Replacement Of Lost Damaged Metro Card Form: Fill & Download for Free

Yes and no, and somewhat no, but at least 50% yes.Honestly, it depends on what rural areas we’re talking about, and for what reasons those areas are ignored, if they are.I’m from one of those rural areas. The heart of flyover country. And of Trump Territory.I’m not a Democrat, but I am a Never-Trumper, and in the opinions of most of the folks where I’m from, that puts me on the left somewhere between Lenin and Chairman Mao. I’m one of the people who is trying to have these conversations with neighbors.Their number one complaint? They’re ignored and forgotten until they throw a brick through the window like Trump. People pay attention to them now. But they feel like Democrats, who are almost uniformly city people in their estimation, either ignore them entirely or look down on them patronizingly and condescendingly and refuse to listen to them.It’s not that they are opposed to progressivism. It’s that they feel humiliated.Democrats forget this at their own peril.Let me try to explain.First, understand the actually progressive history of rural areas.There’s an accepted notion that rural areas are just inherently backwaters resistant to change and so they vote conservatively, and always have.As Ira Gershwin once wrote, it ain’t necessarily so.The Progressive movement of the late 1800’s and early 1900’s was primarily led by rural Midwesterners, particularly areas like Minnesota and Wisconsin. There’s a lot of this state with murals of Fightin’ Bob LaFollette on them. The Republican Party was an activist, progressive party for much of its history. That legacy does still live on in places like rural Wisconsin.It wasn’t just the sin and vice values voters, either, who voted progressively for the temperance movement. Organizations such as the Grange were certainly big into ethics and morality, but they were also focused on raising the quality of rural life, including rural electrification and road infrastructure, improved rural schools, and promoting agricultural efficiency.4-H clubs instituted competitions for youth to come up with more inventive ways to improve rural living and agricultural yields. My grandfather won a state soil judging competition. These organizations celebrated modernization and change.These were states that were leaders in creating public elementary, secondary, and higher educational institutions that were free or cheap for residents. UW-Madison created a “short course” college program for farmers to learn better agricultural practices at a bare-bones cost. Both of my grandfathers had degrees through that program. Even when my parents were going to undergraduate at a state school, their tuition was $100 per semester.These voters were concerned with democratic reforms, as well. It was rural progressives that pushed for reforms such as the referendum, the recall, the ballot initiative, the direct popular election of senators, and the civil service. They were concerned with income inequality, and pushed for reforms such as the progressive income tax and ending the laissez faire attitude towards corporate regulations. It was rural progressives that picked up McClure’s Magazine in droves, thanks to a reduced rate for delivery due to the U.S. Post Office and a good price for groundbreaking investigative journalism. And in reading McClure’s, they learned about how stacked the deck was for big business, and pushed for reforms to even the playing field.Even where there was traditionalist pushback, these progressive reformers were generally wildly successful in rural areas until only relatively recently in history.That said, those rural progressives were never particularly welcoming to immigrants, particularly those of color, and had a skeptical attitude towards civil rights at best. Women’s suffrage was a mixed bag among rural progressives, which is particularly ironic considering that women were some of the most vocal in pushing the temperance movement and the women’s vote was essential in delivering the 21st Amendment, a major Progressive Movement platform plank.And they were plenty hostile to urban dwellers, who they saw as decadent, impractical, elitist, snobbish, and out of touch with rural life. Rural progressives blamed urban big-business conservatives for monopolies and unfair trade practices that essentially controlled milk and grain and meat prices.Rural progressives tended to be Republicans. Urban progressives tended to be Democrats. The same basic fault line was present 120 years ago as continues to be present today: the urban-rural divide, and a resentment of city folks by the rural folks.Second, understand the more recent history of liberal (and even conservative) politics and its impact on rural America.Rural America has been beaten to hell, especially in recent years.Cities make up 5% of the country, but dominate in population and especially culture. Name the last television show that positively and fairly portrayed modern rural life. I’ll wait. Can you think of one? The few that even touch on the topic portray rural life as backwaters full of serial killers and dumb accents, or stupid and naive.You remember when the news covered the hundreds of people and $125 billion dollars in damage to rural Mississippi when Hurricane Katrina rolled through, right? Oh, maybe not, because it never got covered in lieu of talking about New Orleans. NOLA is culturally important. Waveland… not so much. Anyone who is not from within 100 miles of it, point to it on a map. Right now. Without using Google. I dare you. Tell me where it is.And yet, Waveland, Biloxi, and surrounding areas suffered substantially more catastrophic damage than the French Quarter did.Infrastructure in rural areas is no longer funded or maintained. Basic things city folk take for granted just don’t exist in rural areas, or if it does, it’s not reliable. Roads, even electricity sometimes can be shaky because it’s not maintained, because the county probably can’t afford it.Rural people generally have to do their own water, including wastewater treatment. You know how much a mound system costs, especially when you have to dig it up every ten years and replace it? You know much it costs to dig a new well if the old one is contaminated? Tens of thousands of dollars. Based on my current city water bill, which is high for the area I’m in, it would take me over sixty years to pay for the cost that my neighbors from where I grew up just put in to dig a new well and replace their septic system to sell their house.And that’s for government services; private ones? Forget about them.It’s not profitable to deliver packages to the ass-end of nowhere, for example. If my in-laws want to order something on Amazon, it’ll get delivered as far as their P.O. Box in town, anywhere from 30–45 minutes travel away depending on road conditions. The Postal Service only goes as far as a turnaround on part of the minimum maintenance road they’re on, five miles away.You want high speed internet? Your only option is satellite or maybe a cell hotspot, both of which are metered, limited connections, so no Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime Video, YouTube… anything that consumes more data than basic email. And depending on your television market, you might not even be able to get satellite where you area, even if you don’t want cable with it and just want the internet. Why? Because that’s how the contracts are structured with satellite providers, who really want you to buy the satellite TV.A lot of these communities were built around a single or maybe two industries. Where I grew up, your options were pretty much dairy and crop farming or manufacturing. Both of which are utterly dying. Automation is taking over manufacturing, and giant agribusiness and factory dairies are the only way to survive anymore. My grandfather used to break even at $18/hundredweight for milk. (What, you think farmers sell it by the gallon?) That was twenty-five years ago. It’s up right now from recent years, at just over $18 per hundredweight for November 2019 contracts.Plus crop prices suck right now. You have to get more per acre every year just to break even. A couple bad years in a row and you’re just screwed. So, when some guy from Madison comes along and tells you that you have to put a line fence back that’s going to cost you five grand in lost crop, it hurts.You know why there have been more small farm foreclosures in the past five to ten years than ever? That’s why.There is a not-unfounded belief and understanding that free trade agreements and globalization has caused this.Fine, Democrats tell them. Just move. Go to the city. Unemployment is down right now: get a new job! You can sell the land and go do something else?But right there’s the real kick to the balls: where are you going to go if you want to leave and how are you going to get there?This, right here, is why the suicide rate in my home area