Custom Search
Showing posts with label Probe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Probe. Show all posts

Friday, December 1, 2017

MIKE FLYNN PLEADING GUILTY DOES NOT IMPEACH DONALD TRUMP FROM OFFICE (FLYNN vs CONYERS)










MIKE FLYNN PLEADING GUILTY DOES NOT IMPEACH DONALD TRUMP FROM OFFICE:

FLYNN'S PLEA DOES NOT PROVE COLLUSION.

NATIONAL SECURITY PROBE WILL NOT IMPEACH TRUMP EITHER.

DEMOCRATS SHOULD NOT CELEBRATE PREMATURELY.

WHAT DEM LEADERS SHOULD FOCUS ON IS GETTING SEXUAL HARASSER JOHN CONYERS TO RESIGN.

MIKE FLYNN IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW & JOHN CONYERS IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW EITHER.

CONYERS IS A BLACK MAN WHO USED HIS POWER TO HURT PEOPLE NOT HELP PEOPLE.

CONYERS' DISRESPECT OF WOMEN MAKES MOST BLACK MEN IN AMERICAN SOCIETY LOOK BAD.


Sources: Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Michigan News, YouTube


****** Mike Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying About Russian Contacts


~ Former national security adviser says he is cooperating with special counsel probe


Former national-security adviser Mike Flynn pleaded guilty Friday to lying to federal investigators about his calls with the Russian ambassador and other issues and said he is cooperating with prosecutors, a sign that the special counsel’s inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election is reaching deeper into President Donald Trump’s inner circle.

In a 45-minute hearing in a Washington federal court, Mr. Flynn admitted he misled Federal Bureau of Investigation agents about a series of calls he had last December with the ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, about sanctions imposed on Russia by the Obama Administration and about a United Nations resolution critical of Israel.

Mr. Flynn also acknowledged in court documents filed Friday that he had detailed conversations with Trump transition officials about the calls, and that a “very senior member” of the transition team had directed his contacts over the U.N. issue. A person familiar with the matter said that individual is Jared Kushner, a top White House adviser and the president’s son-in-law.

Abbe Lowell, a lawyer for Mr. Kushner, didn’t return requests for comment. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators interviewed Mr. Kushner in recent weeks, focusing their questions exclusively on his interactions with Mr. Flynn, according to people familiar with the matter.

Prosecutors said Friday that Mr. Flynn consulted several times with top Trump transition officials on his contacts with Russia, suggesting Mr. Mueller is closely scrutinizing other prominent Trump associates. But his ultimate targets, and the exact nature of any potential wrongdoing, remain unclear.

Mr. Mueller is six months into a wide-ranging investigation into Russia’s efforts to meddle in the 2016 election and potential links between those efforts and the Trump campaign. In court documents, Mr. Mueller’s office said Mr. Flynn’s lies to the FBI impeded that investigation.

When asked by U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras how he pleads to the charge against him, Mr. Flynn, flanked by his two lawyers, said softly, “Guilty, your honor.”

Given his cooperation, Mr. Flynn is expected to face at most six months in prison, depending on his “substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense,” according to his plea agreement.

Prosecutors didn’t elaborate Friday on who else they may be looking at. Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty only to one count of lying to the FBI, but a “statement of the offense” filed in connection with his plea detailed additional wrongdoing, including lying on a regulatory form about his private work directed by Turkish government officials.

Mr. Mueller’s decision not to file more serious charges against Mr. Flynn led many legal experts to infer that Mr. Flynn is providing significant information to the investigation.

“Mueller would not have accepted an agreement to plead to a single charge absent an arrangement of some sort, and presumably that is Flynn’s truthful testimony about other matters within Mueller’s jurisdiction,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a former federal prosecutor who was a deputy to special counsel Kenneth Starr during his investigation of President Bill Clinton.

In a statement Friday, Mr. Flynn said, “I recognize that the actions I acknowledged in court today were wrong, and, through my faith in God, I am working to set things right.”

He added: “My guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the Special Counsel’s Office reflect a decision I made in the best interests of my family and of our country. I accept full responsibility for my actions.”

Mr. Flynn, who was a high-profile campaign surrogate for Mr. Trump but who lasted in his White House post for less than a month, becomes the most senior Trump associate to face criminal charges in the special counsel investigation. At the 2016 Republican National Convention, Mr. Flynn led the crowd in chanting “Lock her up!” in reference to Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton and her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. On Friday, protesters outside the courthouse chanted as Mr. Flynn left: “Lock him up!”

Documents filed in federal court Friday detail Mr. Flynn’s misstatements to the FBI during an interview last January and depict a group of incoming Trump officials concerned about the Obama administration’s new sanctions on Russia and trying to figure out how to react to them.

Mr. Flynn “falsely stated” to the FBI that he hadn’t asked the Russian ambassador to refrain from escalating a response to the sanctions, a senior prosecutor in Mr. Mueller’s office, Brandon Van Grack, said in court. In fact, Mr. Flynn had called a senior official of the Trump transition team on Dec. 29—the day the sanctions were announced—to discuss “what, if anything, to communicate to the Russian ambassador,” according to a statement filed in connection with Mr. Flynn’s plea.

The unnamed senior official was with “other senior members” of the transition team at Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s golf club in Florida, the document said. The official and Mr. Flynn discussed the fact that members of the transition team at Mar-a-Lago “did not want Russia to escalate the situation,” the document said.

Among the transition officials who met with Mr. Trump at Mar-a-Lago that day were Stephen Miller, K.T. McFarland, Kellyanne Conway, Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus, a Trump spokesman said at the time. Mr. Miller and Ms. Conway are now serving in the White House. Mr. Bannon and Mr. Priebus served as chief strategist and chief of staff, respectively, but were ousted over the summer. Ms. McFarland is Mr. Trump’s nominee for ambassador to Singapore.

“Immediately after his phone call,” Mr. Flynn called Mr. Kislyak and asked that Russia only respond “in a reciprocal manner,” the document said.

The next day, Dec. 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin released a statement that Russia wouldn’t take retaliatory measures, and Mr. Kislyak called Mr. Flynn on Dec. 31 to tell him Russia had “chosen not to retaliate in response to Flynn’s request.”

After his phone call, according to the document, Mr. Flynn spoke to “senior members” of the transition about his conversations with Mr. Kislyak and about Russia’s decision “not to escalate the situation.”
In addition to the sanctions issue, Mr. Flynn also lied about calls he made to “Russia and several other countries” about a U.N. resolution submitted by Egypt on Dec. 21, which criticized Israel’s construction of settlements in disputed territories.

Mr. Flynn “falsely stated” that he only asked on the calls about the countries’ position on the votes, the document said. In fact, “a very senior member of the Presidential Transition Team directed Flynn” to contact the officials to “influence those governments to delay the vote or defeat the resolution,” the document said.

The document also said Mr. Flynn made “materially false statements” in a regulatory filing about his separate work for Turkish interests, including stating that his company “did not know whether or the extent to which” the Turkish government was behind the project.

Mr. Flynn is the fourth—and most prominent—figure to be publicly charged in Mr. Mueller’s investigation to date. Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his longtime associate who also worked with the campaign, Richard Gates, were indicted in October for prior work they did in Ukraine, unrelated to the Trump campaign.

