mateen (who has not been with the Company in years) may not like the fact that Tinder has experienced enormous success following their respective departures, but sour grapes alone do not a lawsuit make. Mr. Rad has a rich history of outlandish public statements, and this lawsuit contains just another series of them. We look forward to defending our position in court."  

SEE ALSO: How this woman went from a Pizza Hut employee to a founder of a $4 billion startup

SEE ALSO: Tinder's founders are suing Match Group and IAC, saying they've been ripped off — and they're seeking at least $2 billion in damages

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How movie theaters are ruining your movie

source https://www.businessinsider.com/tinder-employees-accuse-former-ceo-greg-blatt-of-sexual-harassment-in-2-billion-lawsuit-2018-8

Tinder's parent company allegedly faked financial information to lower the dating app's valuation, according to a new lawsuit (IAC)

• Tinder's cofounders and executives are suing parent company IAC and Match Group over allegations that the parent company cooked the books to create a lower valuation for the popular dating app.
• IAC and Match allegedly inflated Tinder's expenses and downplayed new features in an effort to create a "false picture" of Tinder's finances.
• This led to a private valuation of $3 billion in 2017, according to the lawsuit.
• The end goal was to save the parent company billions of dollars when employees cashed-in their equity, by maintaining an inaccurately low valuation for the dating app, the lawsuit claims. 

---

Tinder's parent company allegedly faked the popular dating app's financial figures in a scheme to avoid having to pay the app's founders and long-time employees billions of dollars in equity, according to a bombshell lawsuit filed in New York on Tuesday.

The lawsuit, filed by a group of Tinder founders and executives, alleges that the app's parent company IAC and its subsidary Match Group created a "disinformation campaign" and a "false picture" of Tinder's financial figures and projections in order to reach a lower valuation for the company. 

The key allegations in the complaint are that IAC inflated Tinder's expenses, "inventing an alternative universe in which Tinder was stagnating toward freefall." IAC also allegedly downplayed upcoming features which would impact Tinder's performance figures.

As the result, Tinder was valued at $3 billion in 2017 when its growth could have valued it even higher, according to the lawsuit. 

Like many companies in Silicon Valley, Tinder offered employees and founders stock options to give them "skin in the game," according to the lawsuit, and Tinder plaintiffs owned more than 20% of the company's value. 

But as a subsidiary of IAC, Tinder's financial figures were private and its valuation was set outside of the public eye. 

This gave IAC the opportunity to "undermine Tinder's valuation" to "save themselves billions dollars," according to the complaint. 

After the $3 billion valuation was set, IAC cancelled three scheduled independent valuations set for 2018, 2020, and 2021, and reorganized Tinder's executive structure so that its early employees could not exercise their stock options at a higher valuation, according to the complaint.

Founding CEO Sean Rad was replaced by IAC insider and Match.com CEO Greg Blatt. 

Business Insider has reached out to Match Group for comment on the lawsuit and its allegations.

Here's the full complaint:

TINDER FOUNDERS, CURRENT EXECUTIVES & EMPLOYEES SUE IAC/MATCH by Kif Leswing on Scribd

 

SEE ALSO: Tinder's founders are suing Match Group and IAC saying they've been ripped off — and they're seeking at least $2 billion in damages

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: DermaClip is a needle-less alternative to stitches

source https://www.businessinsider.com/tinder-owner-match-group-iac-accused-faking-finances-to-lower-app-valuation-2018-8

An aristocrat who claims his family should have inherited the throne of Monaco is suing France for $401 million

• A French aristocrat is suing France for €351 million ($401 million) in damages.
• Count Louis de Causans says the French state cheated his family out of the throne of Monaco.
• De Causans told Le Parisien that "sleight of hand" had allowed the French state to rewrite Monaco's laws of succession.
• De Causans' ancestor was apparently once Monaco's rightful heir, but missed out on the throne because he was German, and France was on the brink of World War I at the time.

---

Louis de Causans is a prince without a kingdom — or so he says.