has doubled to tripled, particularly among youth and farmers.Where are you going to go?Move to the city, like the urban liberals say we should? That’s what Democrats keep telling my people. Just move. Just move to Madison or Milwaukee because there’s plenty of jobs.Right, because most of my people have $2500 to throw at a security deposit and first and last month’s rent on a cheap place.Sell the land and the stuff on it? To whom? Some giant agribusiness corporation who will happily buy you out… for pennies on the dollar of the assessed value of your land and equipment? It’s not like the other small guy around the corner has the cash to buy your acreage and your cows and your aging equipment.Almost all of that property is mortgaged to hell anyway, because every bad year, every time that milk prices and crop prices are down, you had to take out another loan and refinance the old debt. Crop insurance is enough to maybe keep you from folding for one year. So, you end up taking out a loan against the value of the farm. Again.If the bank will give it to you. Credit is getting progressively tighter because things are leveraged more and more. You can’t sell the farm and fixtures and equipment and livestock for what it’s worth, or even what the debt on it is, because nobody will buy it for that. You’re stuck, because you’ll still lose your shirt when the bank comes after you for the remainder. And the bank might cut you off at any time. Or raise the interest rates.There are no good options.It can be really crushing. It’s why people drink themselves to death, or get into harder stuff. They’re trying to numb the pain half the time. And then you get a drug conviction or a DUI, and now you’re even less employable, and next thing you know, you’re stuck on welfare like the people that the media you listen to tells you are lazy and undeserving.It’s humiliating.And then they turn on the antenna TV and watch the national nightly news and hear the national message of Democrats on every nationally-broadcast television show and media outlet: they’re white, so they’re privileged.And they immediately think, “Fuck that shit,” because it sure doesn’t feel like a privilege to exist where and how they do in what feels like and is the margins of society in a lot of ways.Now, I’ve written at length about how that’s not what privilege means, but that’s not terribly well explained by Democrats to rural people, believe me. Certainly not to my people.And that brings me around to where Democrats are failing at speaking Ruralese right now.It’s worth listening to the complaints of rural voices. Really listen, not take what they say at face value or impose an urban understanding of the rural consciousness.I’m deeply frustrated with some of the answers to this question, which say Bullock is wrong because Democrats do work hard in those areas, but are shouted down because of white fear and nostalgia and that they really like authoritarianism because who doesn’t love a lack of choice and women git back in the kitchen and Jesus Haploid Christ, this is why you people are turning off my people.You know why they’re scared of multiculturalism? It’s not because they believe white people are superior. It isn’t. It’s because they probably lost a job, or knew someone who did, to an affirmative action hire. We can have a legitimate, honest discussion about whether or not that’s good or bad, but if you continue to ignore the fact that happened, you’re going to lose them. As they say in my part of the country, “don’t piss in my face and tell me it’s raining.”*Edit: I want to clarify, after thinking about it a bit on my way home, that this is a very regional-specific take and rural areas may be very distinct in this regard. The pocket of rural America that I’m from is relatively close to a bunch of moderately urban areas and within two hours of three different medium-metro areas. As a result, there is a lot more diversity. There is also a much different tradition to the area. The racism that exists is largely implicit bias and subconscious racism, not overt KKK-style terrorism. That’s not necessarily great, but it’s important to realize that it’s a much different form of racism and fear of multiculturalism than “Jews will not replace us.”There are other pockets of rural America that are a lot different, and are overtly racist. And those pockets are not isolated to certain parts of the country that have a tradition for that. St. Cloud, Minnesota has an appalling number of Confederate flags in the windows of homes and pickup trucks. There was an honest-to-God white pride rally earlier this year. An anti-hate listening session and anti-hate walk had to be called off because of legitimate threats and people who where threatening to hold a protest. A protest against people trying to end bigotry and prejudice. In central Minnesota.I have had some truly horrifying conversations with people that I otherwise respect, who have adopted an almost casual racism, and this has increased in the last three to five years. It’s clear when I press them on it that they don’t understand what they’re saying, and are repeating talking points in many circumstances. But it is alarming, and should be taken seriously.End edit.They don’t fear progress. I call shenanigans on this. Remember, they were the very ones looking for progress a century ago. They absolutely still do want progress.But the progress offered up by progressives is largely delivered with a side of “fuck your present existence; you better just learn how to do something else, and move to the city.” As explained above, even if that were what my people wanted, it’s not an option.Democrats aren’t offering them progress that helps them.What’s the modern equivalent of rural electrification and paved roads? What’s the modern equivalent of rebuilding rural America? What’s the Democratic plan for saving family farms, or easing the transition away from them? What’s the Democratic plan for stopping the slow, relentless march of Wal-Marts destroying the general store?Medicare-for-All? That’s great… if you’re anywhere near a hospital or your local one didn’t already fold. Student loan forgiveness? Awesome… except, probably nobody in your family or workplace went to college, needed to, or will be working in public service.What progress are you offering them?They just like authoritarianism? Horseshit. That is utter horseshit. I call shenanigans on this up, down, left, right, and sideways.You know what the biggest gripe that my people have is? That other people are coming in and telling them what to do who don’t know anything about the subject. They didn’t vote for Trump because he promised them less democracy. They voted for Trump because he’s a one-man government wrecking crew. The fact that he’s destroying the federal government, deregulating the daylights out of everything, sparking chaos on the world order, all of that’s a feature to them, not a bug. They don’t love him because they want someone who will tell them what to do; they love him because they think somehow he’s going to get rid of all the people telling them what to do.They just love nostalgia? Again, I call shenanigans. You know why my people have at least some degree of wanting to go backwards in time? Because at least two generations ago, they could survive on what we had.That’s what made “Make America Great Again” both so enticing to some and horrifying to others. It’s a meaningless glittering generality that allows anyone to impose just about anything on it. Most of my people associated it with a heyday when at least a guy could support a family of four on a regular wage. The fact that it was also a time when being anything but a white guy sucked donkey balls just doesn’t cross their mind.Yes, yes, I hear you screaming in the back right now about how that’s the problem. That’s a selfish attitude. Their mindset is “fuck you, I got mine.”And it is. Oh, hell yes it is. Most of them won’t admit it out loud, but it is. They’ll fight it because these are close-knit communities that look after their own. They’re not selfish when it comes to taking care of the people they know. But outside of that? The rest of the country? They don’t know those folks and don’t care to.But if you’re a Democrat trying to reach these people, take a step back and ask why that is.Yes, many of them are privileged in ways that they don’t understand. That’s a piece of it, sure. But it’s a lot deeper than that.I would like to think that a lot of the progressive voices on here who are constantly attacked over their identity and actually consistently marginalized would have some empathy here. I’m not saying sympathy. But empathy at least.Again, as I’ve written before:It’s disheartening the amount of time I have had to spend trying to convince urban and coastal progressives that the people I grew up with are not just bigoted, racist, homophobic, uneducated Republican slaves to Fox News. That we’re not just a lost