ELIJAH CUMMINGS DEFENDS HIS 23 YR BALTIMORE REPRESENTATION (SO DO THE RATS):
WAS TRUMP RIGHT? IS BALTIMORE STILL “THE WIRE”??
HOW MANY BLACK MEN HAS CUMMINGS HELPED TO (SECRETLY) INCARCERATE INSTEAD OF HELPING THEM TO BECOME GAINFULLY EMPLOYED?
CONGRESSMAN ELIJAH CUMMINGS (“THE BULLY”) IS KNOWN TO RETALIATE AGAINST ANYONE WHO DOESN’T AGREE WITH HIM OR CHALLENGES HIM.
IN FACT, MANY OF HIS CONSTITUENTS ARE AFRAID OF HIM WHICH EXPLAINS WHY HE’S BEEN IN PUBLIC OFFICE 23 YRS.
SO WILL CUMMINGS USE HIS CONGRESSIONAL JUDICIAL COMMITTEE POWER TO RETALIATE AGAINST PRES TRUMP OVER HIS BOLD TWEETS ABOUT BALTIMORE?
WILL CUMMINGS RETALIATE AGAINST ALL THE JOURNALISTS & BLOGGERS WHO REPORTED ON THIS STORY?
STAY TUNED.
Post Sources: Baltimore Sun, DW News, Fox News, NBC News, Turning Point USA, Washington Examiner, Youtube
**** The trouble with Trump's tweets about Baltimore is that they are true
President Trump’s recent tweets about Baltimore, rats, and the city’s political leadership have roiled Washington and prompted another round of cries of “racism” from the usual race hustlers, who are seeking out every camera they can find. But rather than focus on whether or not Trump is a racist, how about we focus on the man’s words? Are they true?
Yes, they are.
First elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1995, Elijah Cummings has represented Maryland’s 7th Congressional District (which includes Baltimore City) for the past 23 years. Prior to that, Cummings was an elected member of Maryland's House of Delegates, representing District 39 (also Baltimore City) beginning in 1983. In all, Cummings has represented Baltimore for 36 years.
What has Baltimore to show for Cummings’ years of representation? Here are a few examples. In 2017, 13 high schools in the city of Baltimore were found to have zero students — not a single one — who were proficient in math. And out of the 3,804 students in all who took the state math proficiency test, only 14 were proficient.
Baltimore’s schools perform this poorly despite the fact that residents of Baltimore pay 3.2% city income tax, the maximum local income tax rate allowed by state law in an already high-tax state. Take that as further proof that throwing money at problems doesn’t necessarily solve them.
Crime in Baltimore is, simply put, out of control. With over 2,000 violent crimes per 100,000 people, in the year 2017 Baltimore was well within the most dangerous 1% of U.S. cities.
And then, there’s the rats, the mention of which generated much of the ire directed at Trump. He claimed that Baltimore is “rat infested," causing some left-wing pundits to claim he was using code to refer to “black and brown people.” Yet, once again, the issue is whether he was right. And he was. The city has a very real rat infestation problem.
Baltimore’s rats have long been the subject of commentary in the news and in social media. From both sides of the political aisle, everyone from Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders to Ben Carson and Baltimore’s former Mayor Catherine Pugh (who resigned in May amid federal and state corruption investigations) have been outed on the web for having publicly commented on the city’s filth and squalor in years past. A 2018 video has surfaced of Pugh touring her miserable city and nearly gagging on her own words as she exclaimed, “You can smell the rats … Oh my God, you can smell the dead animals.”
So, yes, there are rats. A lot of rats. So many rats that one citizen created a full feature-length documentary film about Baltimore’s rats. The city and county themselves launched the “Rat Attack Program” to battle the epidemic, sadly without much success.
On Monday, Baltimore’s local Fox broadcasting affiliate WBFF was reporting on Trump’s tweetstorm when, as if sensing its opportunity for two seconds of fame, a rat ran through the frame effectively photobombing the Fox45 reporter’s live shot!
As a black American pundit, I am often asked whether I think Trump is a racist. I do not, but the answer I always give is that I don’t care. What I care about is the truth.
The point is that the overarching focus on race accomplishes nothing. And if the focus is simply on truth, then in this case, Trump is unquestionably right.
That Baltimore’s political leadership has failed its constituents is inarguable. That's why those same political figures, along with the race hustlers of the day, repeatedly pull out the same card they’ve been playing for decades. They get away with it by accusing their own accusers of racism. They choose to focus on accusations of intent rather than substance of the issue.