The French-born count is seeking compensation of €351 million ($401 million) in damages from France, which he says cheated his family out of the throne of Monaco.

The aristocrat, full name Louis Jean Raymond Marie de Vincens de Causans, told Le Parisien that "sleight of hand" had allowed the French state to rewrite Monaco's laws of succession during the reign of Luis II of Monaco (1922-44).

He said: "I want the truth to come out and this injustice perpetrated by France on my family to be put right.

"In reality, my cousin Prince Albert acceded to the throne by a sleight of hand … France found a solution to get its hands on Monaco. Afterwards, they managed business on the Rock as they wished."

He said Louis II had no heirs, meaning the throne should have passed down to his branch of the Grimaldi family, making his ancestor Guillaume II de Wurtemberg-Urach the new ruler.

However, Guillaume II was German — and to have a German ruler of Monaco at a time when France was on the brink of war with their neighbours was unthinkable.

So, Louis II adopted his illegitimate daughter Charlotte Louise, whose mother was a cabaret singer. A law, which was later deemed illegal, was passed in 1911 to secure her succession.

"I thought it was the Grimaldis' fault, but then I found out it was the French state that caused this dramatic turnaround for us," De Causans said.

It's easy to see why De Causans is upset. Monaco's current ruler Albert II is worth $1 billion. However, he stressed that he does not blame the prince for his qualm.

Le Parisien also spoke to De Causans' lawyer, Monsieur Jean-Marc Descoubès, who said that the enormous sum of money being demanded was in line with the losses sustained by the aristocrat's family.

"His fortune would be out of proportion with what it is today," Descoubès said.

You can watch the full interview in French here.

SEE ALSO: Meet the 10 richest billionaire royals in the world right now

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What's going on with Elon Musk

source https://www.businessinsider.com/aristocrat-suing-france-for-351-million-euro-over-monaco-throne-2018-8

'Despacito' rapper Daddy Yankee says he had $2 million in jewelry stolen by a man who impersonated him

• "Despacito" rapper Daddy Yankee was allegedly robbed of $2 million in jewelry in Spain this week by a man who impersonated him to gain access to the safe in his hotel room.
• His representatives confirmed the robbery in a tweet on Thursday. 

---

"Despacito" rapper Daddy Yankee was robbed of $2 million in jewelry in Spain this week, his representatives said on Thursday. 

The Puerto Rican rapper, whose real name is Ramón Luis Ayala Rodríguez, was out of his hotel room when a man allegedly impersonated him to gain access to the safe in his room, local news outlet Las Provincias first reported. 

Rodríguez's public relations team, Nevarez PR, confirmed the robbery in a tweet on Thursday. 

"Daddy Yankee's press office confirms that the artist has been victim of a robbery while he was out of his hotel in Valencia, Spain," the tweet read. "A law firm has been hired and there will not be any more statements in order to not hinder the investigation."

La oficina de prensa de @daddy_yankee confirma que el artista ha sido víctima de robo mientras estaba fuera de su hotel de Valencia, España. Ya ha sido contratada una firma de abogados y no se darán más declaraciones para no entorpecer de ninguna manera la investigación.

— Nevarez PR (@nevarezpr) August 9, 2018

Las Provincias reported that the robber impersonated Daddy Yankee in order to ask the staff at the Melía Valencia hotel, where Rodríguez stayed, to open a safe in the rapper's room. The man allegedly made off with gold chains, diamonds, and other jewelry worth over $2 million and around $2,500 in cash from two separate rooms. 

Federal police have begun an investigation into the robbery and are using security cameras, the hotel's guest list, and possible fingerprints in an attempt to track down a suspect, according to Las Provincias. 

Daddy Yankee's single "Despacito," a collaboration with Puerto Rican singer Luis Fonsi, became the most viewed music video in YouTube's history last summer. A remix of the song featuring Justin Bieber spent a record-tying 16 weeks at No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart last year.