cause to progressive policies.When I try to talk to urban progressives about learning to speak Ruralese and understanding rural values, do you know what I get? Scoffs. “What values? Like racism, illiteracy, and superstition?”No, Karen. We’d like to feel safe in our homes and actually get ahead from an honest day’s hard work for once. Probably the same as you.When I tell my urban counterparts that my people feel like their way of life is dying, do you know how many of them smile and say, “Good!”Now, I’m not going to pretend that rural ways of life are always idyllic or healthy. There are destructive generational issues that have haunted rural life. Alcoholism isn’t really viewed as a problem so much as kind of the norm. Case races with Bud Light or Coors are part of living here. There are lots of people trapped in abusive, destructive relationships because they got married young and had a couple kids before they really had life figured out. Egalitarianism for women is not awesome in some parts of rural America. Being gay or trans could be a death sentence, though it’s better than it used to be in most parts of rural America now.. . .There is plenty of hypocrisy and ugly to rural living.But there is also a lot of beautiful to it. There will be a meal train and a card signed by the entire community with whatever cash people could scrape into the hat if someone gets sick or someone dies. Move into a new house and someone will be around shortly with a casserole or hotdish for the oven. We’ll hold benefit nights for a family that lost a house to pick up the slack from the insurance, donate our gently used toys and children’s clothing to a less fortunate local family, or show up in crews with chainsaws and ropes to clean up the trees that come down in a storm. We’ll patch up the roof of the pole shed for the neighbor or rope up the cows that got out through the hole in the fence for each other. We’ll plow or blow each others’ driveways out in the winter, especially if it’s old man Holler who’s like 170 and the crazy fool would probably try do it and kill himself trying if someone didn’t.A farmer in Central Minnesota lately had cancer bad enough that he couldn’t harvest his corn crop, so all the other farmers in the area pitched in, brought their combines over, and brought it in for him.Folks care about each other out here.I was always taught as a kid that we had to look out for each other, because God knows nobody else will.Still think that our backwards ways are all without merit?And then there’s the whole “you’re voting against your interests!” thing. I’ll admit, I used to think that, as well. The 2016 election and subsequent conversations and reading honestly changed my mind on that.The people in my home area feel like liberals are elitist and condescending to rural voters. The most recognition my home area has received from Hollywood lately is Making a Murderer. (Side note, that was several counties over from where I grew up. That’s a whole different part of the state.)Democrats are not asking questions of my people. They’re not listening. They don’t even have to agree, they just have to make my people feel heard.If you can’t offer them something better, at least give them a good explanation as to why, and why that at least still is important to the values you both share.I love this little clip from The West Wing, where Jed Bartlett faces a dairy farmer who was angry about a vote Bartlett took in Congress on dairy prices that look money out of his pocket and hurt him. The farmer is mad about it, and wants to know why Bartlett voted that way, because the farmer is seriously considering not voting for Bartlett for president.What did Bartlett do? He owned it. He spoke to a shared value: we take care of our own, and we should be making the world better for our kids. And what does that have to do with the price of milk? Bartlett explains that voting for that bill would have made it harder for poor kids to afford it.You know what? My people can probably get behind that.But better yet: include them in the solutions. Maybe there could have been a better idea out there for how not to screw the farmers and still get milk to kids in poverty. My people are pretty creative, actually. You’d be amazed at how smart they can be, how inventive, how far they can stretch resources.So, I think Bullock is right, to an extent, that Democrats simply don’t campaign or message in a lot of those areas, at least not on issues that my people care about, or in eliciting their help in fixing the problems we all collectively face in a way that also helps rural people.They’ll talk to you about those things. They absolutely will. Pull up a chair and let them complain? Everyone loves to bitch about the weather and the state of affairs.But they won’t respond to outsiders coming in to tell them what they “really need” or what their interests “really” are. You haven’t earned that.They might even be skeptical at first of why you’re asking them about it in the first place; they’ve learned the hard way that these kinds of discussions aren’t really about getting their input or knowledge, but to gather data for some report somewhere. There’s a lot of lost goodwill that’s going to take some serious time and effort to rebuild.But start asking them questions. Real questions, not pointed, closed, leading questions. Start listening to them.I think that’s where Bullock was going with what he was saying.Now, I’m sure I’m highly likely to get a bunch of people who will comment here “But WHY?! They aren’t suffering as much as we are suffering!”Are there people who are much more marginalized than my people? Hell yes.Are there people who have a lot less political power getting crapped on by my people? Hell yes.Is the perception of how much they receive from the government differ entirely from the reality? Hell yes and then some.All of that is true.Doesn’t matter.It doesn’t.This is how they feel about it.Telling them they shouldn’t feel that way is like telling a person who is depressed to just not feel sad. It doesn’t address the reasons why they feel that way, rational or otherwise.You have to start by affirming the fact that they feel that way and digging into why, or they will never listen to you.As my people say: “If you keep doing what you’ve always done, you’ll keep getting what you’ve always got.”Keep that in mind as you approach strategy around rural voters in 2020, Democrats.This was long-ish and without pictures. Here you go.Mostly Standard Addendum and Disclaimer: read this before you comment.I welcome rational, reasoned debate on the merits with reliable, credible sources.But coming on here and calling me names, pissing and moaning about how biased I am, et cetera and BNBR violation and so forth, will result in a swift one-way frogmarch out the airlock. Doing the same to others will result in the same treatment.Essentially, act like an adult and don’t be a dick about it.Getting cute with me about my commenting rules and how my answer doesn’t follow my rules and blah, blah, whine, blah is getting old. Stay on topic or you’ll get to watch the debate from the outside.Same with whining about these rules and something something free speech and censorship.If you want to argue and you’re not sure how to not be a dick about it, just post a picture of a cute baby animal instead, all right? Your displeasure and disagreement will be duly noted. Pinkie swear.If you have to consider whether or not you’re over the line, the answer is most likely yes. I’ll just delete your comment and probably block you, and frankly, I won’t lose a minute of sleep over it.Debate responsibly

