Warren creates document to release people from NDAs with Bloomberg

[brooklynite]

The Hill

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) drafted a document her primary opponent Mike Bloomberg can sign to release his former employees from nondisclosure agreements (NDAs).

Warren, who has been calling on Bloomberg to release people who used to work for his company from the secrecy agreements for months, unveiled her document Thursday during a CNN town hall in Nevada.

“So I used to teach contract law. And I thought I would make this easy. I wrote up a release and covenant not to sue. And all that Mayor Bloomberg has to do is download it. I'll text it. Sign it. And then the women, or men, will be free to speak and tell their own stories," Warren said.

She then read the document verbatim during the town hall, adding “I think that the mayor should sign this and that we all have a right to see."

[Squinch]

1. This is absurd. The NDAs are not against him. He can't release them.

They're among other people in his company. They are legal agreements between two people other than himself. He is not a party in them. He can't legally do what she is asking and she knows it.

She is in a strong position right now. It is disappointing that she would resort to gimmicks from that position.

[denem]

2. I think Warren is on top of the law, don't you?

[Squinch]

3. Yes. That's why this is disappointing. She's better than this.

[denem]

4. Warren has released the text.

If it is legally defective or ineffective, we will know about it.

[Squinch]

5. The concept is legally defective. And she knows it is. She is

better than this type of gimmick.

[denem]

8. The text is out there

On a quick reading it estops Mike Bloomberrg and Bloomberg LP, from claiming harm or being parties to enforcement proceedings. As I said, we will know soon enough.

[Bradshaw3]

43. And you know this how?

You teach law at Harvard?

[Act_of_Reparation]

6. Yes, Bloomberg is clearly the victim here.

[Squinch]

7. Sigh.

[brooklynite]

9. No, you're wrong...

Yes, an NDA is an agreement between two parties. But if one Party is willing to waive it, the other Party then has the option to as well.

[Squinch]

11. But he is neither party. The NDAs are not about incidents

involving him. They are about incidents between his employees.

[yardwork]

12. How do you know?

[Squinch]

14. Here:

There are dozens of those lawsuits and the press has had headlines saying Mike Bloomberg accused by 45 women of sexual harassment. Those lawsuits are targeted at Bloomberg L.P. They are the defendant in those cases. In none of those cases has Mike Bloomberg been accused personally of predatory behavior, in the ones that have come to light and that have been adjudicated.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/bloomberg-2020-senior-advisor-responds-to-sexism-allegations/

[LiberalFighter]

17. Yet Bloomberg responded, "Maybe They Didn't Like a Joke I Told".

[Squinch]

18. Though we may not like that statement, it has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

[LiberalFighter]

20. Nothing to do with it? That was his response about the women in his company with NDA's.

[backtoblue]

21. .

[yardwork]

47. You know, that doesn't look good for Bloomberg at all.

First, this set of NDAs - even if they involve the company rather than him personally - looks terrible. Second, we have no idea if there are additional NDAs involving him personally. Overall, the whole situation looks terrible for him.

[Squinch]

48. I agree. It doesn't look good in the same way that women saying

the BS campaign was a sexist culture didn't look good.

But then, none of them are clean on these issues.

[yardwork]

49. Are you serious? You're saying all the Democratic candidates have a history of sexual harassment?

Can you point to dozens of sexual harassment suits made against Elizabeth Warren? No, because they don't exist.

[Squinch]

53. Ran an organization where sexism was rampant? I just did.

BS was accused of running a sexist organization 2 years ago. Which to me was a lot worse than having an organization accused of sexism in the 90s when it really was a different world.

But yes, you are right. I misspoke. Neither woman, nor Pete as far as I know has been accused of sexism or of running a sexist organization.

[brooklynite]

13. Bloomberg LP is a privately held company. Michael Bloomberg is the majority shareholder.

[Bradshaw3]

44. Thank you n/t

[jmg257]

15. Well - except for the one for this lawsuit...this one names him specifically, along with LP,

As defendants.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/sekiko-sakai-garrison-v-michael-bloomberg-and-bloomberg-l-p/6d9bea84-4783-4b88-8866-26bddfb14b6d/

There is a settlement for this lawsuit, I don't think its a big stretch to think he is named in it.