SEE ALSO: Musicians only got 12% of the $43 billion the music industry generated in 2017, and it mostly came from touring

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why the World Cup soccer ball looks so different

source https://www.businessinsider.com/despacito-daddy-yankee-2-million-jewelry-stolen-2018-8

Casey Affleck gave an intensely uncomfortable interview about the #MeToo movement and the allegations of sexual misconduct against him

• Casey Affleck gave an interview to the Associated Press in which he publicly addressed for the first time the allegations of sexual misconduct raised against him by two women in a 2010 civil lawsuit, regarding his alleged behavior on the set of his 2010 film, "I'm Still Here."
• Affleck settled the suits for an undisclosed amount in 2010, and the allegations resurfaced when he was nominated for (and subsequently won) the Oscar for best actor in 2017 for his performance in "Manchester by the Sea."
• In the interview, Affleck said that the fact that he had been "involved in a conflict that resulted in a lawsuit is something that I really regret," before giving an indirect admission about how he had conducted an "unprofessional environment" on the set of the film.

---

Casey Affleck gave an uncomfortable interview to the Associated Press in which he addressed the #MeToo movement in relation to the civil lawsuit he settled in 2010 that included allegations of sexual misconduct.

Affleck apologized and said he had some culpability in the situation, but stopped short of admitting to the sexual harassment he was accused of.

The interviewer, Lindsay Barr, asked Affleck pointedly about whether the rise of the #MeToo and Time's Up movements had changed his perspective of his alleged misconduct on the set of his 2010 film "I'm Still Here," where two women accused Affleck of sexual harassment. 

According to the complaints filed in 2010, one woman alleged that Affleck crawled into bed with her without her consent while she was sleeping, while another woman alleged that Affleck pressured her to stay in his hotel room and "violently grabbed [her] arm in an effort to intimidate her into staying" when she refused. The women also said that Affleck was verbally abusive and instructed a male crew member to expose himself to one of them. 

Affleck settled the suits for an undisclosed amount in 2010, and the allegations resurfaced when he was nominated  for (and subsequently won) the Oscar for best actor in 2017 for his performance in "Manchester by the Sea."

In the interview, Affleck said that the fact that he had been "involved in a conflict that resulted in a lawsuit is something that I really regret," and that he wished he "had found a way to resolve things in a different way," before giving an indirect admission about how he had conducted an "unprofessional environment" on the set:

"I was a boss. I was one of the producers on the set. This movie was (shot in 2008, 2009) and I was one of the producers. And it was a crazy mockumentary, (a) very unconventional movie. The cast was the crew and the crew was kind of the cast and it was an unprofessional environment and, you know, the buck had to stop with me being one of the producers and I have to accept responsibility for that and that was a mistake. And I contributed to that unprofessional environment and I tolerated that kind of behavior from other people and I wish that I hadn’t. And I regret a lot of that. I really did not know what I was responsible for as the boss. I don’t even know if I thought of myself as the boss. But I behaved in a way and allowed others to behave in a way that was really unprofessional. And I’m sorry."

Watch the interview below: 

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why the World Cup soccer ball looks so different

source https://www.businessinsider.com/casey-affleck-awkward-interview-metoo-movement-2018-8

Justice Department argues Trump could block anyone he wants on Twitter, not obliged to let people 'piggyback' on his tweets

• The Justice Department said it appealed a "fundamentally misconceived" ruling in which President Donald Trump was found to have violated the US Constitution by blocking Twitter users from his account.
• The DOJ argued Trump's account belongs to him "in his personal capacity," and "not the control of the government," and thereby affords him immunity from obligations to engage with the public.
• The Southern District of New York ruled in May that Trump could not legally block his followers merely for political reasons, calling it "viewpoint discrimination that violates the First Amendment."

---

The Justice Department said it appealed what it called a "fundamentally misconceived" ruling in which President Donald Trump was found to have violated the US Constitution by blocking users from his personal Twitter account.

"Donald Trump uses his Twitter account as a means of communicating his own views to interested members of the public," a legal brief from the Justice Department argued. "For nearly a decade, he has used that account to convey his thoughts on a wide variety of topics, ranging from popular culture to world affairs. Since becoming President, he has continued to use that account in the same way."