Another adviser, George Papadopoulos, has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russian go-betweens.

Former FBI Director James Comey, whom Mr. Trump fired in May, has testified that Mr. Trump asked him to back off his investigation of Mr. Flynn, which the president denies.

Prosecutors’ references Friday to Mr. Flynn’s conversations with other Trump transition officials suggest Mr. Mueller is scrutinizing the actions of other high-profile figures in Mr. Trump’s orbit. Mr. Kushner said in a statement to Congress in July that, at Mr. Trump’s request, he served as the main point of contact for foreign countries during the transition.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Friday’s plea shows that a Trump associate was “negotiating with the Russians against U.S. policy and interests before Donald Trump took office and after it was announced that Russia had interfered in our election.”

She added, “It’s critical that we determine whether Flynn spoke with the Russians on his own initiative and who knew and approved of his actions.”

A statement from White House lawyer Ty Cobb played down the guilty plea, noting that Mr. Flynn was in the job less than a month and had “entered a guilty plea to a single count.”

Mr. Flynn’s false statements, Mr. Cobb added, “mirror” similar ones he made to Vice President Mike Pence about his Russian contacts earlier this year, which the White House has said resulted in his resignation. “The conclusion of this phase of the special counsel’s work demonstrates again that the special counsel is moving with all deliberate speed and clears the way for a prompt and reasonable conclusion,” Mr. Cobb said.

U.S. investigators began scrutinizing Mr. Flynn’s contacts with the Russian ambassador after the two spoke in a series of phone calls during the presidential transition in December 2016, according to people familiar with the investigation.

During those calls, Mr. Flynn discussed the potential easing of U.S. sanctions imposed on Russia after the Trump administration came to power in January, current and former officials said at the time, citing transcripts of intercepted communications between Mr. Flynn and Mr. Kislyak.


Monday, June 19, 2017

TRUMP vs SEKULOW: DEMS CREATE MORE DRAMA (FAKE INVESTIGATIONS)








TRUMP vs SEKULOW: DEMOCRATS CREATE MORE DRAMA (FAKE INVESTIGATIONS):

ARE DEMS USING FAKE SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS TO HELP ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS??

FAKE INVESTIGATION PROBES COULD DERAIL TRUMP'S "MAKE AMERICA GREAT" AGENDA.


Sources: CNN, Fox News, Meet the Press, Youtube


***** Trump lawyer Sekulow: President has no knowledge of being investigated


Jay Sekulow, a member of President Trump’s legal team, said Sunday he has no knowledge of the president being the target of a federal probe, following Trump's recent statement suggesting that he is being investigated.

“The president has not been notified by anyone that he is under investigation,” Sekulow told “Fox News Sunday,” in a heated exchange with host Chris Wallace about whether Trump could be under investigation without knowing.

“You don’t know that he's not under investigation,” Wallace said.

Sekulow responded: “I can’t read minds.”

Sekulow also said that Trump’s tweet that led people to believe he was under investigation was in response to a Washington Post story in which unnamed sources said the president was being investigated.

The FBI and two congressional panels are investigating whether the Trump campaign or presidential transition team colluded with Russia during or after the 2016 White House race.

Jay Sekulow, a member of President Trump’s legal team, said Sunday he has no knowledge of the president being the target of a federal probe, following Trump's recent statement suggesting that he is being investigated.

“The president has not been notified by anyone that he is under investigation,” Sekulow told “Fox News Sunday,” in a heated exchange with host Chris Wallace about whether Trump could be under investigation without knowing.

“You don’t know that he's not under investigation,” Wallace said.

Sekulow responded: “I can’t read minds.”

Sekulow also said that Trump’s tweet that led people to believe he was under investigation was in response to a Washington Post story in which unnamed sources said the president was being investigated.

The FBI and two congressional panels are investigating whether the Trump campaign or presidential transition team colluded with Russia during or after the 2016 White House race.

Before Trump fired James Comey as the FBI director, Comey told the president he was not a target in the agency investigation. The Post story suggests the FBI probe, now being led by special counsel Robert Mueller, includes whether Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey.

“Nothing has changed since Comey said the president is not a target,” Sekulow also said Sunday.

Sekulow said Trump has never accused Deputy Attorney General Rob Rosenstein of “doing anything wrong,” and has expressed no opinion about him.

Rosenstein wrote a letter that seemed to support Trump firing Comey.

He told Congress last week that he would not fire Mueller “without good cause,” amid speculation Trump wanted to get rid of Mueller.

He also said he couldn't say whether Trump has discussed Mueller, citing attorney-client privileges.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Roy Cooper's North Carolina SBI Lab Changes Yet To Come: Imprisoning Black Men




















North Carolina's SBI Lab Transformation Moving Far Too Slowly


One day last summer N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper faced a bank of cameras and vowed to make reforms and change practices to restore the reputation of the State Bureau of Investigation and in particular to clean up significant problems at the SBI crime lab.

It was an impressive performance. Cooper had commissioned an audit of the agency's practices, brought in former FBI agent Chris Swecker to examine the lab's blood analysis unit and released information that showed hundreds of defendants may not have gotten a fair chance in court to prove their innocence. The audit's findings backed up investigative reporting by the News & Observer of Raleigh, and Cooper vowed to act on a number of fronts to fix the problems. Now there is new leadership at the crime lab and at the head of the SBI.

Yet an update last week indicated that the SBI's transformation has moved slowly. Some of the changes Cooper promised, including posting SBI lab policies on the Internet, have yet to be made. Other promised reforms now appear to be under internal debate, the N&O said. And state prosecutors who had asked for a full-scale audit of the crime lab are disappointed with the slow response.

What's more, an SBI lab analyst who has been suspended from case work said in court last week she had little interest in the FBI agent's scathing report on lab practices, including the withholding of test results favorable to defendants in more than 200 investigations. She described them only as one person's conclusions, and declined to say why she had not read the report.

Her testimony came in a hearing for Derrick Allen, who had served 12 years in prison on murder, sex assault and child abuse charges. Allen has always maintained he was innocent. He said he agreed under pressure to a plea deal only because he feared the death penalty. Allen's lawyer argued the state withheld blood test results, polygraph tests of a witness and other information that would have helped Allen defend himself.

Last week Superior court Judge Orlando Hudson dismissed the case against Allen and threw out all charges. He said the SBI's withholding of evidence was "extremely disturbing" and said Allen's rights had been violated by the crime lab's work.

While Cooper has taken steps to restore the SBI's reputation and make sure that its practices are based on a pursuit of truth and not just on convictions, Allen's story and those of other defendants wrongly convicted in North Carolina's courts demand swifter and firmer action. We must not tolerate a criminal justice system that condones withholding evidence, tampering with confessions, manufacturing of bogus scientific tests to support predetermined conclusions and otherwise trampling on the rights of the accused to defend themselves in court.







Fixing North Carolina SBI Lab Will Cost Money


Restoring the credibility of the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation's crime laboratory after a blistering review of the lab's policies and procedures will cost the state, officials said Thursday.

An independent review found 190 cases that resulted in convictions from 1987 to 2003 in which SBI agents in the crime lab's blood-stain analysis unit omitted, overstated or falsely reported information about blood evidence.

