user: Bicyclist struck by Brooklyn hit-and-run cabbie: cop sources

Tuesday, June 23, 2015, 8:48 AM

A 23-year-old bicyclist was hospitalized early Tuesday after a black livery cab plowed into her in Brooklyn and then drove off, police sources said.

The incident occurred about 1:55 a.m. at Central and Myrtle Aves. in Bushwick, cops said.

Paramedics rushed the cyclist to Elmhurst Hospital, where she remained in critical condition Tuesday.

The livery cab driver was being sought, officials said.

Summary: The incident occurred at Central and Myrtle Aves. in Bushwick early Tuesday, cops said.


Bill O'Reilly rips Mother Jones again: 'Bottom rung of journalism'

On Friday night the Fox News host devoted the first ten minutes of his talk show to blast the liberal magazine once again for a report alleging that he had exaggerated his accounts of covering the Falklands War in 1982.

"Mother Jones, which has low circulation, [is] considered by many the bottom rung of journalism in America," O'Reilly said in his opening monologue, called the "Talking Points Memo."

Related: What Bill O'Reilly has said about his time during the Falklands War

With that, O'Reilly picked up where he left off a day earlier.

On Thursday, after Mother Jones published the report, O'Reilly mounted a furious rebuttal, making his case in interviews with several reporters. He also made several disparaging remarks about David Corn, the Mother Jones Washington bureau chief who co-authored the report with Daniel Schulman.

O'Reilly kept it up with his monologue on Friday's broadcast, dismissing Corn as a "liar" and the report as a "political hit job." The host also reiterated that he never said that he was on the Falkland Islands during the conflict between Argentina and Britain.

"I said I covered the Falklands War, which I did," he said.

The Mother Jones report highlighted several examples of O'Reilly saying he had been in a "war zone" during his coverage of the conflict for CBS News.

In fact, everyone with CBS was based in Buenos Aires, far from the actual war zone.

O'Reilly did not address his references to the "war zone" on his show Friday. He described his encounter with "angry mobs in Buenos Aires," recalling that he had witnessed "horrific" violence during a protest.

O'Reilly also highlighted an internal memo from CBS News praising his coverage of the protest.

In previous references to the protest, O'Reilly has given the impression that he was in a war zone. He wrote in 2004 that he had "survived a combat situation in Argentina during the Falklands War."

O'Reilly told TVNewser on Thursday that he expects to be exonerated and for Corn to wind up "in the kill zone" -- a phrase for which Mother Jones demanded an apology.

(O'Reilly did not apologize for it.)

In his monologue on Friday, O'Reilly also directed his criticism at CNN: "At this point, TV coverage has been scant, but CNN tried to exploit the situation because a guy over there named Brian Stelter is another far-left zealot masquerading as a journalist. CNN can do a lot better than this guy."

As for Corn, O'Reilly expressed doubt that he will suffer any consequences.

"Mother Jones and the far left websites couldn't care about the truth," he said.

Corn, the Washington bureau chief for Mother Jones, published a point-by-point response to O'Reilly's monologue.

In it, Corn bemoaned the fact that O'Reilly "continued the name-calling" and said, "In a way, it's impossible to win a debate with O'Reilly because he is not bound by reality."

CNNMoney (New York) February 21, 2015: 12:23 PM ET

Summary: Bill O'Reilly continued to rip


SEC Won’t Take on Global Research Settlement With Jobs Act

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s ongoing review of the IPO process has taken another baby step: The agency has posted answers to “frequently asked questions” about how the Jumpstart Our Businesses Act, or JOBS Act, affects rules surrounding analyst research.

The bottom line is, not much. As the Journal wrote last week, big banks such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase, Credit Suisse, et al, have been hesitant to take full advantage of the JOBS Act’s move to ease banks’ ability to publish research reports before, during or immediately after an IPO. The change was meant to help drum up investor interest in IPOs of companies that generate less than $1 billion in annual revenues.

But the banks have several worries, most prominently about whether the rules slapped on them a decade ago – after Eliot Spitzer alleged they used research to overhype dot-com era companies – still apply.

The SEC’s answer? They sure do. In an online notice published last week, and circulating this week among lawyers, the SEC writes:

The JOBS Act does not amend or modify the Global Settlement. If the settling firms were to seek an amendment or modification of the Global Settlement in light of the JOBS Act, one or more of the settling firms would have to make an application to the court.

That means that in all likelihood, the 25 day compromise banks have recently struck for a research blackout period after an IPO – shorter than the 40 days operating since 2003 as an interpretation of the settlement, but yet not taking full advantage of JOBS Act territory – will continue for the foreseeable future.

The SEC further said that, due to the Global Settlement, big banks’ analysts would not be allowed to attend meetings with both the companies and the bankers who arrange the deals, as the JOBS Act now allows. The SEC was clear that non-Global Settlement firms definitely can do that, though it remains to be seen whether those banks are willing to cross the big banks that control the underwriting syndicates of the biggest, and most fee-generating, IPOs.

To be sure, the door is not entirely slammed shut. The SEC did leave open the possibility that it could make a significant change to the Global Settlement, but the agency would go through the rulemaking process to do so. The agency indicated it could help facilitate a petition to the court if a broker-dealer chose to push ahead with a request to change the rules.

But absent a fresh push by Congress or the administration, the notion that the SEC will be aggressive here seems remote. The Commission is already bogged down by Dodd-Frank, additional rule-making related to the JOBS Act, high-frequency trading, money-market funds and now, as the Journal reported Monday, a review of quiet-period rules. The looming election could further derail all of that.

Summary:

assistant: The SEC has provided some answers to questions about whether the Jobs Act will upend the Spitzer global research settlement. The bottom line answer is not much.