Anonymous ID: dcfd00 Dec. 12, 2019, 11:23 a.m. No.7489956   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>7489937

 

Josh Bekenstein is a Managing Director of Bain Capital, a leading global private investment firm with over $100 billion in assets under management. Mr. Bekenstein was one of the founding members of Bain Capital in 1984. Since then, Bain Capital has grown to more than 1,000 people working across offices in eight countries on four continents globally.

 

Mr. Bekenstein has played a leading role in a wide spectrum of prominent businesses in which Bain Capital Private Equity has made investments. These companies include Bright Horizons Family Solutions (NYSE: BFAM), a leading provider of employer-sponsored child care, early education, and work/life solutions; Dollarama (TSE: DOL), the leading dollar store operator in Canada; Burlington Stores Inc. (NYSE: BURL), a nationally recognized retailer of high-quality, branded apparel at everyday low prices; Canada Goose (NYSE: GOOS, TSE: GOOS), one of the world’s leading manufacturers of extreme weather outerwear; and Bombardier Recreational Products (TSE: DOO), a world leader in the design, manufacturing, distribution, and marketing of motorized recreational vehicles and powersports engines.

 

Mr. Bekenstein is also active in a number of charitable and civic activities. He chairs the board of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and serves on the boards of Yale University, the Environmental Defense Fund, and New Profit. Mr. Bekenstein graduated from Yale University and holds an MBA from Harvard Business School. He and his wife Anita have five children between the ages of 22 and 30, and one grandchild.

https://cpl.hks.harvard.edu/people/joshua-bekenstein

Anonymous ID: dcfd00 Dec. 12, 2019, 11:51 a.m. No.7490136   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>0164 >>0231 >>0463

China grips Sri Lanka with artificial island off Colombo

 

COLOMBO – China, no stranger to building islands, has finished one off the coast of Colombo that gives Sri Lanka, a strategically located South Asian nation, the potential of erecting a futuristic business hub.

 

Billed as Port City Colombo, the 269 hectares of land reclaimed off the coast of Sri Lanka's largest city was officially declared part of the country last weekend. The night sky above Colombo's coast lit up with fireworks to mark the moment this Chinese-led venture was formally able to begin attracting foreign investors.

 

Seasoned observers reckon the island will further deepen China's economic ties with debt-strapped Sri Lanka, where India, the U.S. and Japan are also vying for influence. But it was China that provided the $1.4 billion investment to dredge the sea and build the artificial island. It is the largest foreign direct investment project ever undertaken in Sri Lanka.

 

Diplomatic sources in Colombo say Port City Colombo stands apart from other big-ticket ventures in the country, a big beneficiary of China's belt and road largesse. Billions of dollars in Chinese loans have resulted in a slew of projects – a port, airport and highways.

 

Port City Colombo will not join this list; the FDI project comes at no financial cost to Sri Lanka.The project began in September 2014, when Chinese President Xi Jinping first visited Sri Lanka. It involved China Communications Construction Company, the giant developer and most active builder when it comes to Sri Lanka's BRI projects, through an affiliate, China Harbor Engineering Company (CHEC). Officials at CHEC Port City Colombo, a company floated by CHEC for this venture, are targeting investors from the Middle East, India, Southeast Asia and China in their endeavor to turn the island into "South Asia's premier residential, retail and business destination," as the company states in its promotional material.

 

Financial analysts in Colombo reckon that Port City Colombo's location will allow it to draw Indian businesses. At the company's road show in Mumbai, India's financial capital, one message was driven home – that the new hub is a two-hour flight away.

 

But as CHEC Port City Colombo points toward its goal of attracting a further $13 billion in property development investments, it awaits some action in the Sri Lankan parliament, which needs to pass several pieces of legislation, including one to make the island a special economic zone. Some of the legislation is contentious, especially that calling for a new legal regime and regulations that some observers are likening to the "one country, two systems" formula China uses with Hong Kong. That will require an amendment to Sri Lanka's constitution.

