Facebook Marketplace Accused Of Breaching EU’s Antitrust Rules
The EU’s European Commission has accused Facebook Marketplace of breaching antitrust rules because the company dominates both social networks and an online classified ads market – and has been “distorting competition” by coupling the two services.
Specifically, the fact that “users of Facebook automatically have access to Facebook Marketplace, whether they want it or not,” is of concern to the EU.
The alleged breach of antitrust rules comes in the form of a European Commission Statement of Objections released on Monday, which said it had informed Facebook parent Meta that a “preliminary view” deemed the company in violation.
A Statement of Objections is the first step the Commission takes when it begins an investigation into what it believes are a violation of E.U. antitrust rules. It does not mean the outcome has been predetermined.
But if an investigation concludes that antitrust rules have been violated, the Commission has the power to impose a fine of up to 10% of Meta’s annual worldwide turnover as well as a prohibition of further rule-breaking behavior. -Variety
“With its Facebook social network, Meta reaches globally billions of monthly users and millions active advertisers,” said Margrethe Vestager, the Commission’s executive VP for competition policy. “Our preliminary concern is that Meta ties its dominant social network Facebook to its online classified ad services called Facebook Marketplace. This means Facebook users have no choice but to have access to Facebook Marketplace. Furthermore, we are concerned that Meta imposed unfair trading conditions, allowing it to use of data on competing online classified ad services. If confirmed, Meta’s practices would be illegal under our competition rules.”
The report also raised concerns that Meta is imposing “unfair trading conditions” on Marketplace competitors who advertise on Facebook and Instagram via ‘onerous terms and conditions,’ which apparently also allow Meta to use data derived from competitors to benefit the Marketplace service – which would infringe on Article 102 of the EU’s Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union.
The Commission says the length of the investigation will depend on various factors, including Meta’s cooperation.
The news is the latest blow for beleaguered Meta, which announced last month it was laying-off thousands of staffers. Last June the E.U. launched another investigation into potential anti-competitive behavior by Facebook, which is still ongoing. Then in August, the Federal Trade Commission in the U.S. filed an amended antitrust complaint against the company after its first was dismissed. -Variety
The move comes just months after the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) ordered Meta to sell Giphy, a provider of GIFs – forcing the company to unwind a $400 million acquisition.
One civilian was killed, another eight people were wounded, and a poultry farm was damaged in Ukrainian shelling in Russia’s Belgorod Oblast, the region’s governor said on Sunday.
“One person died. It is known that the man came to us from Tambov and worked as a contractor on the construction of a poultry farm,” Belgorod Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov wrote on Telegram.
Further he said, “An estimated 14,000 residents are still without power supply. Emergency crews are starting to reconnect the grid to backup power sources.”
Belgorod borders Ukraine and has come under attack throughout the war. Sunday’s shelling came after The Times reported that the Pentagon now tacitly backs Ukrainian strikes inside Russian territory, although there’s no indication US weapons were used in the attack on Belgorod.
When the US provided the HIMARS rocket launch systems to Ukraine, the Biden administration said it received “assurances” that Ukrainian forces won’t use them inside Russian territory. But the US no longer appears to be concerned about how the weapons are used.
“When we give them a weapon system, it belongs to them, where they use it, how they use it, how much ammunition they use to use that system. I mean, those are Ukrainian decisions, and we respect that,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said last week.
The Times report said that the US was no longer concerned about Ukrainian attacks inside Russia leading to a major escalation based only on the fact that Moscow hasn’t yet responded with nuclear weapons or attacks on NATO countries.
Call it a democracy, call it a democratic republic, call it a constitutional republic, call it anything you want – it doesn’t really matter what America is if there is truth to what Tucker Carlson was reporting the other night via a source who had “direct knowledge” of still-hidden documents concerning the Kennedy assassination, implicating the CIA.
If indeed the CIA was in any way involved in the assassination of JFK on Nov. 22, 1963, then anything that has happened in the public sphere in our country since that day has basically been a hallucination created by an intelligence agency far deeper than most of us—certainly me, since I was never much given to conspiracy theories—ever imagined.