Fraudsters are finding innovative ways to cheat you via e-commerce and banking transactions as well as mobile calls and mail. Find out how to prevent these.If a stranger you met for the first time on a metro asked you to give him Rs 10,000, would you do it? You don't have his contact details. You don't have his identity proof. And, no, you don't know if the money will be returned.If you are shaking your head in disdain at the sheer naivety of the person who would give out his hard-earned money, take a look in the mirror. It could be you. Or, perhaps, it is you, if you were among the 36% of people who have been cheated in Internet scams, according to a survey by Telenor (see 'Rising incidence...') early this year.The easy access to victims is the reason they are readily stalked by fraudsters—whether you use a smartphone or a computer, are logged into social media or pay online bills, buy gadgets from an ecommerce website, or withdraw money from an ATM, you are a sitting duck. It helps if you have poor tech skills, trust freely and are lured by easy money.As per the RBI data, 11,997 cases related to ATM, credit and debit cards as well as Net banking frauds were reported by banks in 2015-16. This, besides the 49,455 cyber security incidents, including phishing, scanning, malicious code, website intrusion, etc, (see 'Scam terms') that were reported by the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), in 2015. If, however, you take into account the unreported cases, these figures are a fraction of the frauds being unleashed in the country.A new breed of scamsters is coming up with ingenious ways to circumvent security measures. "Earlier, an individual was hacking while sitting in a garage. Today, it is a more organised market, with syndicates all over the world using sophisticated ways to indulge in identity theft," says Mohan Jayaraman, Managing Director, Experian Credit Bureau (India), a global analytics firm that has just launched a tool to measure the probability of fraud in banking and insurance.So rampant is fraud that RBI Deputy Governor S.S. Mundra has reiterated the need to provide relief to customers. "The RBI is examining whether to issue regulatory direction with regard to limiting the liability of customers on fraudulent transactions arising out of frauds and electronic banking transactions," he said at an event organised by the Banking Codes and Standards Board of India, in May this year.But prevention being the better option, you need to protect yourself from the omnipresent scamsters. In the following pages, we shall tell you not only about the various modus operandi being used by scamsters but, more importantly, the ways in which to secure your finances and seek redressal if you are cheated.Also Read: Are you likely to fall prey to online frauds? Find outONLINE SHOPPINGEnsure that the website, seller and payment modes are secure before you binge on e-commerce sites.There is no doubting the convenience of online shopping, be it for electronic gadgets or household appliances, clothes or furniture. Sadly, this has also led to new cheating techniques and sale/delivery loopholes.Modus operandiWhen you order online, it's possible that the product may not be delivered at all, or that you land a fake or damaged product. You may even get an empty package or, worse, one filled with stones. Ask Ghaziabad-based Santosh Kushwaha, 32, who ordered an iPhone6 worth Rs 46,000 in 2015. "The packaging was flawless. It was laminated, the weight was right and it wasn't tampered with. But when I opened it, I found the box filled with stones," he says.The problem can occur at any stage, for which you need to understand the sale and delivery process. There are sites that sell and deliver their own products like Fabindia. There are others that serve as a platform for various sellers. These are marketplaces, like Flipkart, Amazon or Snapdeal, which host products by different brands and sellers. These products may be delivered either by the site itself or the seller. In most cases, it's the seller who delivers. Some sites also provide special services, wherein product quality and delivery are guaranteed, for a premium. Here the site sources products from other sellers but conducts quality checks and delivers them itself. For instance, Flipkart is set to launch FAssured, promising improved delivery service and stricter quality checks, while Amazon Prime is the paid service that offers similar advantages to its members. Here are the various points at which fraud can occur:Fake website: Tech-savvy scamsters set up sites that look like genuine ones with similar logos and domain names. Some may create a dummy site with a product line-up that only exists online. The purpose is to extract money from vulnerable buyers and disappear.Genuine site, fake seller: If you have not received a product, or it's damaged or fake, the scam could be by the seller or courier company, not the site itself. Though such sites scan the sellers hosted by them, weeding out frauds by checking themselves or going by buyers' ratings, it is not possible to identify all scamsters.Courier company: Here, both the site and seller may not be to blame. If they fail to choose a reputed courier and go for cheaper fly-by-night operators, you could land a dummy package. A specific errant employee of the courier firm may also be responsible for the fake delivery.Preventive stepsCheck the site: If you want to try out new sites, make sure to check the domain name. Ensure the URL has 'https' (not just 'http') and a lock icon, and check the site's spelling. To find out who owns a particular domain name and if it's genuine, log in to https://registry. in/WHOIS, which is a searchable list of every domain currently registered in the world. If the site does not offer any contact details or has a vague exchange or return policy, abandon the site. You could also check the company's trust rating on http://www. http://www.scamadviser.com which will give you all the details about the firm and how safe it is to shop from the site. "Make sure the company has the right infrastruc ture, wherein you are able to track delivery and payment informa tion," says Jayaraman of Experian.Check seller's rating: If you have picked an established site, opt for product assurance services, if any. If you don't wish to pay extra, go through the buyer reviews and ratings for the seller to find out if he has a good reputation for delivery. "We take strict action against sellers who attract negative feedback about their service or are found to be engaged in selling products that are fake, in violation of copyright or any other applicable laws," says the Flipkart spokesperson.Secure payment: As for payment, avoid direct payment to sellers. Opt for payment services like PaisaPay in eBay, which ensures that the seller is not paid by the site till the product is delivered, safeguarding your money. Also, do not pay via electronic bank transfers because it is difficult to retrieve the money once it has left the bank. Opt for payment via credit card that has a low credit limit and is used exclusively for online shopping, or for cash on delivery, to minimise risk. "An important safeguard is to make a video recording of the delivery, starting when the courier arrives till the package is opened, in a single loop without breaks," says Kushwaha. This is what served as proof and helped him get his money back, he says.If you are cheated..The first step is to get in touch with the website or the seller. If it's a fake site, it's impossible to seek redressal. Consider your money lost.If you have opted for a safe site with a guaranteed exchange or money-back policy, you could write to the site, detailing the fraud, product details and mode of payment without giving sensitive information like your bank account number, etc. The site will conduct its verification within a specified time and revert. If the site doesn't respond, you could escalate it by registering a complaint with the district or state consumer redressal forum.A good option is to put up the grievance on consumer complaint boards/sites. You could also upload your complaint or video on micro-blogging sites like Twitter with the company's handle. "The site was taking its time to resolve my issue, but when I posted my video on Twitter with its handle, the site responded immediately and my money was refunded in four days," says Kushwaha.Also Read: Online fraud jargons that you must knowSOCIAL MEDIABe cautious while interacting on such sites and conduct background checks before giving away money for a good cause.The popularity of social media like Facebook, micro-blogging sites like Twitter, dating sites, online consumer compaint forums, charity and crowdfunding sites have spawned a fresh set of scamsters that preys on the personal information posted unwittingly by members.Modus operandiThere are various online shopping sites that require you to log in through Facebook or mail and this can be an easy entry point for fraudsters, who can misuse your bank details, phone numbers or mail login and password to clean out your account.Social media: Beware also of friends' friends who ask you for money. They could have hacked your friend's account, created a duplicate one, sent requests to the friend's friends and asked for money. "One of my relatives, who is a scamster, asked several of my Facebook friends for money and two of them even ended up paying her," says Vidya Nagraj, a Chennai-based consultant.Complaint forums: Be careful what information you volunteer on such sites. "I had put up my complaint regarding a wrong bank account number I had provided to an online shopping site for a refund," says Varun Kapila from Bengaluru. "I got a call from a person claiming to be from the site, who requested the correct account number. I didn't suspect anything and gave it to him. My account was soon wiped out, but thankfully it did not have too much money," he adds.Crowdfunding and charities: Despite the noble sentiment involved, be wary about giving money without verifying the claims of the backers. On 26 February 2016, an Indian American, Manisha Nagrani, was arrested in the US for raising thousands of dollars via crowdfunding to help cover the cost of treating her blood cancer. She