 

Thulci Aluwihare, head of strategy and business development at CHEC Port City Colombo, says a strong government push is needed if the legislative hurdles are to be cleared. "There is a draft SEZ law waiting for cabinet approval," he said. "Till such time we can only do soft marketing to attract potential investors."

According to Malik Cader, a former director general of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Sri Lanka, the legislation has absorbed English common law principles regarding dispute resolution within Port City Colombo. "The government needs to get these laws approved because [other] countries in South Asia are getting bullish to attract foreign investment, and this opportunity cannot be lost."

 

Influential domestic business lobbies are making a similar case. The Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, the island's oldest and largest business association, is throwing its weight behind Port City Colombo, saying it will give Sri Lanka's digital and information technology companies a boost. "The Port City is an opportunity for Sri Lankan tech and startups to upgrade and look outside," said Shiran Fernando, the chamber's chief economist, insisting that the island could eventually become a smart city.

 

Sri Lanka's new, pro-China government, headed by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, appears to have heeded this call. Political allies of the president, elected in a landslide in November, said in late November that modern laws are needed to attract foreign investors to the project. "Advanced financial and commercial investments are planned," said Basil Rajapaksa, younger brother of Gotabaya and a former economic minister. And "they [commercial investments] need a different legal framework."

 

Sri Lanka began tilting toward China while Mahinda Rajapaksa was president, from 2005 to 2015. On Saturday, Mahinda, now the prime minister, was present to celebrate a milestone for which he laid the foundation.

 

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Belt-and-Road/China-grips-Sri-Lanka-with-artificial-island-off-Colombo

Anonymous ID: dcfd00 Dec. 12, 2019, 11:57 a.m. No.7490177   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>0192 >>0202 >>0209 >>0239 >>0270 >>0463

>>7490048

>>7490153

 

 

>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/the-law-is-the-law-virginia-democrats-float-prosecution-national-guard-deployment-if-police-dont-enforce-gun-control?_amp=true

 

The law is the law': Virginia Democrats float prosecution, National Guard deployment if police don't enforce gun control

 

 

Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill say local police who do not enforce gun control measures likely to pass in Virginia should face prosecution and even threats of the National Guard.

 

After November's Virginia Legislature elections that led to Democrats taking control of both chambers, the gun control legislation proposed by some Democrats moved forward, including universal background checks, an “assault weapons” ban, and a red flag law.

 

Legal firearm owners in the state, however, joined with their sheriffs to form Second Amendment sanctuary counties, which declare the authorities in these municipalities uphold the Second Amendment in the face of any gun control measure passed by Richmond.

 

Over 75 counties in Virginia have so far adopted such Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions in the commonwealth, the latest being Spotsylvania County. The board of supervisors voted unanimously to approve a resolution declaring that county police will not enforce state-level gun laws that violate Second Amendment rights.

 

Virginia Democratic officials, however, already say local law enforcement supporting these resolutions will face consequences if they do not carry out any law the state Legislature passes.

 

“I would hope they either resign in good conscience, because they cannot uphold the law which they are sworn to uphold, or they're prosecuted for failure to fulfill their oath,” Democratic Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly told the Washington Examiner of local county police who may refuse to enforce future gun control measures. “The law is the law. If that becomes the law, you don't have a choice, not if you're a sworn officer of the law.”

 

Democratic Virginia Rep. Donald McEachin suggested cutting off state funds to counties that do not comply with any gun control measures that pass in Richmond.

 

“They certainly risk funding, because if the sheriff's department is not going to enforce the law, they're going to lose money. The counties' attorneys offices are not going to have the money to prosecute because their prosecutions are going to go down,” he said.

 

McEachin also noted that Democratic Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam could call the National Guard, if necessary.

 

“And ultimately, I'm not the governor, but the governor may have to nationalize the National Guard to enforce the law,” he said. “That's his call, because I don't know how serious these counties are and how severe the violations of law will be. But that's obviously an option he has.”

 

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring blamed the numerous Second Amendment resolutions in the state on the “gun lobby” as a tactic to frighten state residents.

 

“The resolutions that are being passed are being ginned up by the gun lobby to try to scare people. What we’re talking about here are laws that will make our communities and our streets safer,” Herring told CBS 6.