The affairs of the day—RNC chief Ronna McDaniel revealed to be a profligate spender on her own luxury travel, not on Republican candidates; Donald Trump releasing self-aggrandizing NFT pseudo-art as a fundraiser (rest in peace, Johannes Vermeer); even Elon Musk’s exposure of the multiple mendacious censoring creeps behind Twitter, although that has an eerie similarity—pale by comparison to CIA involvement and, therefore, massive coverup for decades in the JFK assassination.
That former CIA director Mike Pompeo declined to appear on Carlson’s show to discuss this is not insignificant. We all know about 51 intelligence officials—John Brennan and others who fallaciously claimed two years ago the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation. They have to have known otherwise. Now this?
Why are 3 percent of the Warren Commission documents on the assassination still being hidden after those nearly 60 years with all the major players dead, if not to hide something of serious importance from the American public?
It’s time to reconsider Oliver Stone’s “JFK” that, though I admired Oliver’s filmmaking, I originally thought to be a crackpot.
The Kennedy assassination has special ramifications for me because it occurred on my 20th birthday. I was a Dartmouth student at the time and drove down to spend the weekend with my girlfriend at Skidmore (Saratoga Springs, New York) and sat in a motel room stunned and mesmerized watching Jack Ruby shoot Lee Harvey Oswald, live on the black and white television.
I cannot remember seeing anything more inexplicable in my life. How could this have been allowed to happen only hours after the assassination? In retrospect, it becomes even more incredible. In a certain sense, I now feel that most of my adult life, what I have thought was real, has been erased.
Although most of us of a “certain age” have our own personal stories, that’s the relatively minor part. Historically, for our country at large, the Kennedy assassination was a disaster. It led to the ascendance of Lyndon Johnson and his “Great Society” social programs.
What actually occurred because of these programs was the not-so-gradual destruction of the black family, the women having been financially induced via handouts to marry the state instead of the men who normally would have been their husbands. The statistics on the decline of the black family and the rise of single-parent households are well known, as are the results that the black community and the rest of us live through on a daily basis. What becomes of a man, black or white, who no longer has the responsibility of being a father? LBJ was in many ways the godfather of Black Lives Matter, not to mention the hugely sad violence in the streets of our biggest cities, most notably Chicago.
If all this is true, the question becomes how do we get out of this hallucination that is more powerful than, though not unrelated to, the mass formation psychosis described by the Belgian academic Mathias Desmet.
To begin with, we need the full information, every document, and we need it now. Without the public being able to review that last 3 percent we can go no further. We should be calling for that—loudly.
The Everly Brothers perhaps put it best, although in another context.
“Wake up, little Susie, wake up We’ve both been sound asleep Wake up little Susie and weep The movie’s over, it’s four o’clock And we’re in trouble deep.”
Argentina has won the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 and is taking home the top prize of $42 million in earnings, marking a new record for the greatest sum of money FIFA has ever awarded to a team.
In second place comes France, who lost in a narrow head-to-head ending in penalties, and is taking home $30 million.
Where the top winnings were just $2.2 million for the ‘82 champions in Spain, the sum climbed fairly steadily to $8 million in Japan/South Korea in 2002, before more than doubling to $20 million for the 2006 tournament held in Germany. Pay packets have continued to grow since that date, with 2022 offering up $4 million more than the Russia 2018 World Cup.
The championship does not only offer money to the top two teams, however.
According to data collated by Sporting News, FIFA allocated a total of $440 million in prize money for this year’s World Cup. Third place was awarded $27 million, followed by $25 million for fourth place, $17 million for the quarterfinals, $13 million for the round of 16 and finally $9 million for participation in the group stages.
Two MSNBC hosts have been sued for making false statements about a man who pleaded guilty and was sentenced for taking part in the events of Jan. 6, 2021.
Chris Hayes and Ari Melber, the hosts, committed defamation when they made the statements on-air, Brandon Straka says in the new complaint.
Straka, a Democrat-turned-Republican, pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct. In exchange, a slew of other charges were dropped, including impeding a law enforcement officer during a civil disorder.
Hayes, on his MSNBC show on Dec. 17, 2021, claimed that many people associated with former President Donald Trump “appear to have been smart enough not to commit the Federal crime of storming the Capitol live on television.”