The Justice Department asserted that Trump's account belongs to him "in his personal capacity," and "not the control of the government," and thereby affords him immunity from obligations to engage with the public. The argument continued by saying Trump could not be compelled as a government official on a personal account to include all "people from his own property."

"And when he exercises the power enjoyed by all Twitter users to block other users from their own accounts, he is not using any authority belonging to or conferred on him by the federal government," the Justice Department's legal brief said.

"When he blocks a particular user from reading or replying to his tweets, he is exercising his right to choose with whom he will engage in speech," the Justice Department added.

The law-enforcement agency added that Trump was not obligated to allow others users to use his tweets for their own political messages.

"Blocked users remain free to express their views to other Twitter users through their own Twitter accounts; the First Amendment does not entitle them to piggyback on Donald Trump’s speech to amplify their own."

The Southern District of New York ruled in May that Trump could not legally block his followers merely for political reasons, calling it "viewpoint discrimination that violates the First Amendment."

The White House previously said Trump's tweets were considered official statements. Asked how Trump's tweets ought to characterized during a press conference in June 2017, then-White House press secretary Sean Spicer said, "The President is the President of the United States, so they're considered official statements by the President of the United States."

At the time, Spicer did not clarify which Twitter account — Trump's personal account or the president's official account, @POTUS — he considered to be issuing official statements.

But according to the Justice Department, the public's voice does not extend to Trump's tweets merely because he made a statement about public policy on the social media platform.

"... What is true for real property is just as true for intangible property in the form of a personal Twitter account," the Justice Department said.

The original lawsuit was filed by Columbia University's Knight First Amendment Institute and seven Twitter users who were blocked by Trump. One plaintiff said she was aware of 150 accounts that were blocked by Trump, but believed there were hundred more.

SEE ALSO: A Twitter employee on their last day of work took down Trump's account for 11 minutes

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korean defector: Kim Jong Un 'is a terrorist'

source https://www.businessinsider.com/can-donald-trump-block-people-on-twitter-argument-2018-8

Meet Rick Gates, Paul Manafort's former right-hand man who is now the star witness testifying against him in trial

• Businessman Rick Gates is a cooperating witness in the special counsel Mueller's Russia investigation and the star witness in the trial of Paul Manafort.
• Gates was Manafort's long-time associate and protégé. The two met as Washington lobbyists three decades ago.
• He joined the Trump campaign with Manafort in 2016.

---

Rick Gates, the former deputy chairman of the Trump campaign, is testifying this week as the prosecution's star witness in the trial of his former boss and Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Gates took a plea deal and became a cooperating witness in the Mueller probe in February 2018 after the special counsel Robert Mueller's office indicted them on 32 counts of tax evasion, tax fraud, and bank fraud in the Eastern District of Virginia. Manafort is pleading not guilty to all charges.

The two associates were previously charged on 12 counts, including conspiracy to launder money, conspiracy against the US, and making false and misleading statements in the District of Columbia last October. Both men pleaded not guilty at the time.

Mueller, who is leading the probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and the Trump campaign's possible coordination with Moscow, has been investigating Manafort's and Gates' relationships with foreign leaders and suspicious financial dealings abroad.

Manafort, who has strong ties to Trump's inner circle, has been a key player in Mueller's investigation.

Gates is a lesser known figure in Washington, but still an influential Trump booster with wide-ranging connections to powerful leaders and businessmen around the world. Here's what we know about him.

Gates' early days in Washington politics

Gates met Manafort nearly three decades ago while he was an intern at Black, Manafort, Stone, and Kelly — one of the most powerful lobbying firms in DC.

The firm worked to help boost the image of dictators and strongmen around the world, including Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, Mobutu Sese Seko of the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Russian-aligned former president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych.

Although Manafort left the firm the same year Gates joined, the two reunited in 2006 at a new consulting company called Davis Manafort.