Baltimore is steeped in squalor, and the black community there bears the brunt of its inept, corrupt political leadership. Trump hasn't had time to cause that in his less than three years in office. But in less than three seconds, his tweet has shone a glaring spotlight onto it, and that bright light is causing the rats to scurry.
TRUMP AS PRESIDENT - I WILL NOT CRITICIZE (MEXICO DEAL):
I WILL PRAY FOR PRES TRUMP BUT I WON’T PUBLICLY CRITICIZE HIM.
NO MAN IS PERFECT; ONLY GOD ALMIGHTY.
OUR IMMIGRATION SYSTEM WAS VERY BROKEN & CONGRESS REFUSED TO FIX IT.
HAVE WE BECOME SO POLITICALLY CORRECT, MEDIA DRIVEN AND DIVISIVE THAT WE NO LONGER CARE ABOUT WHAT IS LEGALLY & MORALLY CORRECT ACCORDING TO CONSTITUTIONAL LAW??
WHY CRITICIZE A LEADER WHO IS ONLY TRYING TO LEGALLY HELP BOTH AMERICAN CITIZENS & ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS EXPERIENCE THE AMERICAN DREAM?
GOD BLESS OUR NATION
GOD BLESS THE U.S. MILITARY
GOD BLESS MEXICO FOR AGREEING TO SIGN THIS DEAL.
Post Sources: CBS News, Fox News, Reuters, Washington Post
**** Trump’s big win leaves critics sputtering
Because President Trump emerges as a clear winner from his week-long confrontation with Mexico over our neighbor’s lax enforcement of its southern border, reflexive Trump critics will scramble to find some way of containing what is a clear Trump triumph, which came with assists by Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who conducted the key negotiations.
Already we have heard about long-term damage to trust between the North American allies, about investor nervousness and Trump’s unpredictability.
This sort of flailing-about to deny the obvious says nothing about Trump and much about those critics who can no more admit he played high-stakes poker and won a round on border security than they can admit that the president delivered a magnificent tribute to the heroes of Normandy on Thursday.
Much of the media has overheated now and, like an engine that has run too long without an oil change, has begun to seize up, stall, even melt.
That Trump has contributed to the slow wreck of American media is undeniable.
It’s a feature, not a bug, of his presidency to attack, attack, attack the media elites. And no matter how often center-right journalists counsel him to abandon the Stalinist “enemy of the people” rhetoric, he hasn’t because it triggers a flaming hatred among the ideologies of the left, with platforms and elites eager to signal each other that they are part of the tribe menaced by this Godzilla from Trump Tower.
Voters, though — not just the “Twitter Democrats” but voters of all ages and ideologies — are a pretty smart bunch. Assume for a moment that they know, generally, that tariffs are a lousy idea in terms of economic growth. Assume as well that they know that tariffs can be an instrument of national power in confrontations unrelated to economic growth.
Assume that voters know our competition with China is far more than an economic race, but rather a complex geopolitical rivalry that both sides wish to keep contained short of open conflict and that is waged through proxies, cyber-confrontations, intellectual-property battles, freedom-of-the-seas disputes and the relative size and power of our armed forces and those of our allies.
In that context, tariffs on Chinese goods are just part of an overall negotiation toward a new normal that is in everyone’s interest.
So “tariffs bad, free trade good” is simplistic. “Free trade is good and agreed-upon international conventions are required for genuinely free trade and tariffs may be necessary to achieve those conventions” is accurate. And widely understood.
“Alliances are good” is simplistic. “Alliances in which allies actually do what they promise with regard to percentage of GDP spent on national defense while not increasing dependence on Russian natural gas” is complex but accurate.
Hard as it is for the Manhattan-Beltway echo chamber to believe, sounding sophisticated isn’t actually being sophisticated. Trump’s record is mixed, but not this week.
This week, even as Joe Biden began to melt (the headline in Saturday’s Times of London online edition was “Democrats raise doubts over Joe Biden’s stamina for presidential nomination race” — never a good sign when the neighbors notice these things), Trump put together back-to-back big successes. Historian and classicist Victor Davis Hanson speculates that Trump’s enemies are so addicted to hating him that, in a classic addict pattern, all behaviors are bent in service of the addiction.
This weekend and next week will separate the outrage addicts from the serious journalists. Trump would be very well advised to take this tariff weapon off the table with regard to Mexico.
It probably wouldn’t work a second time unless the Mexicans failed to deliver even a halfhearted effort.
It’s not the sort of threat you can use twice, and doing so would undo the enormous win he can rightfully paint this to be at rally after rally as Campaign 2020 gets underway.
If Trump invited Democrats back to the White House for immigration reform and border security talks right now, urging them to be as serious as the Mexican government has been about the border crisis, it might actually work.