“Brandon Straka is the exception,” Hayes said.
Hayes also quoted Straka as saying during the tumult at the Capitol, “Take it away from him. Take the shield!” And Hayes also claimed that Straka had broken into the Capitol.
The statements are false because Straka did not commit the federal crime of storming the Capitol, did not utter the supposed quotation, and never entered the Capitol building, the new defamation complaint states.
The evidence to support the case includes a statement of offense from an FBI agent, which says clearly states that Straka was on Capitol grounds but did not enter the Capitol. The plea agreement also says Straka was on Capitol grounds but does not say he went inside the building.
“Comparing the Hayes Statements to the truth, it is beyond peradventure that the Statements are materially false,” Straka’s complaint states.
The documents do say that Straka uttered “take it, take it,” but not the full quote attributed to him by Hayes.
Melber, meanwhile, talked about Straka during a segment of “The Beat with Ari Melber” on Oct. 19.
Melber, during an interview, with Straka’s image on screen, said that Straka “was convicted in connection with the January 6 insurrection” and “was found to have been trying to help attack police officers.”
According to the plea agreement, Straka recorded people trying to take a U.S. Capitol Police officer’s shield but did not participate in the action. The agreement was for a guilty plea for a single charge, disorderly conduct on the Capitol grounds.
Melber also claimed: “His name is Brandon Straka. He confessed. He confessed to being guilty. He was found to [have been] helping attack police.”
“The Melber Statements are materially false because Straka did not confess and was not found by any Court to have helped attack police officers or to have attempted an attack on any police officer,” the new complaint states. “Indeed, the public record, reviewed by MSNBC and Melber prior to publication, demonstrates beyond cavil that Straka did not engage in any acts of violence or encourage anyone to commit violence on January 6, 2021. Rather, he was filming events outside the east side of the Capitol in a journalistic capacity.”
Damages
The false statements caused damages to Straka, his lawyers said, referencing the recent verdicts against InfoWars founder Alex Jones.
“As was true in the Alex Jones cases MSNBC, Hayes and Melber’s actions caused Straka to be inundated with threats and subject to intense harassment and hate messages,” they said. “Invitations to appear on television and podcasts and to participate in events went cold due to the toxicity of Defendants’ false Statements. Straka suffered insult, embarrassment, humiliation, mental anguish, injury to his reputation, loss of income and career damage.”
Melber’s statements were made during an interview with Matt Schlapp, the chair of the Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual event where Straka has spoken a number of times. Melber “intentionally poisoned the opinion of an important and powerful colleague of Straka,” the complaint states, adding later that “MSNBC and Melber deliberately attempted to end Brandon’s career and destroy Brandon’s relationships with high-profile political figures.”
The statements were also made to millions of followers on Twitter, and to more people on YouTube, the complaint notes.
BoJ Sparks Market Chaos With Huge ‘Yield Curve Control’ Adjustment
The Bank of Japan shocked markets tonight.
After leaving policy rates unchanged, the ‘easiest’ bank in the world decided to dramatically modify its so-called Yield Curve Control framework and increase the quantity of government bonds it will buy each month (while the rest of the world is doing the opposite).
The increase in range is huge (from -0.5% to +0.5% in yields). Thus, realistically this is a tightening policy move allowing long-rates to rise from 25bps (the prior YCC limit) to 50bps (the current YCC limit)…
The YCC adjustment is being reported as a mechanism to encourage better functioning in the bond market (where barely a bond changes hands nowadays). The BOJ says it made the change as:
“the functioning of bond markets has deteriorated, particularly in terms of relative relationships among interest rates of bonds with different maturities and arbitrage relationships between spot and future markets… If these market conditions persists, this could have a negative impact on financial conditions.”
The BoJ also increased its bond purchases to JPY9 trillion per month for January through March.
As one might expect, Cash JGBs didn’t budge on the news.
Interestingly, despite the ‘easing’ implied by the JGB buying increase, the JPY strengthened against the dollar (because with a wider/higher band for the 10Y yield, theoretically the BoJ will have to buy fewer bonds to keep it within their limit). The JPY is now at its strongest since August.
Until, of course the next depressionary collapse.
