A career State Department official resigned from her post on Tuesday, saying she could no longer work for the Biden administration after it released a report concluding that Israel was not preventing the flow of aid to Gaza.
Stacy Gilbert, who served as a senior civilian-military advisor to the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), sent an email to staff saying she was resigning because she felt the State Department had made the wrong assessment, The Washington Post reported, citing officials who read the note.
The report was filed in response to President Joe Biden issuing a national security memorandum (NSM-20) in early February on whether the administration finds credible Israel’s assurances that its use of US weapons do not violate either American or international law.
The report said there were reasonable grounds to believe Israel on several occasions had used American-supplied weapons “inconsistent” with international humanitarian law, but said it could not make a definitive assessment - enough to prevent the suspension of arms transfers.
That’s because that was already illegal. What the bill blocked was Campaign Financing by megadonors and foreign nationals.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text
DIVISION B—Campaign Finance
TITLE IV—Campaign Finance Transparency - Mainly talks about disclosure of foreign entity funds and corporations based outside of the USA or with any such affiliations.
TITLE V—Campaign Finance Empowerment - The US Citizen specific rules, and in fact it STARTS this title with an overturning of Citizens United SCOTUS decision.
Its legal. It does nothing to reduce bribes from megadonors. It doesnt overturn citizens united, it just criticizes it.
Added 1962: Title 18 U.S. Code § 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses
Yeah but theres a made up distinction between bribery and lobbying. Its money given to politicians to influence them, which is bribery.
You think Personal and Campaign Finances are the same? And you refuse to believe the Campaign Finance Reform I linked you to on a Government Hosted site, that Republicans voted down without hesitation, helps police Campaign Finance?
If it really is so inconsequential as you say, then why did Republicans vote it down on Roll Call 61, barely passing on Roll Call 62? Wouldn’t they benefit from keeping up a facade? Why would the GOP Speaker of the Senate refuse to call it to vote?
they’re both bribes.
I believe every word it says. It just doesnt have any words about reducing the amount of bribes politicians are receiving. Its mostly talking about transparency…which, we already know they’re all getting truckloads of corporate money already.