 

“So, when Virginia passes these gun safety laws that they will be followed, they will be enforced,” he added.

Anonymous ID: dcfd00 Dec. 12, 2019, 12:23 p.m. No.7490367   🗄️.is đź”—kun

Senators Give Explosive Critique of Wall Street’s Top Cop as Mainstream Media Yawns

 

At yesterday’s hearing, Senator after Senator probed the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Jay Clayton, on what were clearly intentional failings to hold Wall Street accountable. The scathing rebukes of the SEC came from both Republican and Democrats on the Senate panel. But you will find no reports about that hearing on the front pages of newspapers today — or in any section of leading newspapers.

 

Particularly harsh in their appraisal of Clayton’s rein at the SEC were Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Democratic Senators Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland.

 

Brown is the ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee and spoke at length at the opening of the session, right after the Republican Chair of the Committee, Mike Crapo, gave a far more charitable assessment of the SEC under Clayton. Brown listed example after example of how Clayton’s SEC has worked for the interests of “serial law breakers” on Wall Street over the interests of “hardworking families.” Brown’s statement appears in its entirety below.

 

Senator Tom Cotton provided a scathing rebuke of the SEC’s failure to stop the grossly conflicted and grossly overvalued company, WeWork, from getting its prospectus to become a publicly-traded company through the SEC’s fogged lenses. Those conflicts included Neumann buying up real estate and then leasing it back to his own company; trademarking the words “We Company” and then selling it to his company for $5.9 million; and attempting to list his company with a valuation of $47 billion when it was just weeks away from running out of money.

 

Cotton told Clayton: “I want to talk today about the collapse of WeWork. That company just laid off 2400 workers right at Christmas – 20 percent of its workforce – due almost entirely to the incompetence, greed and possible frauds and crimes of WeWork’s founder, Adam Neumann.”

 

Cotton asked Clayton if the SEC was investigating WeWork. Clayton said he couldn’t comment as to what investigations the SEC had open. Cotton raised the issue that the SEC had WeWork’s prospectus for nine months before the company filed for a public offering. Many of the outrageous conflicts were enumerated in that prospectus but that didn’t stop the SEC from allowing WeWork to move along with its plans to offer its shares to working families and other public investors.

 

Cotton brought up a Wall Street Journal report that Neumann had smoked marijuana while on a flight to Israel while he was CEO of WeWork. Cotton said he hoped that Neumann’s “transporting illegal drugs across international boundaries” was being investigated by the U.S. Justice Department. Cotton stated to Clayton that despite all of the outrageous conflicts of Adam Neumann, he was paid $1.7 billion “to walk away from the smoking rubble of his company.” Cotton said Neumann was able to “extract that payout because the corporate governance structure gave him 10 votes per share, a kind of super voting stock that enabled him to hold his company hostage until the other investors paid him just to go away and stop destroying its value. And he’s even on a four-year consulting contract at $185 million…” Cotton added.

 

Cotton said the WeWork scandal was “aided and abetted by some of Wall Street’s biggest banks and biggest law firms.”

The lead underwriters of what was to be the second biggest IPO of the year were JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs.

WeWork was represented by one of the most sophisticated corporate law firms in America, Skadden Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

The Wall Street bank underwriters were represented by another sophisticated law firm, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett.

 

The imagery of the WeWork disaster isn’t helped by the fact that before landing as Chairman of the SEC, Clayton was a law partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, another major Wall Street-linked law firm. As Wall Street On Parade previously reported, prior to his SEC post, Clayton had represented 8 of the 10 largest Wall Street banks in the prior three years. Senator Van Hollen told Clayton that he was disappointed that Clayton is focused on “strengthening the hand of already strong CEOs and corporations at the expense of their shareholders in many cases, with the proxy advisory regulation you’ve proposed.”

 

Van Hollen stated that Clayton had attempted to present the need for the proxy advisory rule as rising out a concern on the part of main street investors.

———————————–

Opening statement by U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) at link

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2019/12/senators-give-explosive-critique-of-wall-streets-top-cop-as-mainstream-media-yawns/