So the bottom line is that The BoJ will allow 10Y to rise to 0.50% from 0.25% but in order to make the transition as painless as possible, it will increase bond purchases to Y9 Trillion from Y7.3 Trillion per month.
This will basically remove the YCC kink in the JGB yield curve…
And sure enough, 10Y JGB yields have instantly exploded higher to their highest since 2015…
JGB Futures trading has been halted on the Osaka Exchange.
Japanese bank stocks are soaring on the increased outlook for their NIMs…
*MUFG EXTENDS GAINS, RISING AS MUCH AS 9.6%, MOST SINCE NOV 2016
Who had Japanese banks as the best trade of December
Capital Economics offers some clarifications as traders comes to terms with WTF Kuroda just did…
There was nothing in the statement that would suggest that this decision heralds a wholesale tightening of monetary policy.
For one thing, the bank’s assessment of current economic conditions as well as its outlook over coming quarters was little changed from the October meeting.
If anything, the downgrade to the bank’s view on external demand suggests that it is getting increasingly worried about the strength of the recovery.
Most importantly, the bank reiterated that it expects short-term and long-term policy rates to remain at their present or lower levels.
Daisuke Karakama, chief market economist at Mizuho Bank, warned about taking these initial kneejerk moves as indicative of anything:
“FX markets seem to want to take it as BOJ’s pivot, which I do not think so.”
The BoJ’s dramatic adjustment to its yield-curve control framework could reflect policymakers’ preference for a stronger yen, according to National Australia Bank.
“The widening of the band has been framed as a move to improve market functionality, but implicitly one could argue the bank now has a preference for a stronger yen (or at a minimum a distaste for further yen weakness),” Rodrigo Catril, the bank’s Sydney-based strategist says.
“On face value the YCC announcement reinforces the view that the BOJ willingness to wait for the right type of inflation does have limits.”
This action by The BoJ has sparked chaos in other markets with US Treasury yields spiking…
As Bloomberg’s Yuki Masujima said:
“The implications go far beyond Japan – with the BOJ – the last major holdout in a global monetary tightening shift (with the exception of China) — now letting the benchmark yield trade higher than before, the shock will echo across global financial markets.”
Bitcoin has spiked (likely on the rise in BOJ QE – which is actually offset by the BOJ ‘allowing’ rates to rise, thus tighten)…
Gold jumped back above $1800…
And US equity markets are tumbling…
…and just as liquidity evaporates for the Xmas break across global markets.
The governor had repeatedly stuck to a resolutely dovish stance by stressing the need for stimulus until stronger wage growth takes place, ruling out the possibility the BOJ will take action against the yen’s slump.
He had also characterized any widening of the movement band around the yield target as equivalent to a rate hike, a description that led most economists to believe such a move was still some time away.
Or maybe that was Kuroda’s cunning plan after all – offer no hint at all of this and then drop it during one of the most illiquid times of day during one of the most illiquid weeks of the year, so the effect is immediate – like ripping off a band-aid.
Presumably, the smart chaps in the BOJ believe they can allow the yield to jump and traders will happily let it rest there at 50bps. Of course that won’t happen and Kuroda’s successor will be forced to buy ever increasing quantities of JGBs to maintain the 50bps yield upper band.
A federal judge said he will block a “tyrannical” provision in an incoming California gun law because it would have the “chilling effect” of discouraging people from challenging the statute in court.
Judge Roger Benitez said in a San Diego courtroom on Dec. 16 that he would soon issue an injunction halting part of a state law scheduled to take effect on Jan. 1, according to The Associated Press. The offending provision would require those who fight the state’s gun laws to pay the government’s legal fees should they lose in court and was heavily promoted by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat with presidential ambitions.
The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, is Miller v. Bonta, court file 22-cv-1446. The lawsuit is one of many now pending in courts across the country after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled this past June that individuals have a constitutional right to carry firearms in public for self-defense.
The so-called loser-pays requirement would produce a “chilling effect” that would hinder state residents from suing to vindicate their legal rights because they would fear having to pay potentially huge lawyers’ tabs, Benitez said, agreeing with Second Amendment advocates.
“I can’t think of anything more tyrannical,” said Benitez, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush.