Since the report was released last month, the crime lab director has been replaced, and Attorney General Roy Cooper has ordered audits of other parts of the lab. Defense attorneys say they will question the credibility of the SBI in court, and some lawmakers have said that they lab might need to be removed from SBI control.

"I was heartened by the actions that were taken, but it's also clear we have a long way to go," Rep. Rick Glazier, co-chairman of a special legislative committee looking into policy and procedure issues at the SBI, said Thursday.

The Joint Select Study Committee on the Preservation of Biological Evidence was formed last year to examine more technical evidence-preservation procedures. The committee, which also includes current and former district attorneys, court administrators and law enforcement authorities, heard Thursday from Cooper, new SBI Director Greg McLeod and Chris Swecker and Mike Wolf, the two former assistant FBI directors who conducted the independent review.

The committee expects to recommend changes in SBI operations to the General Assembly, which reconvenes in January. Glazier, D-Cumberland, said lawmakers should be prepared to spend money to carry out any needed reforms.

"The costs of not doing that are far greater than whatever those costs are going to be," he said.

McLeod said more training and more personnel will probably be needed to correct the deficiencies.

Cooper said it's too early to address the issue of an independent crime lab.

"I think that's an issue for tomorrow. That's an issue for the next legislative session. Today, I'm concentrating solely on fixing the problems," he said.

"We don't have all of the facts yet," he continued. "We haven't looked at all the other states and compared it to what North Carolina is doing. The key right now is for us to concentrate on the problems and get those problems fixed as quickly as possible and making sure the work that is done at the SBI is accurate and fair."

Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers say, however, that making the crime lab independent could remove perceptions that lab workers are aiding prosecutors seeking evidence to build their cases. Twelve other states already have independent crime labs.

“There is a cloud hanging over the SBI, and the only way to remove that cloud is to remove the crime lab from the SBI,” Senate President Pro Tempore Marc Basnight said in a statement this week.

"This is simply inexcusable," Rep. Nelson Dollar, R-Wake, said when the report was released in August. "We have to consider whether or not the SBI should remain under the Attorney General's Office or whether it should be an independent agency."

The special committee's co-chair, Sen. Ed Jones, said that quality control is his top concern. He suggested that another approach could be for other people in the SBI lab to double-check reports for accuracy.

“I’m open to any suggestions,” Jones, D-Bertie, said Monday. “I’m going in with an open mind to find out what happened and to keep it from happening again.”

House Minority Leader Paul Stam, R-Wake, a committee member, said he wants more information before deciding on lab independence but said there has to be some working relationship between lab workers and law enforcement because their charge is to solve crimes with integrity.

“These are the practical problems,” Stam said. “We want the final work product of the SBI lab to be beyond reproach all the time.”








North Carolina's SBI Lab Culture Resists Change


After an Independent Audit found that the North Carolina State Crime Lab had withheld or misreported test results in more than 200 cases, Attorney General Roy Cooper promised to change the culture at the State Bureau of Investigation.

"The lab cannot accept a lack of thoroughness,"Cooper said in August. "It cannot accept attitudes that are not open to the possibility that a mistake has been made. It cannot ignore criticism and suggestions from the outside." He and SBI Director Greg McLeod have vowed to fix problems throughout the bureau highlighted by a News & Observer series.

Cooper has a long way to go, as shown by the events that unfolded late last week in two courthouses across the state.

In Durham, a lab analyst testified that she viewed the state as her client, casting doubt on assertions that the lab serves both the state and the defense.

A defense lawyer complained that the SBI lab refused to answer a simple question in a 12-year-old murder case: Did the SBI lab still have possession of critical evidence?

In Charlotte, lawyers for the SBI downplayed allegations that an SBI agent had caused a mentally disabled man to be jailed for 14 years on a fabricated confession; they said it really didn't matter whether the SBI agent "elaborated" or "augmented" or even "smoothed out" the alleged confession.

But perhaps the biggest challenge toCooper's call to accept criticism and suggestions from outside the bureau came from testimony given by one of his agents.


No admission of error

SBI agent Jennifer Elwell, testifying in Durham about the case of Derrick Allen, rejected the audit that Cooper has embraced while admitting she had only read bits of it. She criticized the two former FBI supervisors who did the work, saying they didn't understand forensic science.

She refused to acknowledge that either she or SBI policy was in error, but Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson ruled otherwise. He threw out charges that Allen killed and sexually assaulted 2-year-old Adesha Artis and specifically cited how Elwell's report was used to extract a guilty plea from Allen.

In 1998, Allen was charged with the murder and sexual assault of his girlfriend's daughter. The lead prosecutor said in court that the "most significant" piece of evidence in the case was the girl's "bloody panties."

Elwell conducted presumptive tests that indicated the stains could be blood. She ran two confirmatory tests on the underwear. In a positive test, microscopic crystals form on the item to confirm the presence of blood.

Sometimes tests were inconclusive, Elwell said: "Crystals did not form; they tried to form, but nothing happened."

And sometimes the tests were negative, as in Allen's case.

Her report did not say the test was negative. It said her test "gave chemical indications for the presence of blood."


Audit's criticism rejected

Elwell rejected all criticism of her work, saying the audit was just one person's opinion and not the opinion of the scientific community.

Allen's lawyer, Lisa Williams, asked whether the attorney general had hired two incompetent auditors.

"I am not going to speak for the attorney general," Elwell said. "If you like, you can call him and subpoena him and ask him."

During the hearing, Williams complained about how the SBI lab refused to answer simple questions.

Earlier this year, a private investigator for Allen called the lab to ask whether it still possessed evidence collected in 1998: the rape kit items collected from the girl and samples taken from Allen.

Williams said employees at the lab refused to answer.

The hearing in Durham also touched on the issue of whether the laboratory is independent or whether it tips the scales of justice in the courtroom by favoring prosecutors and police over defendants. A benchmark national report on forensic science has recommended that labs be removed from the control of police or prosecutors.


Different views of Agency's role

Joe John, interim director of the SBI crime lab, said his impression after a month on the job was that lab workers were not puppets of law enforcement. Lab analysts universally told him they believed "their customer was the criminal justice system as a whole."

But Elwell identified a different client Friday. She said the lab was drawing new guidelines to provide "a stricter standard of customer service for our client, that being the state of North Carolina."

Williams, Allen's lawyer, said the misconduct in Allen's case hurts everyone: Her client didn't get his day in court and neither did the victim and her family.

"If everyone does their job well, 12 jurors get to decide," Williams said. "Mr. Allen will not get an opportunity to be declared innocent by a jury" and Adesha's family won't know who's responsible for her death.

On Friday in Charlotte, lawyers for the SBI tried to win dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Floyd Brown, a mentally disabled man jailed for 14 years on murder charges. Brown's lawyers contend that SBI agent Mark Isley fabricated an elaborate six-page confession.


Defense says SBI Leaders Failed

If the state gets the case thrown out, Brown's attorney cannot inspect internal records at the Attorney General's Office to determine exactly what former SBIDirector Robin Pendergraft and other supervisors knew about Isley's actions, and when they knew it.