House Democrats passed an immigration bill last week. Senate Republicans could quickly pass their own version to get a joint House-Senate conference with White House participation.
Everyone could win: the United States and Mexico, the president and the House speaker, both parties, the undocumented in this country seeking regularization, and the desperate and easily exploited poor of Central America.
MALEAH DAVIS, 4, RAPED & MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD BY HER MONSTER STEP-FATHER DARION VENCE (MALEAH’S LAW):
DARION VENCE DISPOSED OF MALEAH IN A TRASH BAG....HE SHOULD RECEIVE THE DEATH PENALTY.
BOTH CPS & MALEAH’S MOTHER BRITTANY BOWENS ARE TO BLAME FOR HER MURDER.
WHY DID CPS RETURN MALEAH & HER BROTHER FOLLOWING EVIDENCE OF SUBSTANTIATED SERIOUS ABUSE FOUND IN THE HOME??
WHAT KIND OF HEAD INJURY CAUSED MALEAH TO HAVE MULTIPLE BRAIN SURGERIES?
CONGRESS (BOTH PARTIES) NEEDS TO AUDIT & OVERHAUL CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES IMMEDIATELY IN EVERY STATE & WASHINGTON DC.
CONGRESS SHOULD ALSO CREATE NEW CPS LEGISLATION ENTITLED “MALEAH’S LAW”.
MOST CPS SYSTEM SUPERVISORS ARE SORORITY BLACK WOMEN WHO DON’T REALLY CARE ABOUT LOW INCOME ABUSED BLACK CHILDREN.
PLEASE FIRE MOST BLACK CPS SUPERVISORS AND REPLACE THEM WITH WHITE WOMEN.
YES I SAID WHAT I SAID.
DON’T LET MALEAH’S PREMATURE DEATH BE IN VAIN.
Post Sources: CBS News, KHOU, USA Today, Youtube
***** Dogs detect human decomposition in car of man arrested in case of missing girl Maleah Davis, 4
Trained dogs detected the scent of human decomposition in the car of a man arrested in connection with the puzzling disappearance of Maleah Davis, 4, outside Houston, a prosecutor said.
Derion Vence was in jail Sunday on a $1 million bond after he was arrested Saturday and charged with tampering with evidence – a human corpse. Vence is set to appear in court Monday.
Vence, 26, lived with Maleah’s mother, Brittany Bowens, and is believed to be the last person to see the girl before her disappearance more than a week ago.
Houston police said Maleah has not been found and the investigation is continuing. Authorities have declined to say whether they believe Vence killed the girl, but prosecutors said in court documents filed Saturday that Vence could face additional charges, including murder.
Police have said blood found in Vence’s apartment was linked to Maleah.
Vence initially told police he was assaulted by three men in a truck after stopping for a flat tire on the way to pick up Bowens at the airport on the night of May 4.
Vence said Maleah and his 2-year-old son were with him and they were all abducted by the three men, who knocked him unconscious.
When he came to the next day in Sugar Land, about 20 miles southwest of Houston, the girl was missing, Vence told police. He also said the Nissan Altima he was driving was stolen.
Police said surveillance video showed Vence getting dropped off at Methodist Sugar Land Hospital in the silver Altima last Sunday.
Police found the car in a parking lot Thursday.
At Vence’s probable cause court hearing Saturday night, Harris County prosecutor Pat Stayton said two dogs trained to find cadavers reacted to the trunk of the car.
“The dogs were responding to the scent of human decomposition in the vehicle,” Stayton said.
Surveillance video from a neighbor had shown Vence carrying a large, blue laundry basket with a large trash bag from his apartment on May 3, Stayton said. Vence returned three minutes later without the basket and later he was seen leaving the apartment with cleaning supplies, including bleach.
In the car, police found a laundry basket that looked like the one Vence took out of his apartment, Stayton said.
Police have described Vence as Maleah’s stepfather, but Bowens said through a spokesman that Vence is her former fiancé.
Child Protective Services removed Maleah and her brothers from the home Vence and Bowens shared in August after the girl sustained a head wound, but the children were returned in February, according to an agency spokeswoman.
The Houston Chronicle reported that Maleah’s grandmother, Brenda Bowens, had tried to get the kids placed at her home instead of in foster care when Child Protective Services conducted an investigation starting in August.
FURLOUGHED FEDERAL EMPLOYEE BOLDLY SUPPORTS SHUTDOWN & BORDER WALL:
HOW MANY MORE DO?
WHY IS CONGRESS ALLOWING SHUTDOWN TO DRAG ON?