had been perfectly healthy all along.Dating scams: Though this is more common abroad, it's not completely unknown in India. If you befriend someone on a dating site and the person starts demanding money for travelling to meet you or other emergencies, medical or otherwise, know it to be a fraud.Preventive stepsYou may not be able to seek redressal or have legal rights to claim the money lost because you either volunteered the money or information yourself. So the best you can do is avoid these. "Expose yourself only to the people you know on social media," says Jayaraman. Don't give money without knowing how it is going to be used and make sure to use secure payment channels while giving money to charities or for crowdfunding.BANK TRANSACTIONSBanking fraud may be among the top online scams, but the RBI is in the process of reducing the liability of the customer.According to the RBI, incidents of bankrelated fraud, including cards, ATMs and Net banking, have risen from 8,765 in 2012-13 to 11,997 in 2015-16. "With the introduction of 'Chip and PIN' security feature, we have noticed a significant reduction in incidents of fraud in credit cards," says Vijay Jasuja, CEO, SBI Card. But the sheer volume of online and offline transactions makes it a fecund ground for fraud.Modus operandiEssentially, the only way to cheat when it comes to banking transactions is through identity theft, wherein your credit/debit card details or your bank account information is stolen. It is this theft that is carried out in a variety of ingenious ways by scamsters.Online stealing: During e-shopping or bill payment, if you do not choose a safe site or payment channel, it is easy to steal your card information by intercepting the data. You can be routed to a fake site or the data can be copied through keystroke logging. Pharming ensures that the fraudster has your bank account or credit card number and CVV, which can be used for online transactions. Malware or virus can also be introduced in your computer which provides access to all the details stored in your e-mail. If you have saved your passwords and login details, these can be easily stolen. "Besides phishing and vishing, malware and breach incidents are the emerging threats when it comes to frauds," says Sanjay Silas, Head, Branch Banking, Axis Bank.SIM swipe fraud: This is a relatively new technique, wherein the scamster contacts the mobile operator with fake identity proof and gets a duplicate SIM card. Your original SIM is deactivated by the operator. The fraudster generates one time password (OTP), which appears on his phone, and he carries out online transactions.Fake calls and mails: "Vishing has become popular in the past few years and is done via a phone call. Customers, unknowingly, share their CVV number or OTP which is used for identity theft," says Jasuja. Hyderabad-based Bharat Naidu (see picture) knew better. "Last year, I got a call allegedly from Citibank, saying my points were about to expire and that they would transfer it to a new card, for which I would need to give the old card's CVV. I knew what was happening and gave them the wrong number," he says. Frustrated after a few attempts to get the details, the caller gave up. A month later he got a similar call. At that point he called up the bank and asked them to replace the card. You should also be suspicious of any mails that ask you to give sensitive information.Mobile phone apps: There are some apps that seek access to the data on your phone. Ensure that the app is safe because it is an easy way for fraudsters to seek critical information stored on your phone.Public terminals or Wi-Fi: If you use laptops in public areas or conduct mobile transactions over public Wi-Fi, it can be intercepted and your card details stolen.ATM withdrawals: This is another hot spot for fraudsters to gain access to your card data and PIN. Scamsters use hidden cameras and skimmers to gain information (see Are you likely to be conned?) from ATMs. Mumbai's Girish Nair (see picture) knows it well. "When I went to withdraw money from an ATM, the machine stalled. Later, I realised that the money had been withdrawn shortly after I had left," he says. He believes that the three men in the booth at the time had rigged the ATM and taken the cash.Preventive steps Be alert, install protective features on your phone and computer, and educate yourself. Here are some steps you can take to avoid fraud:Register for SMS and e-mail alerts: This will help detect a transaction you haven't made. In such a case, call up the bank's customer care number (see Call your bank...). Also, if your mobile stops working for unusual reasons, check with your mobile operator.Don't disclose details: "Never give Net banking password, ATM or phone PIN to anyone or respond to unknown mails or calls asking for account details," says Silas. Adds Jasuja: "No bank or credit card firm personnel is authorised to ask a cardholder for his card details."Hide CVV, go virtual: "While entering the CVV on a site, ensure it is masked by asterisks and the number is not visible on screen. This is especially important when shopping on foreign websites where the CVV number is the only point of verification and approval," says Jasuja. Also, while transacting on websites, use a virtual keyboard to avoid keystroke logging and while using an ATM, cover the keypad with your hand.Don't save details on sites: Many websites ask to save credit card details for future purchases. "But one should never ever save this information," says Naidu. Neither should you do it on any server, desktop, or mobile to avoid skimming and other frauds.If you are cheated..The moment you fear your credit card or bank account details have been compromised or a fraudulent transaction has taken place, call the bank and have the card blocked. Follow it up with a written complaint and declaration. The bank should respond in 30 days, and if it doesn't, lodge a complaint with the ombudsman (https://www. http://rbi.org.in/commonman/English/Scripts/AgainstBankABO.aspx).If this doesn't help, complain to the district consumer redressal forum and then to the court of law.PHONE CALLS, E-MAILS Phishing and vishing are among the most prevalent of frauds to have emerged in the past couple of years.One would assume cheating someone over the phone or mail would be difficult, but it's probably one of the easiest ways. All it takes is confidence and smooth-talking on the part of the fraudster. Besides vishing and other attempts to snare credit card information over the phone, there are other ploys to not only draw out sensitive information, but also make you pay money. This happens not only via phone but also mails. The Nigerian advance fee and lottery scams have given way to new excuses to steal your money, almost all of them demanding some sort of payment for bigger rewards.Modus operandi Insurance plans: If you get a call or mail, saying some of your forgotten policies are due for maturity and that you need to pay some money to secure this amount, know it to be a fraud.Work-from-home offers: According to the Telenor survey, this is the most common form of Internet scams accounting for 39% of frauds. This will typically entail an enticing job offer that requires you to first pay some fees and charges to be able to entitle you for the job. You are asked to deposit the money in a bank account and will never hear from the caller again.Free gifts and loans: This scam involves securing basic information from any forms you have filled in any of the offline shops. You are then offered a free gift for being a valued customer, but of course, you have to pay a small charge. Similarly offers of interest-free loans that require paying a processing fee should be ignored.Banking calls: If you get an urgent call saying your PIN is going to be deactivated, or account closed, and that you need to share your bank or card details to continue operating it, ignore it. Similarly offers for new credit cards or redemption of points that require divulging details should be avoided.Preventive steps "Avoid sharing personal details at public places like malls or shopping complexes on the pretext of holiday packages or gifts," says Silas. Do not reveal your financial or personal details on application forms, phone or mails. Similarly, avoid responding to SMSes or mails received from unknown senders or ones that urge immediate action or attention (see How to identify junk mail). Remember that there is no legal recourse if you lose your money in this fashion. So stay alert and secure your hard-earned money.