David Rudolf, Brown's lawyer, said the SBI had a track record of ignoring problems with agents and promoting them instead. He said that reflects a failure of leadership from Pendergraft and others.

"This went on for years under her watch," Rudolf said. "She enabled this kind of conduct to go on by not taking steps to stop it." Attorney General Cooper removed Pendergraft as director in late July, moving her to another job. Isley, the agent in Brown's case, hasn't seen any change in his job as a result of the lawsuit.

Last week, SBI leaders reiterated that they are moving methodically to carry the changes recommended in the audit.

After the audit, which included 32 of Jennifer Elwell's cases, she was prohibited from examining more cases at the lab. She is now helping rewrite lab policies.



View Larger Map


Sources: McClatchy Newspapers, WRAL, Google Maps

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

North Carolina's Terrible Mental Health System Investigated By Feds!
























Feds Launch Probe Of N.C. Mental Health System


The U.S. Justice Department has opened a formal investigation into North Carolina's struggling mental health system, the first step in a process that could trigger a federal edict for sweeping reform.

The probe is the result of a complaint filed in July by the advocacy group Disability Rights North Carolina, which contends that the state is violating the Americans With Disabilities Act for failing to provide proper housing for people with mental illness.

Nearly a decade after the state Department of Health and Human Services closed thousands of beds in government-run psychiatric hospitals as part of a reform effort, more than 6,400 people with severe mental illness are housed in adult care homes scattered across the state, living in sometimes squalid and dangerous conditions.

The mental patients, their care typically paid for with taxpayer money, are often far younger than the elderly residents with whom they are housed. In the last two years, at least four residents with mental illness have been killed by fellow patients who had histories of severe mental illness and violence.

Vicki Smith, the executive director of Disability Rights, said the federal investigation could force the state to take actions to fix the mistakes made during North Carolina’s 2001 reform effort, which has also resulted in people with mental illness routinely languishing for days in emergency rooms because no bed in a psychiatric facility is available.

Word of the federal investigation also comes as the state is debating further cuts to the state’s mental health system and moving to close Dorothea Dix Hospital.

“Now DHHS is going to have to answer a whole series of questions about why mental health reform has failed,” Smith said. “This is huge, from our point of view. Huge.”

The Justice Department informed the state of its pending investigation through a five page letter received by DHHS administrators in Raleigh on Thursday. However, the state department did not publically reveal the news until it issued a three-sentence media release earlier today, hours before the start of the Thanksgiving Holiday.

Renee McCoy, a spokeswoman for the state agency, said there would be no comment beyond the media release, which said the state will “work with the Department of Justice to provide all necessary documents and information in response to the complaint.”




Budget Cuts Hitting North Carolina's Mental Health System With Vengeance


Diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder and social anxiety disorder, Vinh Gazoo has been in a psychiatric hospital five times.

Recently released from jail after a six-month sentence stemming from a crime resulting from his mental health issues, Gazoo says he now survives week to week because of the Mental Health Association in North Carolina.

nonprofit association that helps mental health patients, the organization helps pay for his medication. Its employees and volunteers drive him to doctor's appointments and therapy sessions.

Gazoo was notified this week that those services have been dropped because of state budget cuts.

The $19 billion state budget resulted in a nearly 12.75 percent or $738 million decrease in the Department of Health and Human Services' anticipated $5.54 billion budget for the fiscal year.

About $75 million of DHHS's community services $390 million budget, which helps fund the Mental Health Association was cut, according to executive director John Tote.

"The cuts we have been waiting on from the General Assembly, they're here now, and they're hitting with a vengeance," he said.

Now, the Mental Health Association is laying off approximately 40 percent of its employees.

"Those 175 folks – in the positions they have – affect the lives of about 2,000 individuals across the state (who have) significant mental illness," Tote said.

He estimates approximately 4,000 mental health providers across the state will soon be out of work. The result, he says, will be thousands of patients without services.

Tote blames lawmakers, saying they were much more concerned with politics than providing services for DHHS.

Rep. Verla Insko, D-Orange, who serves on the state House Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services and also chairs the mental health legislative committee, agrees.

Insko says she doesn't think most lawmakers fully grasped the budget cuts and the impact they would have. For many people with mental illness, she says, there is no safety net other than emergency rooms and mental hospitals.

"As an advocate, it's galling," Tote said. "As a person, it's sad – terribly sad."

For Gazoo – now, his option is a walk-in clinic, but he says he has no way to pay for the services he needs and no way to get there. He says he'll likely either wind up back in jail or in a psychiatric facility.

"That's the two choices I have, because without my medication, I get pretty violent," he said.




Feds Indict Former Chief Of Charlotte Non-profit Group Serving Mental Health Patients


The former leader of a Charlotte nonprofit mental health agency has been indicted on charges that he embezzled nearly $150,000 from the program.

Prosecutors said in court documents Wednesday that 50-year-old Edward Gerard Payton directed employees of Mecklenburg Open Door to provide him loans or payment advances. Authorities contend he actually embezzled the money, and only repaid part of it.

The court documents also say Payton used agency credit cards and vehicles inappropriately.

The documents contend that Open Door shuffled funds that belonged to clients when regular funds ran short because of Payton's activities. One charge says Payton was warned about the seriousness of his activities by the agency's former CFO, but continued to embezzle. The indictment claims Payton used the money to pay alimony, child support, and tax liens.

Mecklenburg Open Door ran several group homes and helped manage finances for many mentally ill and homeless clients. Payton was the agency's executive director from 2006 to August of this year. He was fired after the board of directors confronted him about the money.

Mecklenburg County severed its relationship with the agency in Nov. 1. They have since hired a new agency called Monarch to take over its responsibilities.

Payton was arrested Wednesday. Court records don't list an attorney, and a message left at a phone number listed in his name was not returned. He faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each of his five counts.

Mecklenburg County has reacted to the scandal by changing its standards for county contractors like Mecklenburg Open Door. Outside agencies will now be required to have yearly audits of finances.

"We're actually going beyond what general accounting standards require to make sure that Mecklenburg County residents know we are watching their money," said Jennifer Roberts, chairwoman of the Mecklenburg County Commission.






Kenneth Jermaine Chapman's Death vs Carolinas Medical Center's Racist System


Carolinas Medical Center/ Carolinas Health Care System has been previously sued on numerous occasions by several African-American families for Racist Medical practices leading to premature, medically preventable deaths.

Many of those lawsuits were quietly settled with families of those Black patients who died due to intentional improper care or NEGLIGENCE.

Such lawsuits and bad reputation is the reason why Carolinas Medical Center/ Carolinas Health Care System now exist instead of Charlotte Memorial Hospital, the old CMC.

Thus its safe to say Carolinas Medical Center and Charlotte Memorial Hospital are one in the same.

How do I know this?

I always do my research and I talk to people personally affected by what I post on my Blog.

People will tell me things they might not disclose to the Charlotte Observer because the Charlotte Observer has a history of practicing Biased reporting and Discrimination in its publication of articles.

Kenneth Jermaine Chapman was an African-American Charlotte citizen who recently killed three members of his family and later himself.

Prior to his destructive actions he desperately sought Mental Health Care assistance from Charlotte's Carolinas Medical Center.