IS THIS SHUTDOWN REALLY ABOUT THE WALL?
OR IS IT SECRETLY ABOUT “DRAINING THE SWAMP” & CONTROLLING WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE OF GOVT MONEY?
IS THIS SHUTDOWN SECRETLY BEING USED BY CONGRESS TO LEGALLY GET RID OF LONG TERM FEDERAL GOVT EMPLOYEES OVER THE AGE OF 60??
OR IS IT ABOUT NATIONAL SECURITY?
INQUIRING MINDS OF AMERICAN VOTERS WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH.
Post Sources: Fox News, WJLA, YouTube
**** Furloughed federal employee says she supports Trump's push for a border wall
Several times during the partial government shutdown, President Donald Trump has claimed that federal workers are on his side.
Now, we’re hearing from one of those workers.
“I’m very strongly behind it, yes,” Amanda Schimone said. “I just believe in what we are doing. I believe in the President’s policies and Secretary Nielsen’s policies, and supporting the border patrol agents.”
Schimone spent 26 years in the U.S. Air Force before retiring in 2012. Now, she works at the Department of Homeland Security’s federal law enforcement training center in Cheltenham, Maryland.
“We train all the federal agents, through all the different agencies. Not just DHS, but FBI, the state department, that kind of thing,” she said.
Despite the fact that’s she been furloughed since the shutdown began, Schimone says she supports the border wall on behalf of her colleagues who patrol the border every single day.
“If you had a tool that would help you do your job better and to be able to have border security – they’re my coworkers – I don’t know them personally, but if they say that’s what they need to do their job, than I support them 100 percent,” she said.
Schimone’s husband also works for the federal government, but is not impacted by the partial government shutdown. She says they’re relying on his income plus a pension she gets from the U.S. Air Force to pay their bills while her DHS paychecks are on hold.
“We’ve put away money, we have a financial planner, we’ve been really cognizant of doing that,” she said. “My credit card bills, they’re just getting the minimum payment right now.”
Still, she knows there are a lot of federal employees who are struggling financially due as the shutdown drags on.
“I do have for empathy for them. I do understand that some people live paycheck to paycheck,” she said.
She also understands that a lot of people may not like her perspective on the government shutdown. And she says that’s okay.
“I don’t judge people,” she said. “They have a right to their opinion, and I have a right to mine.”
At the very least, she hopes people will listen to what she has to say.
“Do I like being furloughed? No. But I understand and I support them,” she said. “I realize America is where people really want to be, but I think there’s a right way to come into our country, and not illegally. And so that’s one of the reasons why I do support the border wall.”
She hopes the president and Congress can soon agree on funding for the wall, and get the government back open.
“Maybe negotiate the amount that President Trump wants or some type of other immigration policies, but it sure would be nice if they would try to work together,” she said. “No negotiations makes me feel like they don’t care about the Department of Homeland Security.”
MARYLAND’S GERRYMANDERING ORDERED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY FEDERAL JUDGES (PG COUNTY):
VOTERS WHO DID NOT SUPPORT DEMOCRAT CANDIDATES WERE OFTEN PUNISHED POLITICALLY AFTER ELECTIONS.
CONGRESSIONAL MAPS MUST NOW BE REDRAWN PRIOR TO 2020 ELECTION.
FAIR ELECTIONS ARE WHAT DEFINES AMERICAN DEMOCRACY.
LEGAL CITIZENS OF ALL RACES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO VOTE FOR CANDIDATES OF THEIR CHOICE WITHOUT FEAR.
Post Sources: Washington Post
**** Federal judges in gerrymandering case toss Maryland’s congressional voting map
Federal judges in Maryland on Wednesday blocked the state from using its congressional voting map in future elections, ordering political leaders to draw new electoral lines for contests in 2020.
The three-judge panel unanimously threw out the congressional map in a long-running partisan gerrymandering case. The decision gives Maryland officials until March to submit a new redistricting plan.
The judges acknowledged the inherently political redistricting process but declared the boundaries unconstitutional and intentionally designed to target Republican voters in the 6th Congressional District because of their political affiliation.
“When political considerations are taken into account to an extreme, the public perceives an abuse of the democratic process,” wrote Judge Paul V. Niemeyer of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. He was joined by U.S. District Judge George L. Russell III.
Chief U.S. District Judge James K. Bredar wrote a separate opinion agreeing with the overall judgment and declaring partisan gerrymandering “noxious, a cancer on our democracy.”
If the state is unable to meet the deadline for creating a new map, the court’s order establishes a commission that will create a map of its own.