Benitez previously ruled against California laws targeting gun ownership. His defense of the Second Amendment has earned him the nickname “St. Benitez” among gun rights activists.
In June 2021, the judge found that California’s Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989, which prohibited so-called assault weapons such as the popular AR-15 rifle in the state, ran afoul of the Second Amendment. Weeks later the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit put his ruling on hold. And in March 2019, Benitez found that the state’s ban on large-capacity magazines included in Proposition 63 was unconstitutional.
In the case at hand, the judge said he would not prevent the rest of the statute from coming into force, leaving intact provisions that prohibit the sale of certain so-called assault weapons and a ban on guns lacking serial numbers.
The California gun law relies on a novel enforcement mechanism inspired by a Texas law enacted last year that crowdsourced abortion enforcement, giving individuals the right to sue over alleged violations of the state’s fetal-heartbeat abortion law. The law allows, for example, for someone who helped a woman obtain an unlawful abortion by driving her to a clinic to be sued.
Newsom argues the Texas abortion law is unconstitutional but says if the U.S. Supreme Court upholds it, then his state will rely on the same enforcement mechanism to target Second Amendment protections.
The U.S. Supreme Court refused a request to block the Texas law and on Dec. 10, 2021, issued a complex procedural ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, remanding the case to a lower court. Then in June of this year, the high court overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent that held abortion was a constitutional right, leading to a flurry of activity in state legislatures and legal challenges to abortion laws in courts across the nation.
In court on Dec. 16, Benitez chided lawyers for the state of California who said the state does not intend to enforce the legal fees rules unless the Texas law survives legal scrutiny.
“We’re not in a kindergarten sandbox. It’s not about, ‘Mommy he did this to me so I should be able to do this to him,’” Benitez reportedly said.
The Epoch Times reached out repeatedly to both sides for comment over the weekend.
Bradley Benbrook and Stephen Duvernay, attorneys for the California gun law challengers, and lawyers for the state, Elizabeth K. Watson and Thomas A. Willis, did not reply as of press time. The California Gun Rights Foundation, which is fighting the law, also did not reply to a request for comment.
But lawyer Joshua Dale, who represents a San Diego area gun club that is involved in the lawsuit, told Benitez the law would put undue pressure on would-be litigants.
“I’m terrified of this law,” Dale said in court, according to the AP.
“It would be absolutely devastating to pay the state’s attorney fees. I’ve got kids. I’ve got a mortgage. I could never pay $50,000 or $100,000 without emptying my 401(k) account.”
By Hideyuki Sano, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist
Investors that want to bet on China’s economic reopening but are still concerned about the nation’s geopolitical risks and market volatility are finding better alternatives elsewhere in Asia.
The idea is that if Asia-Pacific’s No. 1 economy rebounds, it will also benefit the region’s big exporters to China like South Korea and Taiwan, as well as major commodity producers such as Australia and Indonesia. And investors in those areas won’t have to worry much about China risks such as sudden regulatory crackdowns, the property market’s debt turmoil, and the possibility of escalating military tensions with neighbors.
“If one assumes the Chinese economy will improve, you can get similar benefits by investing in countries that have close ties with China,” said Hiroshi Matsumoto, senior client portfolio manager at Pictet Asset Management. The Swiss asset manager sees Germany in addition to Asian countries as getting a special boost from China opening up again.
Goldman Sachs says emerging- market equities and commodities, especially copper, are among the largest beneficiaries from China reopening, adjusted for volatility.
The MSCI Emerging Markets Index may rise to 1,080, a gain of about 13% from the current level, Goldman strategists Dominic Wilson and Vickie Chang estimated in a research note dated Dec. 2. That’s smaller than the potential gain of 17% in the Hang Seng China Enterprises Index but it’s more than the 7.6% upside seen for the US S&P 500.
A reopened China would require more commodity imports to power its massive economic engine, good news for resource-rich countries like Australia and Indonesia. “If China does reopen in a big way, without major headwinds, I think Indonesia and Australia become a lot more attractive,” said Charu Chanana, a senior strategist at Saxo Capital Markets.