In fact he sent out an S.O.S. which was intentionally ignored.

Mr. Chapman clearly, verbally expressed to CMC Staff he had thoughts of hurting others and killing himself.

Did CMC Staff report his thoughts to Charlotte DSS even though they knew this man had minor children in the home?

NO!

They didn't give a darn because Ken Chapman was Black and wasn't an affluent citizen.

Now if Ken Chapman had connections with an Affluent, Politically-connected Black Charlotte citizen, than of course they may have taken Mr. Chapman's situation more seriously, but because he was just a poor Black man they didn't give a darn!

The result?

A Black Man who killed his wife, two of his children and than later himself.

If you think Jennifer Roberts (board chair) and the other Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Commissioners are seriously concerned about this matter or seriously concerned about investigating Mr. Chapman's case...DON'T BET ON IT!

If you think Charlotte's weak, scared Black Leaders are going to speak up...DON'T BET ON IT!

The only two Charlotte-Meck. County Commissioners who do really care, Harold Cogdell Jr. & Vilma Leak (both African-Americans) will be blocked from doing anything constructive by Jennifer Roberts (board chair), "Ms. N.C. Corruption" herself.

This tragic incident helps to further demonstrate how Racism is deeply woven into all facets and levels of Charlotte, NC's community, including the Health Care System.

Charlotte's other main Medical Center, Presbyterian Hospital isn't much better.

Its a private facility where Blacks go in but don't come out.

Presbyterian Hospital also has a long history of Black Patients needlessly dying but that's a story for another day.

As I was saying Carolinas Medical Center's staff intentionally did NOT prevent Mr. Chapman's death, nor did they help protect his family however.....

I'll bet Mr. Chapman's surviving relatives receive a huge bill for his so-called "treatment".

In fact thousands upon thousands of African-Americans within the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Region have Carolinas Medical Center Medical Bills on their Credit Reports.

Many of those bills are decades old.

Many of those bills are due to Billing errors from Carolinas Medical Center.

Many of those bills are due to Carolinas Medical Center INTENTIONALLY overbilling Black patients.

How does Carolinas Medical Center skirt Federal Law as it relates to Medical Bills which are older than 7 years old?

Carolinas Medical Center pays Equifax, Experian and Trans Union Credit Reporting agencies to sell those old Medical bill accounts to Debt Collectors, who create new account numbers for those decades old bills and continue screwing up the Credit Ratings for hundreds of thousands of North Carolina's Black citizens.

Is this really Racism you ask??

Yes!

For White Patients treated by Carolinas Medical Center staff everything is handled entirely different.

White Patients who visit Carolinas Medical Center for treatment receive proper care regardless of their situation and...

They aren't intentionally overcharged, neither are their Credit Reports damaged even if they don't possess Medical Insurance because NOT every White patient has Private Medical Insurance, just like there are many Black patients treated at CMC who DO possess Private Medical Insurance.

I'd say its time for the Federal Gov't including the FTC, to take a look at how Carolina Medical Center intentionally provides inadequate treatment to its Black patients, how they consistently & intentionally overbill Black patients and how they are paying big bucks to 3 major Credit Reporting agencies (mainly Equifax) for the sole purpose of selling Medical Bill Accounts which are decades old to Debt Collectors.

Just watch the Levine Family, old Charlotte money and one of Carolinas Medical Center/ Carolinas Health Care System largest contributors, use their big bucks to help defend CMC in any possible lawsuit.

The Levine Family is Charlotte's "Savior".

They often come to Charlotte's aid in a crisis however ONLY after the crisis occurs.

They run Charlotte's so-called Leaders including Jennifer Roberts and Anthony Foxx.

The Levines are most likely indirectly involved in most of Charlotte's Racist activities being carried out however, because they are super rich everyone is afraid of them.

If Ken Chapman were a White Man residing in Charlotte, NC neither he nor his family members would be dead today.

Or at least his family members would be alive today.

Both Carolinas Medical Center/ Carolinas Health Care System, Charlotte DSS and quite possibly the Levine Family are ALL legally Responsible for the Chapman Family's death stemming from total NEGLIGENCE.

If I were related to Mr. Chapman's family I would most definitely SUE and demand a Federal Probe to be conducted.

Sadly enough Kenneth Jermaine Chapman's relatives are probably uneducated or too afraid of Charlotte's Racist, Unfair systems to take legal action.

Charlotte's Racist, Scared Leaders know this which is why nothing will probably change.







Patient Advocates: N.C.'s Mental Health System Needs Fixing


Recent reports of patient abuse and neglect at Cherry Hospital in Goldsboro is more proof that the state's troubled mental health-care system needs restructuring and more funding, patient advocates say.

"There isn't a system of psychiatric facilities in this state," said Vicki Smith, executive director of Disability Rights North Carolina. "What we have are individual hospitals."

Smith said there needs to be a consistent standard level of care across the state's four psychiatric hospitals and that right now, hospitals only try to meet the minimum standards of care to receive funding.

She blamed that on job vacancies, lack of training, lack of supervision and oversight and inadequate pay. Many state agencies also rely on a temporary work force, and that means the quality of patient care is not always the same, she said.

Better recruiting and retention are needed, she said, to attract more qualified and attractive job candidates.

It's something the state's mental health oversight committee also suggested at a meeting earlier this week. John Tote, with the Mental Health Association in North Carolina, says the General Assembly needs to make more funding available.

Advocates believe Health and Human Services Secretary Dempsey Benton has taken aggressive steps to overhaul the system since taking over last year.

For example, he's starting to hold workers more accountable, Smith said. His recent decision to close a ward at Cherry Hospital in Goldsboro in the wake of a patient's death sends a big message, she said, partly because there aren't enough beds for patients there.

On Thursday, Benton said the Division of Mental Health must find an independent hospital management firm to evaluate Cherry Hospital.

However, Smith and Tote are concerned that any progress Benton is making could suffer a setback when a new governor is elected in November and if a new DHHS secretary is appointed.

"Four months left scares me," Smith said. "What concerns me is that with a new administration, the tendency will be to study the problems."

That would not be true if the gubernatorial candidates are already investigating and discussing the problems the mental health system faces. Advocates say they have not heard any specific plans from either candidate so far, however.

"Folks are going to be behind the eight ball, and if that's the case we'll see a perpetuation of the situation," Tote said.




North Carolina Mental-Hospital Workers To Be Re-trained After Patient Abuse Claim


The Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services says workers at a troubled state mental hospital will be retrained following an allegation of abuse that went unreported for several days.

"The patient was not harmed. The issue was that they handled it improperly, so we're going to make sure that we're restructuring a whole bunch of training at Cherry Hospital," Lanier Cansler said Thursday. "It really gave us a clue to the fact that they thought they were doing it right."

The intensive training will be for everyone who works at the Goldsboro facility and involve a list of prohibited actions that result in immediate termination, Cansler said.

Cherry Hospital is in jeopardy of losing approximately $800,000 in federal funding following the incident last month in which a mental health technician dragged a 22-year-old male patient and covered his face with a pillow to keep him from spitting while staff tried to restrain him.

Among the findings in a report by the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, the hospital "failed to provide care in a safe setting by failing to investigate the allegation of patient abuse in a timely manner" by allowing the same staff member to continue caring for the patient for 19 days after the allegation was reported.

