"we find that a number of other officers were implicated in the matter.” But I thought everything was fine.

how so? They reported each side from what i can see. CCA has done a filing so they posted that. When BML files thier counter I'd expect the same. there has been countless articles from either D'Aguilar and the results from the case where BML won.

He is not far off:
https://www.state.gov/protocol-referenc…

> The Honorable In the United States,
> government officials who have been
> elected to public office or are
> appointed by the President of the
> United States with the advice and
> consent of the Senate are afford the
> courtesy title of The Honorable.
> These positions include, but are not
> limited to, the President, Vice
> President...Courtesy titles are not
> salutations and are used only in
> writing before the full name of a
> person.

This is why The World Bank refers to Joe Biden as

> "Statement by the Hon. joe biden,
> president of the united states, at the
> Annual Meetings of the Boards of
> Governors of the International
> Monetary Fund and World Bank"

https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/m…

If you ever watch a Senate or House hearing you would see persons appointed by the president have "The Honorable" on their placard. The Americans still have some British in their customs.

that sounds right.

yea somehow he thinks the court will rule in favour of who wonbest music.

Well the cat out the bag when we have already branded ourselves as such.

The question is do they want to know . What has govts done to enforce and standardized disclosures or modernize campaign finance. The resistance on FOIA tells you enuff. The size of the auditors' general office tells you enough. People tend to work better when they know someone is watching.

I'm not sure why we arent implementing things that have been done and don't require any insane amount of money or effort.

To add some speculation:

1) the charge is by the SNDY and his grand jury not Dept of State. So the SDNY who is known as the 'Sovereign District' isnt walking around handing this info out. Nor they probably want the info out at the moment.

2) The DOJ either indicts or declines to indict. Only under few limtied circumstances do they get persons invovled who are not named in the indictment. The Mueller report being an example of where a declination occurred but the report and reasoning behind not indicting was released.

3)
If an indictment doesnt name someone it means a few things. either a) they dont have enough evidence to bring a case (remember they only bring cases they feel they can win). So it could be they had a tap or an informant and he mentioned this to someone. They looked into it and have no payments or evidence corroborating his claim.
b) or they could for all we know be actively investigating it and dont want the name out yet.

4) It may simply just come up during trial or discovery. Although not sure if discovery would matter in this case since if the allegations are true, and the conversation did happen, the defense attorneys would know anyway. I'm sure the defense however would want such a conversation to be suppressed (esp if they dont have enough to bring a charge to the person).

The PM is talking out of both sides of his mouth.

If I get arrested my defense cant be to pull out a video of other people committing crimes.

Further, if there is nothing to see here, why did in no less than a week, you bring a bunch of laws. Obviously you know that is a problem. He said ' We will have change, we will have reform, and we will have action.'. Why do you need these if there is nothing wrong?

Lastly, why even bring up race. The SDNY Attorney who brought the indictment is a black dude himself and also charged Colombians. The SDNY has indicted people of all colors, races and nationalities. How many black Bahamians were indicted by them in the FTX affair?

the govt decided to not get involved by getting involved.