":In depositions from Garrison’s case, which they settled for an undisclosed sum, Bloomberg repeatedly denied the claims. “I never said those words and there would be no reason to do so, it’s ridiculous and an outrage,” he said, according to the Post

With enough cash, you can keep just about anything quiet. NDA and go away!

[Squinch]

16. And the wide publication of documents and facts in that case suggest that there was no NDA.

[jmg257]

19. Not so sure that is acurate...

Attorney Bonnie Joseph represented Sekiko Sakai Garrison, who worked as a salesperson at his firm and alleged that Bloomberg told her to “kill it” when she told him she was pregnant. During the course of that case, Joseph transferred it to another attorney who secured the final settlement for Garrison, including an NDA. Joseph was never asked to sign one and has spoken publicly about her work.

https://gothamist.com/news/bloomberg-throws-women-mike-rally-2020

[jmg257]

22. Of course, even if released from the NDA with Bloomberg, doesn't mean Garrison wants to talk...

As The Washington Post's Michael Kranish has reported, it's not clear that one of Bloomberg's most high-profile accusers, former Bloomberg saleswoman Sekiko Sakai Garrison, wants to talk. "She has not responded to requests for comment," he Kranish wrote. She reached a settlement years ago "in the six figures" after alleging that Bloomberg twice told her to "kill it" when he found out she was pregnant.

https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Warren-wants-Bloomberg-to-release-women-from-15070892.php

[brush]

51. She should've done this against...ahhhh, it'll come to me...oh yes, fucking trump months ago.

She made her point during the debate. Move on against the crook in the WH.

[Bradshaw3]

54. Yes let's not look too hard at Bloomberg

We don't want to find out uncomfortable facts about him that might, oh I don't know, show him to be a terrible nominee.

I guess wanting to keep people from knowing the truth is good for drumpf. We don't want it for our nominee, especially when we have so many other good candidates who have better qualifications than "well he's not as bad a trump".

[brush]

55. She made her point. trump is the real enemy here. Or are you forgeting all the dozens of women...

who signed NDAS with trump? She boosted her campaign, increased her funding and poll numbers, why continue the attack on another Dem?

And as another poster pointed out, the NDAs are legal documents against his company not him. The document she drew up has no legal standing whatsoever. Courts have to adjudicate such agreements between parties not some hastily drawn up doc by a non-lawyer. She should've advised the parties to seek legal advice if they want to get out of the NDA.

[Bradshaw3]

56. Your rationalizations fall apart

"As another poster pointed out" about the NDAs? That was you making the claim in another thread and you don't know if that's true since they are private. As I asked in the other thread, have you taught at Harvard Law? I'll take her experience over the unproven claims of a Bloomberg apologist any day.

But I do understand why you don't want to hear any more. His answer at the debate shows he hasn't learned anything, meaning the women who drove the blue wave in 2018 will not turn out in numbers for this guy in 2020. I guess if you think it's good for Democrats to keep blinders on about him, you assume the repubs won't bring it up?

Adding, if he's such a Democrat why has he supported so many repubs with milliosn, including in races that are a reason why we have a republican senate now.

[brush]

57. Since she's a lawyer she should know that the parties have to go to court.

And she benefited quite a bit from her tremendous debate performance, why not move on and go after trump. Her campaign plateaued before from beating the M4A dead horse too long. Dragging this fight with another Dem out could cost her.

And btw it, wasn't me on the other thread.

[Bradshaw3]

58. Again, what law school do you teach at?

And why should anyone believe you? You have nothing but highly biased claims while she taught law. But keep up your apologies for a guy who has made sexist comments and put in place racist policies for decades (not to mention supporting republicans in the senate). They are not working.

[brush]

59. Again, is it worth it fighting another Dem. She's plateaued before. This could do it again.

[Bradshaw3]

60. So despite your claims you are not a legal expert

Didn't think so.