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY“THE KING CAN DO NO WRONG” WRONG!Langford v. United States: The Court Rejects “The King Can Do No Wrong”Donald Trump claims he is not legally bound to avoid conflicts of interest because such ethical standards do not apply to him. Trump insists, “The law’s totally on my side, the president can’t have a conflict of interest” reported in the Chicago Tribune. Is he legally correct as the media thinks? Perhaps, there is a public disclosure rule that applies, but not a binding conflict of interest law.Why does a leader play the immunity card with some bravado as it makes him look power hungry. Our tribal roots are a history of autocratic passion leading lords and kings to claim a divine and absolute right to rule over their subjects.The legal answer to a president’s immunity is not as straight forward as Trump thinks. Although Title 18 exempts Presidents etc. from conflict of interest law suits the Emoluments Clause does not exempt him. “A team of prominent constitutional scholars, Supreme Court litigators and former White House ethics lawyers intends to file a lawsuit Monday morning alleging that President Trump is violating the Constitution by allowing his hotels and other business operations to accept payments from foreign governments. They cite fears among the framers of the Constitution that United States officials could be corrupted by gifts or payments.” NY Times Story January 22, 2017. See also IBTimes story - http:// http://www.ibtimes.com/what-emoluments-clause-full-definition-text-constitutional-clause-decrying-conflicts-2479662No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8Art. II, Sec. 1, clause 7 applies to the President and Vice-President. The litigants allege -“These violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause pose a grave threat to the United States and its citizens,” the lawsuit reads in part. “As the framers were aware, private financial interests can subtly sway even the most virtuous leaders, and entanglements between American officials and foreign powers could pose a creeping, insidious threat to the republic.”Trump relys on the express exemption for Presidents for conflicts of interest in Title 18 as follows.18 U.S.C. § 208, the basic criminal conflict of interest statute, prohibits an executive branch employee from participating personally and substantially in a particular Government matter that will affect his own financial interests,The Section expressly exempts the President and Vice President and Members of Congress. It states:“Except as otherwise provided in such sections, the terms ‘officer’ and ’employee’ in sections 203, 205, 207 through 209, and 218 of this title shall not include the President, the Vice President, a Member of Congress, or a Federal judge.”In addition to the language of Section 208, the position of the Justice Department in the 1970s was that such laws did not apply to the president — even before the insertion of the express exemption.The issue has a bad smell and seems to hark back to days of yore when there was the divine right of kings without the rule of law. The exemption for the President and other notables in Section 208 harks to an overarching legal principle called ‘sovereign immunity’ that says that the government need not subject itself to the same rules that apply to the rest of us.It goes back to English common law, from whence we inherited our own legal traditions and precedents - and perhaps even before that. The theory is that since it was the sovereign that created the courts to begin with, the sovereign, crown, king, lord or czar cannot be held subject to a court order. The axiom is “THE KING CAN DO NO WRONG.”https://lawrules.wordpress.com/2012/12/09/langford-v-united-states-the-court-rejects-the-king-can-do-no-wrong/For a long time the old English, Sovereign Immunity rule was the law of the land in the United States. – But on July 28, 1945 a B-25 Bomber slammed into the Empire State building killing the pilot Capt. William F. Smith two others on the plane and 11 people who worked inside the building.The story is eerily familiar, at least the visible fires from a plane smashing into the tallest skyscraper, to the horrific 9/11 terrorist disaster in New York City.Gloria Pall, pictured here in 1945, worked on the 56th floor of the Empire State Building when it was hit by a B-25 bomber.Courtesy Gloria PallI had never heard of this story and it is the more jarring personally as at one point in my legal career I had meetings in the Empire State building in 1969.The result of the crash advanced the law cutting down Sovereign Immunity.Eight months after the crash, the U.S. government offered money to families of the victims. Some accepted, but others initiated a lawsuit that resulted in landmark legislation. The Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946, for the first time, gave American citizens the right to sue the federal government, but there are exceptions.http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92987873“In order to understand the exceptions to the federal Tort Claims Act, it is first necessary to understand the Act itself, and the reason for the Act. As you have already learned, at common law, the King was immune from prosecution. As sovereign, the King could do no wrong, and thus it was impossible to bring suit against the King or his (her) government. This is the basic common law doctrine of Sovereign Immunity. Because our legal system is based on common law, the doctrine of Sovereign Immunity exists, and is applicable in our legal system. However, because in our democratic form of government it is the people, not the sovereign, in whom power is vested, it was seen as necessary to modify the general concept. Even at common law, the King could waive sovereign immunity and permit a person to sue him (or her). But this was done on a case-by-case basis. It’s important to recognize that there is considerable dispute regarding whether the doctrine has any place in our democratic form of government. But it is generally accepted that the doctrine exists and is applicable, unless immunity has been waived.”Kaplan University PA301: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Unit 9 Seminar: Federal Tort Claims Act.A very sad exception is for military personnel suing Veterans Affairs for malpractice. The FTCA basically carves out a limited exception to the doctrine of sovereign immunity. As it applies in the context of claims against the Veterans Administration, the law only allows veterans to sue to recover damages incurred due to negligence of an employee or agent acting “within the scope of their employment.” Furthermore, the law only allows for damages if the plaintiff would ordinarily be entitled to damages even if the negligence or omission was due to the actions of an employee of a private company, under the laws in effect where the incident happened.Can You Sue the VA For Malpractice?U.S. veterans are dying because of delays in diagnosis and treatment at VA hospitals.At least 19 veterans have died because of delays in simple medical screenings like colonoscopies or endoscopies, at various VA hospitals or clinics, CNN has learned.That's according to an internal document from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, obtained exclusively by CNN, that deals with patients diagnosed with cancer in 2010 and 2011.My view is sovereign immunity is an anachronism that should be completely abolished with no exceptions. My comment published by the Washington Post story about a claim for sovereign immunity by an Indian tribe is - “James Matkin •“Sovereign Immunity” has its roots in old English law postulating that neither the sovereign nor the sovereign state can commit a legal wrong. The archaic idea was "the King could do no wrong." Rubbish, this outdated notion contradicts the most important principle of the law i.e. the rule of law and has been repealed through out the world. As Dicey wrote - "the rule of law encompasses equality before the law or the equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land administered by the ordinary Law Courts; the ‘rule of law’ in this sense excludes the idea of any exemption of officials or others from the duty of obedience to the law.." Sovereign immunity is a procedural hurdle that prevents law suits against the government including tribal leaders denying the rule of law and equality among band members and or citizens." http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/20/judge-rejects-tribal-immunity-claim-in-allowing-le/Sovereign immunity is a procedural hurdle that prevents law suits against the government including tribal leaders denying the rule of law and equality among band members and or citizens.British Columbia denied its citizens the independent civil right of suing the government for many years when this arcane immunity had been repealed in most of Canada.The B.C. government enjoyed an unfettered discretion to grant or deny the fiat without reasons. The new Law Reform Commission and public opinion wanted this archaic process repealed and engaged me in 1972 as a young law professor at UBC to write a research report. My paper concluded: “The fact that a fiat has been granted so seldom in British Columbia raises doubt that all claims of merit