Compared with the wild moves in Chinese shares, Asian equities elsewhere are much less volatile, meaning that investors get better risk-adjusted returns. Three-month implied volatilities for the Hang Seng China Enterprises Index stood at 30 while those for the Taiwanese, Korean and Australian benchmarks were 19, 17 and 14 respectively.
Meeting to set economic policy priorities for 2023, Chinese leaders including President Xi Jinping said restoring and expanding consumption should “take precedence.” That suggests policy makers will take more steps to support the economy, which is facing near-term risks from the latest surges in Covid cases.
Hopes that China will open its international borders may help tourism-related shares in Asian countries from Japan to Thailand, where Chinese tourists made up for about a quarter to a third of international arrivals. If those travelers return to Thailand sooner than expected, that may help lift the baht by improving the country’s current-account balance, said Nuttachart Mekmasin, analyst at Trinity Securities in Bangkok.
Texas Power Grid Faces Crucial Moment Ahead Of Single Digit Temperatures
Forecasters are warning that a potent Arctic airmass could plunge temperatures across Texas to single digits later this week. Temperatures in Texas’s Permian Basin could dip to 25 F by late Friday, risking the potential for freeze-offs that could curtail the flow of natural gas. The blast of cold air comes just 22 months after the early 2021 cold wave that collapsed Lone Star State’s power grid.
One weather model via PivitolWeather forecasts single digits in a large swath of Texas on Friday.
The North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC), a commission responsible for assessing power risks, warned that cold could stress the electrical grid in Texas.
“The effect it can have on generators — and the way demand can rise sharply in cold weather — can lead to load risk,” Mark Olson, a reliability manager at NERC, said, who was quoted by Bloomberg.
According to Houston-based NatGas research firm Criterion Research, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) — the state’s grid operator — expects power demand to rise to over 61 gigawatts on Friday, which would come close to summer loads and most prior winter showings.
A massive cold stress test for ERCOT appears to be imminent. Here’s more from Criterion:
ERCOT formally issued an “Operating Condition Notice (OCN)” ahead of this week’s winter weather that will run from December 22-26. The OCN goes into effect when temperatures fall below 25 degrees for the Austin/San Antonio and DFW areas. ERCOT President and CEO Pablo Vegas cited that “As we monitor weather conditions, we want to assure Texans that the grid is resilient and reliable.”
ERCOT’s latest load forecast is extreme, with the ISO expecting demand to rise to >61 GW on December 23, which rivals summer loads and most prior winter showings.
Regional load will push above 50 GW as the front moves in on Thursday, and the demand will be most intense on Friday.
Currently, wind is projected to reach a 12/22 level of 22 GW before dropping the following day (12/23) to 12 GW and then to 4.5 GW on 12/24.
If this forecast holds for wind & total load, ERCOT will need its fossil fuel assets to ramp to 45 GW during the peak cold.
ERCOT’s fossil fuel assets are certainly capable of 45-50 GW in demand, and the upcoming system is only bringing cold weather rather than the winter precipitation we saw during Winter Storm Uri.
Bitterly cold temperatures in the coming days will test ERCOT’s winterization upgrades since the grid collapse in 2021.
Congress is trying to pass a bill to allow the federal government to pressure people to give up their Second Amendment rights in the name of suicide prevention. At the same time, newly released documents show multiple federal law enforcement agencies have effectively done this to people without congressional approval.
On Thursday, Gun Owners of America (GOA), put all its evidence online that shows the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has permanently disarmed people. The gun rights group is lobbying on Capitol Hill to stop this practice from being codified.
The bipartisan bill called the “Preventing Suicide Through Voluntary Firearm Purchase Delay Act” passed the Judiciary Committee last week. It says the FBI would create a new database for people who volunteer to be blocked from buying or possessing a gun. The “delay” in the bill title refers to the period from which the person put themselves into the database and potentially subsequently took themselves out of it.
The FBI program, which claims it ended in 2019, and the House bill both use a “self-submission” program to make people prohibited who could not be blocked from having a gun under current law. The Brady Law of 1993 created the NICS system of background checks to help enforce the nine prohibited categories of people (from the Gun Control Act of 1968 ) from buying guns.