The Wednesday ruling can be appealed directly to the Supreme Court, which in June avoided answering the question of when extreme partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional in the Maryland case and in another map case from Wisconsin.
The office of Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D), which defended the map, said Wednesday that it is reviewing its options. Legislative leaders declined to comment on the court’s order.
Republican Gov. Larry Hogan, who won reelection Tuesday, called the decision “a victory for the vast majority of Marylanders who want free and fair elections.”
“We remain steadfastly committed to moving forward in an open and transparent manner that is free of the partisan influence that has dominated the redistricting process in Maryland for far too long,” said Hogan, who has pushed for a constitutional amendment that would have an independent redistricting commission redraw boundaries.
At the core of the issue is the 6th District in Western Maryland, which was redrawn in 2011 to include parts of heavily Democratic Montgomery County. Democratic mapmakers moved hundreds of thousands of voters from Western Maryland out of the 6th District and added Democrats from Montgomery.
The lawsuit was brought by seven Republican voters who lived in the 6th District before the boundaries were reset.
In its ruling Wednesday, the three-judge panel declared the district unconstitutional and found that the state intended to lessen the influence of GOP voters by replacing them with Democrats in violation of the First Amendment right to political association.
“The massive and unnecessary reshuffling of the Sixth District, involving one-half of its population and dictated by party affiliation and voting history, had no other cause than the intended actions of the controlling Democratic officials to burden Republican voters by converting the District” into a Democratic one, Niemeyer wrote in his 59-page opinion.
The court ruling came a day after Democrat David Trone defeated Republican Amie Hoeber by a wide margin in that district, in what was considered the most competitive of Maryland’s House contests.
In a deposition in the case, former governor Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, was blunt about the partisan mapmaking he oversaw, saying Democratic leaders intentionally redrew the districts to try to give their party an advantage.
“Yesterday’s results confirm what we’ve been saying all along. The 6th District isn’t really competitive for Republicans,” said attorney Michael B. Kimberly, who represents the group of Maryland Republicans.
The ruling rejected the argument from the attorney general’s office that Democratic leaders intended only to make the 6th District more competitive.
“It is impossible to flip a seat to the Democrats without flipping it away from the Republicans,” Niemeyer wrote. “There can be no doubt that at every stage of the process, the State’s Democratic officials who put the 2011 redistricting plan in place specifically intended to flip control of the Sixth District from Republicans to Democrats and then acted on that intent.”
The ruling applies to the entire Maryland congressional map as drawn in 2011, but the challengers have proposed a modification at the border between the 6th and 8th districts that could address the court’s concerns without affecting the shape of the other districts.
Before the ruling Wednesday, state Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) cast doubt on the possibility of an independent commission without a sign-on from other states — Virginia, Pennsylvania and North Carolina — to ensure Maryland Democrats are not at a political disadvantage on Capitol Hill.
“To put that in play without all of those states having to abide by the same rules is not going to happen,” Miller said.
AYANNA PRESSLEY, NEWBIE DEFEATS MIKE CAPUANO INCUMBENT (POLITICAL UPSETS):
FIRST IN GEORGIA (STACEY ABRAMS); NOW IN MASSACHUSETTS.
SUPER CANDIDATE OBAMA HAS ENDORSED STACEY ABRAMS.
WAKE UP DEMOCRATS, BLACK VOTERS CAN NOT BE REPLACED.
THE BLACK VOTE IS STILL LOYAL AND POWERFUL.
NO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WINS WITHOUT A PERCENTAGE OF BLACK VOTES.
Post Sources: CNN, NY Times, Politically Georgia, TIME, Yahoo News, Youtube
***** Another Democratic incumbent upset by primary challenger -- this time in Massachusetts
Democratic Rep. Mike Capuano has conceded defeat to Boston city councilor Ayanna Pressley in the Massachusetts primary for his US House seat Tuesday, the latest upset to rock the Democratic Party and showcase a restive base eager for change.
Pressley's win comes less than three months after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ousted the No. 4-ranking House Democrat, Rep. Joe Crowley of New York, in a primary.
In his concession speech, Capuano said the district was clearly upset with the status quo and that he shared those feelings.
"I will tell you, I'm sorry it didn't work out but this is life and this is OK. America is going to be OK," Capuano said, adding, "Ayanna Pressley is going to be a good congresswoman and Massachusetts will be well served."
Unlike Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley did not argue that Capuano was too moderate. In fact, she said, the two would vote the same way. Instead, the 44-year-old Pressley -- already a rising star in Democratic politics -- cast the race as about Democrats' need for a new, more assertive style in the Donald Trump era.