Two years later, Gates took over the company's affairs in Eastern Europe, flying to London, Paris, and Moscow, meeting with potential business partners, developing deals, and negotiating contracts, according to The New York Times.

His trips to Russia included meeting with associates of Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch and ally of President Vladimir Putin who is linked to organized crime.

Connections to the Trump campaign

Gates joined Trump's election efforts in the spring of 2016 when Manafort became the campaign manager, working as Manafort's deputy.

He traveled with Trump and grew close with many top campaign officials, including former chief of staff Reince Priebus and adviser Tom Barrack.

After Manafort was ousted as Trump's campaign chief in August 2016, Gates continued working on behalf of the soon-to-be president, helping fundraise $25 million for the pro-Trump nonprofit America First Policies and working on Trump's inaugural committee.

As Mueller's probe intensified in the early months of the Trump administration, Gates left the nonprofit altogether.

The Daily Beast reported that Gates was still visiting the White House in June 2017 and working under Barrack, who has remained one of Trump's most trusted advisers.

Trump reportedly "had no idea [Gates] was in the building, otherwise he wouldn't be too happy," a source told the outlet. Gates still had access to the West Wing, even if it wasn't directly with the president.

Secret payments concealed abroad

During his tenure at Davis Manafort, Gates helped start a private equity fund called Pericles that was set up to buy companies in Russia and Eastern Europe.

The money that was funneled through that fund, reportedly through offshore bank accounts in Cyprus and other countries, is at the center of Mueller's indictment of Manafort and Gates.

On February 22, Mueller's office alleged that more than $75 million flowed through the defendants' offshore accounts and that Manafort laundered over $30 million in undisclosed income with Gates' assistance. Indictments accused Gates of laundering more than $3 million.

Jason Maloni, a spokesman for Manafort, told The New York Times in June 2017 that "Paul's payments for his work abroad have all come through traceable wire transfers to his US accounts."

Manafort has denied any wrongdoing, even though his name appears on documents linked to those shell companies in Cyprus.

Damning testimony

On August 6, Gates took the stand as the prosecution's star witness in Manafort's trial.

Under Manafort's steely gaze, Gates testified to having committed criminal activity "under Mr. Manafort's direction."

Gates said he illegally concealed 15 foreign banks accounts that he and Manafort owned from US authorities, helped Manafort file false returns, and embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from his former boss by filing fake expense reports, which Manafort then paid out of his offshore accounts.

The tension in the room was palpable during Gates' testimony. While Manafort crossed his arms and stared down Gates with a stone-cold glare, Gates did not meet his former boss' gaze once during his time on the stand.

"With Rick Gates's testimony, Robert Mueller has orchestrated an important demonstration project," wrote the Atlantic's Franklin Foer in a recent piece about Manafort and Gates.

"He’s shown how he can turn protege against mentor, how he can weaponize a devoted underling to destroy his beloved boss. How once he can get a campaign insider talking, what flows is damning beyond expectations," Foer continued. "The question is now whether Gates's testimony represents the culmination of a long and corrupt story, or the opening pages of a much more complicated tale."

On Tuesday, Gates testified to the specific details of how he and Manafort directed the income earned from their foreign consulting work into the Cyprus-based bank accounts they are accused of illegally hiding from the IRS.

Gates also said that after he and Manafort were questioned by the FBI as part of a joint American-Ukrainian forfeiture investigation in 2014, Gates discussed the FBI interview with one of his and Manafort's Ukrainian business partners at Manafort's behest.

Manafort's defense team is scheduled to start cross-examining Gates on Wednesday.

Read the full, original indictment against Gates and Manafort below:

Manafort-gates Indictment Filed and Redacted by Rebecca Harrington on Scribd

SEE ALSO: Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort is on trial for fraud — here's what you need to know about him

DON'T MISS: Meet Robert Mueller, the former FBI director and tenacious investigator now leading the Trump-Russia probe

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Paul Manafort — Trump's former campaign chairman — surrender to the FBI

source https://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-rick-gates-bio-photo-indicted-trump-russia-probe-manafort-2017-10