Cansler told members of the Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities and Substance Abuse Joint Legislative Oversight Committee Thursday morning that the incident went unreported for so long, not because staff tried to hide it but because they didn't know they did anything wrong.

No one will lose their job over the case, Cansler said, despite a zero-tolerance policy he put in place soon after taking over the department in 2008.

"I will not hold an employee responsible for doing something improperly if they've never been trained to do it right," he said. "That's our responsibility, and we're going to make sure it happens."

DHHS must now submit a plan of correction detailing the new training by May 21 to CMS, which oversees the federal insurance plans and reimburses hospitals for treating patients under the programs.

The federal agency revoked Cherry Hospital's certification in 2008, when a 50-year-old patient died after staff left him sitting unattended in a chair for nearly 24 hours. The hospital lost an estimated $8 million to $10 million in federal funding as a result.

Three employees were ultimately fired, two resigned and 10 others were disciplined in that incident. Several former employees were also charged with and convicted of physically and sexually assaulting patients in other cases.

Mental health advocates and state officials have blamed a lack of training and inadequate pay as contributing factors to the problems the hospital has faced.

Canser said Gov. Bev Perdue's proposed budget for the next fiscal year provides $500,000 for additional training at state facilities. A federal match would bring the total to around $800,000.



View Larger Map


Sources: McClatchy Newspapers, WCNC, WRAL, Google Maps

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

BOFA Claims It Will "Really" Begin To Help Homeowners


















Bank Of America Vows To Do More For Harried Borrowers



Bank of America Corp.'s top mortgage executive will tell a Senate panel today that the Charlotte bank is taking steps to improve loan modification and foreclosure processes that have confounded many struggling borrowers.

Among the changes, the nation's biggest Mortgage Servicer has started giving borrowers a single point of contact in the modification process, Barbara Desoer says in written testimony submitted to the Senate Banking Committee. Homeowners often complain about being passed from department to department when they're seeking agreements to reduce their payments.

The bank is also looking to change an industrywide practice of considering a borrower's modification request, while also taking steps toward foreclosure, she says. This so-called "dual-track" system has led to incidents in which borrowers face foreclosure proceedings even as they're working out modifications.

Bank of America doesn't "claim perfection," Desoer says in her prepared remarks, but continues to "put forward solutions that respond to customer needs."

The bank is working with state attorneys general and other parties as it makes changes to its approach, Desoer says. Last week, bank executives were in Iowa for discussions with state officials who are leading a probe of foreclosure practices at the nation's biggest lenders. N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper and some of his peers have indicated that changes to modification programs may be a potential remedy.

Desoer and a JPMorgan Chase & Co. mortgage executive are likely to face tough questions from senators angered over allegations that banks employed so-called "robo-signers" who rapidly approved foreclosure documents without properly reviewing them. Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller is also on the witness list.

Bank of America became the nation's largest mortgage servicer in 2008 when it bought ailing Countrywide Financial Corp. It now administers about 14 million customer loans - about one in five U.S. mortgages.

More than 86 percent of Bank of America customers are current on their loans and making their payments, Desoer notes. But the bank has had to focus extensively on the portion of customers in default or struggling to make payments. Of the 14 million loans, about three-fourths are owned by investors such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, complicating efforts to reach modification agreements.

As it looks to improve the modification process, the bank has assigned 140,000 customers a single case manager to handle questions, according to Desoer's testimony. Wells Fargo has said it will implement a similar approach for certain Wachovia customers as part of a settlement announced last month. The San Francisco-based bank has also said it's providing a single point of contact to customers who make new modification requests.

Among other changes, Bank of America is looking to create a "customer status checklist" that will show customers where they stand in the process. The bank also plans to double its staff that works with customers face-to-face either at Bank of America offices or alongside nonprofit groups. Other steps may come up in the bank's "constructive and continuing conversations" with Miller and other attorneys general, Desoer says.

Meanwhile, Bank of America has halted foreclosure sales in 50 states as it reviews its processes. The bank believes the basis for all of its foreclosures has been accurate, but it has identified "areas for improvement," Desoer says. The bank has changed its affidavit forms, installed extra quality control checks and changed procedures for hiring outside lawyers. "Every affidavit will be individually reviewed by the signer, properly executed and promptly notarized," she says.












Moynihan "Surprised" By N.Y. Fed Letter


Bank of America Corp. chief executive Brian Moynihan said he was surprised when the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and investors sent a letter pushing the firm to repurchase soured mortgages pooled into securities.

The bank expects to resolve the dispute, which could pressure Bank of America to foreclose on borrowers more quickly, Moynihan, 51, said Thursday in Boston at a presentation to banking analysts.

"I don't think we should be put in a position where we aren't trying to help homeowners through this strife because people want us to foreclose faster," he said.

Bank of America shares declined 4.4 percent on Oct. 19 after news of the letter signed by the New York Fed, Pacific Investment Management Co., BlackRock Inc. and others, alleging the bank's Countrywide Financial Inc. subsidiary didn't service loans properly. The New York Fed acquired mortgage debt through its 2008 rescues of Bear Stearns Cos. and American International Group Inc.

"The fact that they signed the letter from your standpoint surprised you, it surprised me, and it is a surprise to a lot of people," Moynihan said, referring to the bondholders. "We have disputes with them about other assets in those pools and we've resolved them."

Bank of America, the largest U.S. lender, has said it has formal outstanding demands from mortgage investors seeking repurchases of almost $13 billion of loans that may have failed to accurately document key data, such as income and home values.

The Charlotte-based bank is also among lenders facing being investigated by state attorneys general over its handling of foreclosures.

Moynihan said he called BlackRock Inc. CEO Larry Fink to discuss the dispute.
Bank of America said Wednesday it would reduce its 34 percent stake in BlackRock, preferring to use the capital for its own businesses. The bank will remain a strategic partner of BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, for a long time, Moynihan said.

The bank said last month it would start resubmitting foreclosure affidavits in 102,000 cases in which judgment is pending. Amid pressure from lawmakers and state officials, bankers have delayed action in order to review filings that some borrowers claim were marred by so-called robo-signing, in which employees vouched for the accuracy of court statements without personally checking loan records.

The mortgage-bond investor group including BlackRock says Bank of America's foreclosures take too long because of missing documents, processing mistakes and insufficient staffing to evaluate borrowers for loan modifications, Kathy Patrick, their lawyer at Gibbs & Bruns LLP, said Oct. 19.

Moynihan responded Thursday to a question on whether Bank of America would consider a bankruptcy of Countrywide to limit potential losses from distressed home loans.
"We don't see any liability that would make us think differently about working through this in the ways we are working through this," he said.





Did Bank Of America Try To Buy DNC 2012 With Loan?

Pajamas Media roots into FEC filings to discover that Bank of America loaned the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee $32m. last month while asking for nothing more than future contributions as collateral. Such de facto mailing list valuations are an extremely flimsy basis for securing a loan. PJM asks:

Were the Bank of America deals legitimate, arms-length transactions, or were they cozy sweetheart deals in which nothing was really put up to secure a $32 million loan?