"This is a fight for the soul of our party. This is a fight for the future of our democracy," Pressley said at a recent canvassing event in Cambridge. "We might vote the same way, but we will lead differently. These times require and this district deserves bold, activist leadership."
Ocasio-Cortez tweeted her support for Pressley on Tuesday night, writing "Congratulations to my sister in service, @AyannaPressley, on continuing her historic path into Congress tonight."
Pressley is now poised to become the only black member of Massachusetts' mostly male congressional delegation.
She'd argued on the campaign trail that systemic inequalities had worsened in a district that was once represented by John F. Kennedy and where the majority of voters are nonwhite.
"It's about who I listen to and it's about who I govern with. And there are a lot of people in this district who feel left out and left behind and ignored -- and it's not just women, it's not just people of color," Pressley told CNN in a recent interview. "It runs the gamut. And I think after a generation, the district deserves a choice."
The race was just one of a slate of contested primaries in Massachusetts on Tuesday. Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Republican Gov. Charlie Baker -- both heavily favored to win re-election -- both got general election opponents.
Secretary of state Bill Galvin -- Massachusetts' longest-serving statewide official, in office since 1995 -- fended off a Democratic primary challenge from Boston city councilor Josh Zakim, who conceded.
The race focused on Massachusetts' voting laws: Galvin highlighted changes that modernized the laws early in his tenure. But those laws now lag Democrats' preference nationally for same-day and automatic voter registration -- which Zakim has pushed. Galvin has since endorsed those changes, too -- but Zakim has cast him as being slow to do so.
Zakim had influential supporters, including Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and US Rep. Seth Moulton. Zakim also picked up the Massachusetts Democratic Party's official endorsement. But Galvin, a well-known figure who has previously been the leading statewide vote-getter, coasted on Tuesday.
CHARISSE STINSON 21, KILLS 2 YR-OLD SON JORDAN IN COLD BLOOD (BLAME DSS):
WHAT WAS CHARISSE’S MOTIVE??
WHY DID DSS/CPS RETURN THE CHILD TO CHARISSE AFTER CLEAR EVIDENCE OF ABUSE??
DSS CHILD ABUSE & ELDER ABUSE OFFICES IN FLORIDA, NORTH CAROLINA & SOUTH CAROLINA DO NOT PROTECT ABUSED CHILDREN, NOR ABUSED SENIOR CITIZENS.
ESPECIALLY DSS OFFICES IN CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA.
MOST DSS OFFICES ARE NOTHING MORE THAN SOCIAL CLUBS TO HIRE BLACK GREEK SORORITY SISTERS & FRAT BROTHERS.
WHY ISN’T THE FEDERAL OFFICE OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES DOING ANYTHING?
DON’T LET LITTLE JORDAN HAVE DIED IN VAIN.
CONGRESS NEEDS TO IMMEDIATELY ORDER AUDITS OF ALL DSS/ CPS/ ELDER ABUSE OFFICES.
Post Sources: ABC News, Fox News, Youtube
**** Charisse Stinson: Mother of missing 2-year-old Largo boy admits to causing son's death, report says
LARGO, Fla. — The mother of a 2-year-old Largo boy, who was the center of a statewide Amber Alert, has been charged with murder in the death of her son.
Officers arrested 21-year-old Charisse Stinson and charged her with First Degree Murder in the death of Jordan Belliveau.
Jordan was found dead in the wooded area of Lake Avenue and McMullen Road in Largo on Tuesday afternoon.
According to an arrest affidavit written by Largo Police, Stinson admitted to causing the death of her son.
The report alleges Stinson, "in a moment of frustration," struck Jordan in the face with the back of her hand "which in turn caused the back of his head to strike an interior wall of her home. After the blow to the head, the victim suffered seizures during the night, which lead to further decline [in his health], resulting in his death."
The report goes on to state that Stinson did not seek medical help, but rather took her son to a wooded area and left him to die. Authorities say Jordan's body had injuries matching what Stinson told them happened.
According to police, initially Stinson told them that she was walking on East Bay Drive with Jordan around 9:30 p.m. Saturday when they were offered a ride in a white Toyota Camry by someone they did not know who told them his name was Antwan.
She then told police that once inside the car, "Antwan" struck her in the face multiple times, causing her to lose consciousness. She claimed that she didn’t regain consciousness until around 1:30 a.m. Sunday, when she awoke in a wooded area at Largo Central Park to find Jordan missing.
Her story prompted a statewide Amber Alert. Investigators even released a composite sketch of the alleged suspect, based on Stinson's description.
When asked why she took the ride from "Antwan," Stinson told police it was because Jordan was kind of heavy and she didn't want to have to carry him all the way to her destination.