against the Government are going to trial. The decision of whether a claim has merit can only be made fairly by Judges in a Court of law who have the advantage of hearing all the evidence given under oath and subject to cross-examination. To allow these ministers to decide whether their Government will be accountable before the law is directly contrary to the rule of law and the notion of independence of the judiciary.”Why B.C. had not repealed the fiat process like other Canadian provinces is worth considering. The Premier W.A.C. Bennett was a populist like Trump. He had been a small town hardware store owner with ordinary skills. He disliked academics, universities and the media. He led the Social Credit Party winning elections for more than 20 years (longest ever in Canada) by avoiding being labelled as either conservative or liberal. He was a pragmatist allowing unions big success. He often pitted the rural ridings against the big city riding of Vancouver where he continued to win notwithstanding no one there admitted voting for him. His focus was building the provinces infrastructure with new highways to the interior and massive hydro dams. He was called “wacky” as a term of endearment. He often used his “I’ll give that a second look” when opposed. His aloofness vis a vis any upper class surely played a role in keeping the immunity.My research showed the government justified the immunity on grounds they were protecting the courts from hearing “frivolous cases.” This justification did not stand up to scrutiny as the fiat had been denied in major and very controversial disputes with the government. Also over the years very few fiats were issued.My paper informed the final report of more than 70 pages and recommended repeal of the fiat procedure. The full report is available here - https://www.academia.edu/7710138/Law_Reform_report_attacked_archaic_SOVEREIGN_IMMUNITY_DOCTRINE_based_on_my_working_paper_and_resulted_in_B.C._passing_most_expansive_override_law_of_the_immunityShortly after the Commission published the CIVIL RIGHTS report with my working paper advocating repeal of the Petition of Right the new NDP government repealed the Petition of Right process. BC was behind but it caught up and moved ahead of most jurisdictions eradicating vestiges of arcane rule. Liberalizing sovereign immunities is one of the great advances of the European enlightenment. Controlling the State - Constitutionalism from Ancient Athens to Today BY Scott GordonThe Enlightenment brought the counter valiance principleAs the European enlightment ushered in new ideas, from the great thinkers of the time; John Locke, Montesquieu and Jean Jacques Rousseau checks and balances or the countervaliance principle overtook sovereign immunity.John Locke (1632-1704) was an English philosopher who is considered to be one of the first philosophers of the Enlightenment and the father of classical liberalism. In his major work Two Treatises of Government Locke rejects the idea of the divine right of kings, supports the idea of natural rights (especially of property), and argues for a limited constitutional government which would protect individual rights.Another Enlightenment philosopher, Thomas Hobbes, wrote the principle "significance of seventeenth-century England for constitutional theory was that during this period the concept of sovereignty was replaced by the concept of checks and balances."The evolution of political practice in England paralleled the evolution in theory, for it was during this period that "the operational dynamics of the system developed in accordance with the countervailance model of government."Revision of Section 208 immunityI submit the immunity for the President, Vice President contradicts the “countervailance (checks and balances) model of government.” Conflicts of interest violations must be reviewable by the courts. The immunity like the ancient Petition of Right should be repealed.Scandal in PoliticsHistory is replete with politicians in US and Canada who became entangled in conflicts of interests scandals, bribery in particular, and this ended their public life. Scandal is not often litigated by the courts before public opinion pushed the miscreants out of office. Sadly, Canada’s first Prime Minister, John A. Macdonald is often remembered more for his scandals than his other achievements. “The dominant figure of Canadian Confederation, he had a political career which spanned almost half a century. He drank heavily, and in 1873 was voted out during the Pacific Scandal, in which his party took bribes from businessmen seeking the contract to build the Pacific Railway.” W. This cartoon exemplifies his shady side.Whither are we drifting?" Macdonald is shown triumphant at obtaining a prorogation, but is trampling a weeping Canada and apparently drunk with bottle in pocket in this August 1873 cartoon by John Wilson Bengough. Macdonald is depicted claiming clean hands, but with "Send me another $10,000" written on his palm.Trump should not be sanguine about ignoring the reality of conflicts of interest because of a legal technicality, or he may suffer the same ignominy as Macdonald.POSTSCRIPT: The decision denying Trump’s Immigration edicts is heartening as it denies the impulse behind sovereign immunity US style. The New Yorker summarized it - In the case, the Trump Administration had argued that judges shouldn’t even be able to hear from those who believed that their rights had been violated by the executive order; any review would pretty much be confined to making sure it was written in the right form. Trump thought he could do what he wanted, without having to explain it to any “so-called judge.” The appeals-court judges—William Canby, Richard Clifton, and Michelle Friedland—disagreed. “There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability,” they wrote, adding that the treatment Trump had expected “runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.”The Ninth Circuit Rejects TrumpismSimply put, the court held no one including the President of the United States can claim unreviewability under the constitution and the rule of law. Fine.My recent comment published by the New York Times underlines a concern about Trump’s disdain for the rule of law.Trump Goes RogueBy Matthew ContinettiJuly 31, 2017In Donald Trump’s White House, Reince Priebus and Sean Spicer were more than chief of staff and press secretary. They were the president’s connection to the Washington establishment: the donors, flacks and apparatchiks of both parties whose influence over politics and the economy many Trump supporters wish to upend.By firing Mr. Priebus and Mr. Spicer and hiring John Kelly and Anthony Scaramucci, President Trump has sent a message: After six months of trying to behave like a conventional Republican president, he’s done. His opponents now include not only the Democrats, but the elites of both political parties.Since the start of his presidential campaign, Mr. Trump has made no secret of his dislike of the capital. But his contempt for the city and the officials, lobbyists, consultants, strategists, lawyers, journalists, wonks, soldiers, bureaucrats, educators and physicians who populate it becomes more acute with each passing day.He ignores pleas to ratchet back his Twitter feed, rails against the inability of Congress to advance his agenda, bashes the press, accuses the so-called deep state of bureaucratic setbacks, and struggles to hire staff. In Robert Mueller, the special counsel, he faces a paragon of D.C. officialdom, investigating not only his campaign but also perhaps his finances. For Trump, the Senate’s failure to repeal Obamacare was more evidence of Washington dysfunction, and a reason to declare independence from Priebus, the Republicans and political norms. The call to “drain the swamp” is now a declaration of war against all that threatens his presidency.What we have been witnessing is a culture clash: a collision of two vastly different ways of life, personal conduct and doing business. The principles by which Mr. Trump lives are anathema to Washington. He abhors schedules. He wants to be unpredictable. He doesn’t tune out critics, but responds ferociously to every one. He values loyalty to the executive above all, and therefore sees family, who are tied together by blood, as essential to a well-managed enterprise.Mr. Trump has no patience for consultants and experts, especially the consultants and experts in the Republican Party who were proven wrong about his election. Insecurity is a management tool: keeping people guessing where they stand, wondering what might happen next, strengthens his position.Mr. Trump’s bombast, outsize personality, lack of restraint, flippancy and vulgarity could not be more out of place in Washington. His love of confrontation, his need always to define himself in relation to an enemy, then to brand and mock and belittle and undermine his opponent until nothing but Trump