But one question not asked is the connection between the loan and Charlotte’s ongoing pursuit of the DNC’s 2012 convention. We already know that BAC CEO Brian Moynihan has been called President Obama’s favorite banker and that the bank’s exec team — like the rest of the Uptown crowd — is full-on behind landing the convention for Banktown USA. Plus we have ample local precedent for BAC throwing millions in sweetheart loans at favored endeavors — the US National Log Flume Ride and France Family Convention Center Annex being two glittering, irrefutable examples.

BAC has yet to respond to PJM inquires with details about the loans — but you know what is coming. BAC will say there is a legit business purpose to the loans and any suggestion to the contrary is counter-factual.





Did The DNC Get an Illegal Campaign Loan from Bank of America? (PJM Exclusive)

Shortly after Labor Day, as polls continued to sink, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) realized it needed a cash infusion for the upcoming midterm elections.

Its chairman, former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, turned to the Bank of America to secure a $15 million revolving credit line. Then, in the middle of this month, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) got another loan from BofA for an additional $17 million.

What was their collateral? It turns out, not much.

The DNC claims their collateral was an intangible piece of property — its donor mailing list. The DCCC only cites unnamed “assets.” Neither party organization possesses real estate even close to cover the $32 million. The DNC’s headquarters is owned by another entity. Even it was put up as collateral, its market value was last estimated at only $13.7 million.

Were the Bank of America deals legitimate, arms-length transactions, or were they cozy sweetheart deals in which nothing was really put up to secure a $32 million loan?

And if it was the latter, could it be considered an illegal campaign contribution from the largest bank holding company in America?

There also is troubling evidence that two days before closing on the loan transaction, the DNC changed its own privacy provisions to allow the selling or sharing of private donor data.

BofA has been a longtime friend of Democrats. In the 2008 election cycle, BofA gave its largest single campaign contribution to then-Senator Barack Obama. According to Bloomberg News, BofA’s new CEO, Brian Moynihan, is considered Obama’s top political ally on Wall Street.

On the eve of the midterm elections, the appearance of preferential loans from cozy Wall Street bankers could play badly with the electorate. What message does a largely unsecured $32 million credit line for the Democratic Party send to thousands of cash-starved small businesses across the nation who can’t secure any credit even with tangible assets?

The findings are part of an exclusive Pajamas Media investigation.

The DNC Loan Agreement as posted online by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and signed by former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (D) on September 16, 2010, says the loan collateral included: “All electronic mail (‘E-mail’) addresses and other contact lists, records and other Information (electronic or otherwise) relating to contributors, supporters and subscribers owned by any of the Borrowers.” The borrowers in this case were the DNC and the DNC Services Corporation.

The loan agreement further stipulates that if the Democrats defaulted, Bank of America would be entitled to “proceeds from any fundraising activity, refunds, reimbursements, or proceeds from the rental or sale of mailing, contact or subscription lists or Information (electronic or otherwise).”

One key to understanding the problems behind the $15 million loan is determining what the donor list is actually worth. The DNC filings with the FEC do not attach any independent appraisal documents or list broker evaluations to establish the list’s fair market value.

Senator John McCain once tried to use his presidential donor list as collateral for a loan. He valued his Republican donor list as worth $3 million. The bank rejected the loan.

Trying to fix a value on an intangible mailing list is very difficult.

“Donor lists do have value, but very fleeting value,” Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, told Pajamas Media. “Lists do deteriorate and $15 million is an awful lot of money. So if the bank ends up with the list because the party is broke, where are they going to get their money?”

A senior executive who is part of a national U.S. bank told Pajamas Media that a data list would be a weak basis for a $15 million loan. He gave his comments on the grounds that he would not be publicly identified. He said he was “somewhat skeptical of a donor list as adequate collateral for a $15 million credit line.”

But if the value is not $15 million, it could be considered a substantial campaign contribution to the Democratic National Committee. And that could be illegal.

“The DNC would have to demonstrate it’s an arms-length, commercially reasonable, properly collateralized loan,” says Cleta Mitchell, a Washington-based attorney with Foley & Lardner LLP and an expert on campaign finance law. She says there needed to be some outside way to assess or appraise the list before the line of credit could be approved. “Otherwise, it’s an illegal contribution from a national bank,” she says.

Hans von Spakovsky, a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, agrees. Unless the DNC or BofA conducted an independent appraisal, the loan could be considered an illegal campaign contribution. “The FEC would require an independent appraisal of the fair market value of the list that supports the amount of the loan. Otherwise as a commissioner I would consider this an illegal contribution,” he told Pajamas Media.

In 2005, ATA attorneys for direct mail pioneer Richard Viguerie told the Federal Election Commission that ATA could not get credit using its mailing lists as collateral. Concerning its own client’s many mailing lists, ATA told the FEC that as a standard business practice, “the collateral is the mailing lists. Banks have informed ATA that this is not the type of collateral that banks use to extend credit.”

Without independent documentation, Mitchell told Pajamas Media, “you would never be able to say that their mailing list was worth $15 million. A bank would have to discount the value. So a bank would have to say it was worth at least twice that to get to $15 million.” That, she emphasizes, does require an arms-length appraisal and documentation.

Pajamas Media contacted both the Democratic National Committee and Bank of America for comment and details surrounding the transaction. As of this posting, the DNC has not replied to our inquiries. A communications person from BofA did return our phone call but could not respond to our query. [Update: They did after the piece ran; see addendum below.] She promised she would get someone to respond.

Boehm and Mitchell point out that many campaigns frequently take out short-term, temporary loans as bridge loans until new contributions come in. Most promise to pay it off before the election. The BofA terms are different.

The bank states that the first payment of principal will not be required until February 28, 2011, well after the November elections. Final payment for the debt will not be required until December 2011. What if the party found itself in deep debt after losing one or both houses of Congress?

As of October 13, the DNC reported $13.5 million of cash on hand with debts of $7.7 million. Their total worth was $5.8 million with three more weeks of campaigning ahead. (The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee took out an additional $17 million credit line on October 21.)

There is also the issue of whether on the eve of the loan, the Democrats altered their own privacy policy about sharing private donor data. On September 14, two days before executing the loan, the DNC changed its privacy policy web page. The site initially states that their privacy policy is not to share private data: “It is our policy not to share the personal information we collect from you.”

However, the site adds in its last line that indeed it might share private information if it is the result of an “asset sale or in any other situation where personal information may be disclosed or transferred as one of the assets of the DNC.”

Is it simply a coincidence that the last item of this section acknowledges the DNC might share private information as a result of an asset sale to a third party? Or was it added to accommodate the new collateralized loan?

Other Democratic Party web sites strictly forbid the sharing of their mailing lists unless authorized by the individual. For example, one local Democratic website directly state to its supporters: “We will not give, sell or rent your email address to any other organization unless you specifically authorize us.”

The Democrats’ long-time sweetheart relationship with the banking world and with the Bank of America in particular creates the appearance of an insider deal.

BofA was very generous to Barack Obama when he ran for President. Campaign finance records show that in the 2008 election cycle, Senator Barack Obama was the top recipient of Bank of America campaign donations, reaping $421,000.