As the search for Jordan continued, ABC Action News learned authorities were at the Stinson's apartment on Sunday picking up evidence and trying to determine when was the last time Jordan was there.
Police later told ABC Action News they discovered bloody children’s items inside of the apartment. On Monday, they took those items into evidence but said they were not certain if they were connected to Jordan’s disappearance.
Jordan’s mother told investigators her son cut his chin and recently received stitches for the injury. Detectives also took a few items of children’s clothing into evidence Tuesday which were found rolled up in a rug outside of Jordan’s mother’s apartment.
Stinson was arrested shortly after 8:30 p.m. Tuesday and charged with First Degree Murder in the death of Jordan. She is expected to make a first appearance in court Wednesday afternoon.
ABC Action News reached out to Jordan’s father, who was too distraught to speak with us.
"I can't speak on how my brother feels because I never lost a child. I just know my brother is devoted right now," said Stephon Davis, the child's uncle. "I just want my nephew to be laid in peace and his mama and whoever involved in this, justice.”
Digging into court documents, ABC Action News discovered that Stinson and Jordan's father had a history of domestic battery. A Largo arrest report from July stated that Jordan's father drove the boy to Stinson's home, to exchange custody of Jordan. According to the report, Stinson "did not want the child yet," which caused an argument that became physical when the father punched Stinson.
The Department of Children and Families could not release any information on the case, saying in part, “The loss of this child is profoundly saddening. We are actively working with the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office and the Largo Police Department during the course of their criminal investigation. Pinellas County Sheriff's Office conducts all child protective investigations in Pinellas County, not DCF.”
JOHN MCCAIN IS DEAD - POLITICAL BATTLE FOR HIS SEAT BEGINS BEFORE HE IS EVEN BURIED:
AUGUST 29, 1936 - AUGUST 25, 2018
MCCAIN LEFT BEHIND MIXED POLITICAL LEGACY, HOWEVER HE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO REST IN PEACE AND STILL HONORED FOR HIS U.S. MILITARY SERVICE.
I SEND MY PRAYERS AND CONDOLENCES TO HIS FAMILY.
Post Sources: ABC News, BBC News, CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, Youtube
****** John McCain's death means potential legal battle to fill his Senate seat
With the news that Arizona Senator John McCainhas passed away due to complications from brain cancer, the speculation over who will succeed him in the position he has held since 1987 has begun in earnest.
The timing of McCain’s death results in a complicated process that could end up in a court battle in a state that will be key to determining the balance of power in the U.S. Senate this midterm cycle.
According to Arizona state law, the governor appoints a replacement for any vacancy in a U.S. Senate seat who will hold it until the "next eligible general election."
That person must belong to the same political party of the person who held the seat.
That means Doug Ducey, Arizona's Republican governor, would appoint a Republican to fill McCain's seat until the next general election or until the governor decided to call a special election.
However, the most relevant piece of election code in this situation is that the candidate filing deadline for the election cannot be fewer than 90 days before a primary for that special election.
The State of Arizona Election Procedures Manualstipulates that the vacancy "must occur sufficiently before" that deadline to gather signatures to get on the primary ballot.
Since the Arizona primaries will be held this Tuesday, the filing deadline for candidates would have had to have been May 30 for a special election to comply with state law.
So even though the next general election in Arizona is in November, the timing of McCain’s passing likely ensures that whomever Ducey appoints to replace him will serve until 2020, the next general election year.
Matt Roberts, the communications director for the Arizona Secretary of State, confirmed to ABC News that under state election regulations, Ducey can appoint a replacement that will serve in McCain’s seat until 2020.
Democrats could challenge that relevant portion of state election guidance to try and force a special election in 2018, which would put both of the state's Senate seats up this cycle since retiring Sen. Jeff Flake's seat is also up.
When asked about potential plans to pursue legal action to force a special election in 2018, a spokesperson for the Arizona Democratic Party declined to comment on the subject, instead telling ABC News, "John McCain is an American hero and our thoughts are with him and his family at this difficult time."
A special election this year would force Republicans to defend two Senate seats this cycle in a state Donald Trump won by just four percentage points in the 2016 presidential election.
FANNIE MAE IS BADLY IN NEED OF REFORM & NEW LEADERSHIP MINUS CONGRESS' INTERVENTION (NO BAIL OUT):
WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL INTERFERENCE, FANNIE MAE STAFF CAN NO LONGER USE POLITICS TO HURT HOMEOWNERS WHO VOTE OPPOSITE OF THEIR CHOSEN CANDIDATES.