The House bill would upend federal background check gun law by making it arbitrary who loses the right to own or buy a gun. Under current law, a person is prohibited from buying or owning a firearm for mental health reasons only due to being adjudicated as mentally defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution. The House bill makes it so people in this new FBI database who have not experienced these situations would still be committing a federal crime by possessing a gun.
The Opposition
“I’d like to make sure this bill in Congress doesn’t become law—lest it be weaponized against the American people,” Aidan Johnston, GOA’s director of federal affairs told The Epoch Times.
“The very existence of a bill to codify what the FBI was already doing proves the FBI had no authorization from Congress to carry out this program,” said Johnston. The GOA’s released records showing the FBI has forced 23 people to permanently sign away their rights to own a gun, and the agency has still withheld documents in the ongoing Freedom of Information lawsuit.
“Congress should be punishing those bureaucrats who abused it instead of codifying the program and the unconstitutional behavior,” said Johnston.
Bipartisan Bill Speeds Through
The legislation has two Democrat cosponsors—Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.)—and two Republicans. One of the two GOP cosponsors, Rep. John Curtis (R-Utah), is not on the Judiciary Committee.
The other Republican, Ken Buck (R-Colo.), said after a lengthy debate about the problems that he hoped to work with Jaypal to fix the issues in the bill before the vote or in the days following. Since Democrats did not change anything, Buck voted against his own bill. The final vote was 20 to 16 on party lines.
However, Buck said in the hearing that he will work with Jayapal to rewrite the bill and reintroduce it in the next Congress. A spokesman for Buck declined to comment on the timing of the next steps.
Constitutional Issues With the Bill
During the committee markup, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), spoke out about the multiple problems with the bill. Massie pointed out that the major flaw in this proposed law is it wouldn’t just affect the person who opts to lose the right to have a firearm. The bill makes it illegal to give or sell a gun to someone on the FBI’s new “Voluntary Purchase Delay Database.”
“If my father added his name to this list ten years ago, and he says, ‘Hey Thomas, loan me a gun, I want to go hunting.’”said Massie. “And he seems of sound mind to me. And I loan him a shotgun. Then he goes out in the woods and kills himself, am I now guilty of a federal crime?”
The Democrats on the committee responded that is “not the intent of the bill.” Massie replied, “What we are marking up is not intent. It’s U.S. code and it’s very precise. People will be convicted based on the language that comes out of here today.”
Getting Rights Back
Unlike the FBI program which is permanent, Congress would allow people to remove themselves from the database by requesting it from the Attorney General, which would process after 21 days. Buck said this should be rewritten to be 21 days after the request is submitted instead of when the Department of Justice acknowledged receipt.
The other way to get out of the system is to petition the Attorney General with a declaration from a mental health professional that the individual does not present a substantial risk of harm to self. That would take effect in 24 hours. Buck said that part had to be rewritten. “I beg anyone on this committee to tell me when the federal government has done anything in 24 hours.”
Jayapal said she didn’t have a problem fixing the multiple changes Buck suggested. This indicates the bill will be able to move quickly to the Rules Committee and possibly the floor during the next Congress. It is unlikely there will be a vote by the full House in the remaining days of the Democratic-controlled Congress.
Secret Service and ICE Disarming
The move on Capitol Hill came at the same time as the FBI released more documents to the GOA, as first reported by The Washington Examiner, Emails show the U.S. Secret Service and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sent signed forms to the FBI in which people who allegedly have mental health problems signed away their right to have a gun for the rest of their lives.
“Awesome!” one ICE agent wrote to the FBI once a citizen’s form was added to the database.
The Secret Service and ICE agents, both under the Department of Homeland Security, emailed multiple times with officials at the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) in a coordinated, federal program to take guns away from people who were mostly on the feds’ radar for online chat rooms.
The internal document sent between the agencies is called the “NICS index self-submission form.” By signing the form, the person agrees to “denial of my right to purchase, to possess and to use any firearm.” It also says the signature means that once the person is in the so-called NICS index, he or she “may not be permitted to withdraw my name or information.”
FBI Hiding Information
Along with the emails from the other agencies, the FBI released eight more completed forms which all checked the box to agree they had a mental health condition that caused them to be a danger to themselves or others. The FBI will not say how many people have been put into the background check system without violating any federal laws.