catchphrases remain, is the inverse of how Washingtonians believe politics should operate. The text that guides him is not a work of political thought. It’s “The Art of the Deal.”The difference in style between Mr. Trump and Washingtonians is obvious. D.C. is a conventional, boring place. Washingtonians follow procedure. Presidents, senators, congressmen and judges are all expected to play to type, to intone the obligatory phrases and clichés, to nod their heads at the appropriate occasions, and, above all, to not disrupt the established order. We watch “Morning Joe” during breakfast, attend a round table on the liberal international order at lunch, and grab dinner after our summer kickball game. No glitz, no glam, no excitement.Washingtonians avoid conflict. When someone is disruptive on the Metro we shuffle our feet, look another way, turn in the opposite direction. Residents of the “most literate city” in America, we do not shout, we read silently. We lament partisanship, and we pine for a lost age when Democrats and Republicans went out for drinks after a long day on Capitol Hill. The extent of our unanimity is apparent in the Politico poll of bipartisan “insiders,” the vast majority of which, regardless of party or ideology, tend to agree on who is up, who is down, who will win, who will lose.To say that Donald Trump challenges this consensus is an understatement. Not only is he politically incorrect, but his manner, habits and language run against everything Washington professionals — in particular, people like Reince Priebus — have been taught to believe is right and good.This is what distinguishes him from recent outsider presidents such as Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan: Both had a long history of involvement in politics, and thought the Washington political class might play some role in reform. Mr. Trump does not.In this respect, Mr. Trump has more in common with Jimmy Carter. Neither president had much governing experience before assuming office (Mr. Trump, of course, had none). Like Mr. Carter, Mr. Trump was carried to the White House on winds of change he did not fully understand. Members of their own parties viewed both men suspiciously, and both relied on their families. Neither president, nor their inner circles, meshed with the tastemakers of Washington. And each was reactive, hampered by events he did not control.If President Trump wants to avoid Mr. Carter’s fate, he might start by recognizing that a war on every front is a war he is likely to lose, and that victory in war requires allies. Some even live in the swamp.My Published CommentJAMES MATKIN QCVANCOUVER BCPerhaps more concerning is Trump's disdain for the rule of law. When he talks about pardoning himself and wanting the Attorney General Sessions to quit because he recused himself on Russia Trump acts as though he is above the law and can do no wrong. He is disdainful of the bedrock of our liberty - the rule of law. Even Kings after Magna Carta lost their invidious sovereign immunity.Opinion | Trump Goes RogueWhy the government shutdown is good legal news for TrumpThe president’s lawyers cited the government shutdown to win a delay in the emoluments case against him.By Dylan [email protected]@vox.com Dec 27, 2018, 11:20am ESTSHAREThe Trump International Hotel in DC is at the center of the emoluments lawsuit against Donald Trump. An important appeal in the case is now on hold thanks to the 2018 government shutdown. Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post via Getty ImagesPresident Donald Trump is using the government shutdown to try to force Democrats to fund his Mexican border wall. But there is another, more personal benefit for the president that he probably won’t be mentioning anytime soon: An important appeal in the lawsuit over foreign payments to his Washington, DC, hotel and other businesses has been put on hold.Trump is being sued by the District of Columbia and Maryland because they say he is violating the Constitution’s “emoluments” clause, which forbids federal officials from accepting emoluments, a term for gifts or payments for services or labor from foreign governments or US states.The states have won several important procedural decisions, but federal attorneys have filed a number of appeals to slow them down, most notably seeking a freeze on any further discovery — like subpoenas the states might pursue to get information on foreign officials’ stays at the Trump International Hotel in DC.Now the Justice Department lawyers representing Trump have secured a delay in the ongoing appeals. They cited — wait for it — the current government shutdown, now in its sixth day.Politico’s Josh Gerstein had the story first:Justice Department attorneys representing Trump asked a federal appeals court on Wednesday to postpone indefinitely all further filings in an appeal related to a suit that the governments of Maryland and Washington, D.C., filed over Trump’s alleged violation of the Constitution’s ban on foreign emoluments.The government’s brief is not due until Jan. 22, but DOJ lawyers asked the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Richmond, Va., to put the appeal on ice until the shutdown ends.The Justice Department asked that once the government is funded and the case can resume, all deadlines be extended for a period “commensurate with the duration of the lapse in appropriations.” Maryland and DC, Trump’s opponents in the case, did not take a position on the motion by the government, per the Justice Department brief.The federal appeals court overseeing the case agreed to delay the case indefinitely shortly after the Justice Department made its request.The Justice Department’s civil lawyers are typically furloughed during a shutdown, though they are notably allowed to continue working on a case if the court orders it. Federal attorneys filed similar requests to this one in other cases across the country, including, for example, in litigation against Trump’s asylum policies, per Gerstein.The emoluments clause and lawsuit, explained in briefThe lawsuit from Maryland and DC alleges that Trump is violating the Constitution because his businesses, including his DC hotel, are making money all over the world and receiving payments from foreign governments and their representatives as well as state and federal officials.The states successfully argued that they have been injured by the advantages that Trump’s businesses — most importantly, his DC hotel — gained over the states and their interests (like other hotels that receive taxpayer money) through his continued business stake in the Trump Organization while he serves as president of the United States. For example, as the Washington Post noted, the Trump hotel might be receiving business that would otherwise have gone to the Washington Convention Center or a hotel in Maryland, both of which are subsidized by their state governments.As president, Trump is not subject to the same conflict of interest rules as other federal officials. He is, however, still bound by the Constitution.So far, he has refused to totally disconnect himself from the Trump Organization. He ostensibly put his holdings into a blind trust overseen by his children, but most ethics experts dismiss that act as meaningless.Blind trusts are usually run by independent figures, and Trump is clearly in regular contact with his children. More broadly, because the Trump Organization carries Trump’s name, it’s still a signal to would-be customers that the money they’re spending could end up in the president’s pocket.Jeff Stein and Libby Nelson explained the emoluments issue in much more detail for Vox. You should read their explainer in full, but here is the big takeaway:There isn’t total agreement among scholars on the question of whether Donald Trump would be violating the Constitution by allowing foreign governments (and companies backed by foreign governments) to do business with his private company.But top ethics experts from both the Bush and Obama administrations have argued fervently that he is. At issue is the meaning of the emolument clause of the Constitution in Article I, Section 9. An “emolument” refers to compensation for a service or labor, which raises the question of whether foreign payments to Trump-owned businesses constitute forbidden emoluments.On its own, scholars say, simply having his businesses continue to interact abroad maynot necessarily mean Trump is running afoul of the Constitution. One issue is that no American president has ever had anything close to resembling Trump’s international business ties.Violations of the emoluments clauses are difficult to prove because there is little precedent, the definitions are poorly understood, and it is not easy to prove that anybody has been wronged by any alleged violations.Thanks to the shutdown, it will take the courts a little longer to sort this all out.Why the government shutdown is good legal news for Trump