[brush]

61. I never said I was. But why don't you address my comment about her plateauing again?

[Hoyt]

10. They could pull a Stormy Daniels and break the NDA. Gloria Alread or the next Avenatti would

be glad to help. Just don't let them handle the payments for interviews, book, etc.

[greatauntoftriplets]

23. Did she create one for Spanky, too?

[backtoblue]

24. I can see it now...

Either Warren handing him one in a debate, or whomever the nominee is brings it and says "A friend of mine, asked me to give this to you to sign"


Of course, thats assuming *it* actually debates.

[brooklynite]

25. Debate participants are not allowed to bring documents on stage.

Unless she's going to write the agreement from memory, the stunt won't work.

[backtoblue]

28. It waa tongue in cheek

[Demsrule86]

26. She needs to really stop...now she is lookig ridiculous and I like her...she should know that

you can't release anyone from NDA with out both parties agreement. Unless he is the subject and it seems he is not...it can't be done...she should let this go.

[jmg257]

31. Even if MRB and Garrison agreed to break their NDA,

Doesn’t mean she wants to talk.

[Squinch]

29. If I were you, I'd take this down fast. It's a right wing smear against Liz who is a good candidate.

[Dem2]

32. Was a 2 second decision

on the jury. That was an awful slander that I would never have expected here.

[Squinch]

33. They are among us!

But he can't say I didn't warn him.

[Dem2]

34. Still can't believe what I read

[denem]

36. Post removed, not name removed.

[Dem2]

38. I was unable to see that

...as a juror. Seems that one post should be enough?

[denem]

40. Must have been pretty bad

... but I don't want to know.

[Dem2]

41. You could guess

since it was basically the dumb smear that the orange a-hole uses when describing Warren.

[denem]

42. That dog won't hunt.

what an f'tard.

[Squinch]

37. Yep. Sounded an awful lot like Filthy Donnie.

Call me paranoid, but I think we are surrounded with influencers and trolls and we can only trust those posters who we have known for a long time. There's a lot of gaslighting and a lot of lying and a lot of right wing propaganda mucking up these pages.

[Nikki28]

30. Listen

I love Liz, but this is too bad for our party . We need Bloomberg money. Warren is going after the wrong man. She needs to be beating the drum on Trump's Putin links as well as the repukes. I feel for our party. I think M.B is right about Trump being the winner when all the Dem do is stunts like this and wasting time when our country is falling out of control. This does not draw me to a candidate pulling this kind of stuff when we have the biggest threat on our country. I am sick of this crap.If we lose it will be because we are asleep at the wheel in fighting one another. That goes for all of the Dem's who is using their time attacking the Dem's. I fear we better be prepared for 2021 if this keeps up.Please Dem! Use your time wisely and inform the world what is going on in the white house and the Repukes. I am not amused with this. They should be hitting the mics to to real news stories of how this man has stolen one election and will steal another. I think we are in danger when we attack a money port as MB after all he is doing to help us. Focus please Dem's. Get back on track.

[denem]

39. I take Micheal Bloomberg at his word.

Make no mistake Mr. President: I am not afraid of you and I will not let you bully me or anyone else in America. Between now and November, I will do everything I can to defeat you whether I am on the ballot or not.

Mike has been around long enough to know some people don't like him and politics is played hard.

If Elizabeth Warren is the nominee, and Mike stays all in, like I believe he will, he will leave the General Election campaign with his reputation intact and a secure place in history as a patriot, who put the Republic first.

[Bradshaw3]

45. She is vetting the right person

Bloomberg would be a disaster. The Blue Wave in 2018 was driven by women disgusted with drump. Nominating Bloomberg would be a finger in the eye to them. We need THEM, not Bloomberg's money.

[blue neen]

46. Good post.

Concentrate on the real enemy----
Trump. Liz is losing points with me.

[yardwork]

50. This is primary season. They all want to be the nominee.

[lapucelle]

52. Maybe Wareen can also press BS to release his medical records. N/T