BofA’s new CEO, who took over from embattled Kenneth Lewis, is considered one of the Obama administration’s top Wall Street allies on a whole host of issues, from the creation of a consumer regulatory agency to the defense of the administration’s home mortgage fiascoes.

Here’s what Bloomberg News reported about the Moynihan-White House axis last May when he was the number two at BofA:

“He has been willing to speak out bravely in his industry on the need for reform measures,” says Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s liaison to corporate America who has met with Moynihan at the White House several times. “And he has been willing to come to Washington and roll up his sleeves and work on the issue.”

The history between BofA and Democrats goes back years. One highly publicized political scandal linked the bank and Democrats to the subprime mortgage giant Countrywide Financial, which BofA acquired more than two years ago. Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo gave preferential below market mortgages to leading Democrats like Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. After the disclosure of the mortgage favors, both Dodd and Senator Kent Conrad (D-SD) decided not to run for re-election.

Dodd and other Washington Democrats belonged to a group of VIP loan recipients known in company documents and emails as “FOAs” — Friends of Angelo, a reference to Angelo Mozilo.

“This (type of loan) isn’t something that’s generally offered to the general public, but it looks like it is something of a sweetheart deal,” observes Boehm about the new BofA credit line to the DNC. “Usually when you see this it is banks with a relationship with candidates and we see that all over the place. We saw that with Countrywide,” he told Pajamas Media.

Allowing third parties access to donor mailing lists as part of financial transactions can be tricky business. For years Democratic activists hounded Republican Sen. John Ashcroft about the third party use of his mailing list. The Federal Election Commission fined his campaign $37,000.

The issue may not play well with voters either. Getting an easy line of credit may not sit well with cash-starved small businesses that have sought loans during the bad economy — even when they tried to collateralize it with real, not abstract assets.

The question is, will the DNC come clean and open their books on the transaction?

Update:

Jefferson George, a Bank of America spokesman, responds:

First, the answer to the question raised in the headline – “Did the DNC Get an Illegal Campaign Loan from Bank of America?” – is no. We follow all Federal Election Commission guidelines in our financial transactions with political parties and apply the same underwriting standards to these organizations as we do to any other institutional borrower. We also work closely with outside campaign finance legal experts to structure and document these transactions. These agreements are required to be arms-length transactions, and we are very careful with how we underwrite these loans.

As I mentioned, we have always had relationships with committees that represent political parties on both sides of the aisle. Our banking relationship with the Democratic Party dates back more than 30 years, well before the current administration. We also have provided loans for Republican candidates and committees. For instance, we provided financing for Mitt Romney’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Regarding the loans to the DNC and DCCC, due to client confidentiality obligations, we can’t discuss specific loans publicly beyond what is disclosed by the FEC, and we would refer you to those individual organizations. We can say, however, that collateral for these types of loans may include many things, and donor lists usually are insignificant compared such security measures as blanket liens against all assets, including accounts receivable. This also assumes a client doesn’t have adequate cash flow from the collection of contributions. Other factors in considering a loan include a client’s history with repaying loans on time or ahead of schedule.

Update (5:10 PM PDT):

More from Jefferson:

Thanks for this. Saw the updated story. One clarification, and it was my error: We didn’t provide financing for Romney. Rather, we had — and have — a banking relationship, handling deposits and providing other cash management services. And that relationship is still active.

Update (8:00 PM PDT):

Richard Pollack adds:

The nub of the story is that Bank of America refuses to confirm that an independent appraisal was done for the issuance of two huge loans to the Democrats totaling $32 million. While the bank might wish to invoke confidentiality, in the post-partisan era promised by President Obama, transparency around this particular loan is vital. This is especially true if there are allegations of violations of law.

The scope of the BofA small business loan to the Democrats is breathtaking. According to CNN/Money, in 2009, the bank issued 308 loans to small businesses totaling $17.6 million and in 2010 it issued 185 loans totaling $22.8 million. So the size of the Democrats’ two loans dwarfs all loans to small businesses in each calendar year. I wonder how credit-starved small business owners would feel about these Democrat loans tonight.

In that CNN/Money article, Mr. George was interviewed, saying, “Among those seeking loans, the creditworthiness of many businesses has changed. Cash flow — the most important factor — often is down. The value of collateral, such as real estate or equipment, has decreased.”

Mr. George had it right. Collateral is everything. The public has a right to know what is the collateral behind the $32 million in loans. Otherwise, it can be regarded as a gift, and patently illegal under federal campaign finance laws.

(Update: 7:54 AM PDT, 10/28):

More from Jefferson:

Your last update at 8:00 pm ET is incorrect. The numbers you cite from the CNN/Money story are for SBA loans. That was clearly stated in the story, and SBA lending is a very small percentage of Bank of America’s total lending to small businesses. In 2009, Bank of America loaned $16.5 billion to small businesses. Through the third quarter of 2010, Bank of America loaned $13.9 billion to small businesses.

Beyond direct lending, Bank of America works with Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) to provide financing and technical assistance to businesses that don’t qualify for traditional financing. As the leading financial institution supporting CDFIs, the bank provides $1 billion of capital – including more than $200 million to CDFIs that finance small businesses in lower-income communities. Bank of America also recently launched a grant program for CDFIs and other nonprofit lenders, aimed at unlocking $100 million in low-cost, long-term capital for small and rural businesses. To date, the bank has awarded grants that allowed CDFIs to access nearly $27.5 million in lending capital.

In addition, Bank of America has made a commitment to increase spending with small, medium-sized and diverse businesses. The bank’s pledge to purchase $10 billion in products and services from those suppliers over the next five years will provide much-needed income for those businesses. Finally, Bank of America recently announced it will hire more than 1,000 Small Business Bankers by early 2012. Based in communities across the U.S., these bankers will consult with small business owners, spend time at their offices and assess their companies’ deposit, credit and cash management needs.

(Update:7:56 AM PDT, 10/28): Richard Pollock responds:

Thank you for your additional comments on behalf of Bank of America. We will post them in full.

As for the substance of your comments:

Actually, I understated the case in your favor by citing the CNN/Money figures. These loans are not to your smallest business customers, which are really hurting in the credit crunch. It’s your biggest SBA (7) loan portfolio, which is the government backed loan program for small businesses through the Small Business Administration.

Your $32 million dwarfs those loans, many of which have been in trouble because of deterioration in collateralized assets. Your former CEO, Ken Lewis, has admitted this repeatedly. That’s why more conservative rules need to be applied in this economic downturn, not more relaxed standards. The Democratic National Committee and the DCCC will continue. No doubt. But its indebtedness after its most expensive and probably losing mid-term election cycle may put it in a precarious state until the presidential campaign. If may twist on an old financial cautionary warning: past performance is not a guarantee of future results. In 2010, the DNC and the DCCC may face substantial indebtedness and will have to repay the loan through 2012 as well as re-build their donor base.

I strongly recommend that your urge your clients, the DNC and DCCC, to be transparent and back up the collateral for their $32 million lines of credit. Failure to do so will only give the public the impression that there was a sweetheart deal here, and perhaps even the appearance of unlawful activity as well.



View Larger Map


Sources: Bloomberg.com, CNBC, McClatchy Newspapers, Pajamas Media, Wikipedia, Youtube, Google Maps