NEW: For decades Trump has used sprawling NDAs to intimidate employees and associates into silence. But he just lost a case to @OMAROSA that could help bring his political and corporate secrets down on his head. Me & @swin24 @thedailybeast
More from Categorypdfmakerapp grab thisthreadreaderapp unroll please
A massive trove of private financial records shared with The Washington Post exposes vast reaches of the secretive offshore system used to hide billions of dollars from tax authorities, creditors, criminal investigators and citizens around the world.
The Post and scores of other news organizations collaborated in the effort, conceived and organized by @ICIJorg, to illuminate the workings of this secret world on a scale never before possible.
The #PandoraPapers is an investigation based on more than 11.9 million documents.
It exposes more than twice as many account holders and twice as many public officials as the Panama Papers did. https://t.co/B7qrGmlS9m
The files detail the offshore activities of more than 29,000 accounts.
Among them: More than 130 Forbes list billionaires and over 330 public officials around the globe. https://t.co/B7qrGmlS9m
The #PandoraPapers allow for the most comprehensive accounting to date of a parallel financial universe whose corrosive effects can span generations. https://t.co/B7qrGmlS9m
The Post and scores of other news organizations collaborated in the effort, conceived and organized by @ICIJorg, to illuminate the workings of this secret world on a scale never before possible.
The #PandoraPapers is an investigation based on more than 11.9 million documents.
It exposes more than twice as many account holders and twice as many public officials as the Panama Papers did. https://t.co/B7qrGmlS9m

The files detail the offshore activities of more than 29,000 accounts.
Among them: More than 130 Forbes list billionaires and over 330 public officials around the globe. https://t.co/B7qrGmlS9m

The #PandoraPapers allow for the most comprehensive accounting to date of a parallel financial universe whose corrosive effects can span generations. https://t.co/B7qrGmlS9m

You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?