WITHOUT CONGRESS' HELP, FANNIE MAE STAFF CAN NO LONGER STEAL HOMES WITH EQUITY FROM U.S. MILITARY VETERANS WHO VOTE OPPOSITE OF THEIR CHOSEN CANDIDATES.
Post Sources: American Banker, Forbes, Fox News, Youtube
The legislative stalemate over housing finance reform is likely to prolong the uncertain future for the government-sponsored enterprises. But it also illuminates the power of the next head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency.
With FHFA Director Mel Watt's term due to end in January, his successor — either a Senate-confirmed appointee or an interim chief — has substantial authority to set part of the path forward on GSE reform, including how far Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac expand their mission and the status of a common securitization platform shared by the two mortgage giants.
“Reforms can move forward without legislation,” said Anne Canfield, executive director of the Consumer Mortgage Coalition. “There are things that can be done administratively that would reduce the government’s exposure and risk to the GSEs and bring private capital into the marketplace, but in a little bit of a different way.”
That highlights the importance of whomever the Trump administration selects for the job. It could be someone who differs from Watt — an Obama appointee — in style and policy, who could opt to go as far as placing the mortgage giants into receivership.
“I don’t think we’re going to have legislative GSE reform anytime, but the day-to-day decisions they make, whether to approve a pilot or fund the Housing Trust Fund, these are significant decisions that will impact the trajectory of mortgage finance,” said Isaac Boltansky, the director of policy research at Compass Point.
During his tenure, Watt has appeared cautious about changing Fannie and Freddie's role in the absence of congressional reforms.
"I am well aware, and regularly express my belief, that conservatorship should never be viewed as permanent or as a desirable end state and that housing finance reform is necessary," Watt said in a 2014 policy speech early in his FHFA tenure. "However, Congress and the administration have the important job of deciding on housing finance reform legislation, not FHFA. Instead, our task is to continue to fulfill our statutory mandates, to execute our strategic plan and to manage the present status of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
But observers said his successor could take advantage of the agency's powers to move in the direction of reducing the GSEs' role.
Before Watt arrived, the agency was run on an acting basis by Ed DeMarco, who had joined the agency in the Bush administration and was seen as more opposed to expanding Fannie and Freddie's reach.
“It depends on the person," said Canfield. "It really depends on who they select.”
Some candidates who have been mentioned as possible successors to Watt — including DeMarco himself along with retiring House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling — have been vocal about reducing the government’s role in the mortgage market.
In February, when Fannie requested a $3.7 billion draw from the Treasury, Hensarling harshly criticized giving the company any more bailout funds.
“Today’s announcement that Fannie Mae has once again run out of money to pay its own bills is the latest example of why we need to repeal the GSEs’ government charters once and for all," he said then in a statement, adding criticism later of Watt's handling of the companies' fiscal situation.
"The even more troubling aspect of the GSEs financial crisis is FHFA Director Mel Watt’s continued insistence to siphon taxpayer dollars to prop up payments to the Housing Trust Fund that the GSEs cannot afford to make," Hensarling said. "If the GSEs don’t have the money to pay their own bills, they should not be making optional payments to outside entities."
While Watt's term will end in early 2019, a pair of recent scandals facing the agency has led some to speculate he could leave sooner. Watt has been accused of sexually harassing an FHFA staffer and is reportedly under a separate investigation for attempting to weaken the oversight of the FHFA Office of Inspector General.
Before a new nominee is Senate-confirmed, the White House could appoint one of Watt’s three lieutenants to serve as acting director or appoint a temporary director under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act when Watt leaves.
“If there’s a prolonged period where we have an acting director … I think that it would be a slower decision-making process and more of a caretaker,” said Boltansky.
But Canfield disagreed, saying that the administrative decisions made by an acting director could depend on the person.
“I think the acting director can do quite a bit,” she said. “I would hope that they would get a permanent director in there but if they’re not able to do that, I think they can all move forward with an acting director.”
If the White House were to move quickly to nominate a successor to Watt, it would signal that the administration wants to move quickly to end conservatorship and implement reforms of the mortgage finance system, Keefe, Bruyette & Woods wrote in recent a research note.
“However, it is difficult to say what policy path the administration will pursue until we see what personnel it intends to insert at FHFA,” the company said.
Of all the actions a director could take, the most significant would be to put Fannie and Freddie into a receivership, which supporters claim would restructure the GSEs without burdening taxpayers.
Among the other decisions the next FHFA director could make would be to determine the courts of efforts to implement a common securitization platform, which would allow Fannie and Freddie to issue uniform mortgage-backed securities. The FHFA has pushed the second phase of the process to June 2019 — after Watt’s departure.
The director will also be at liberty to decide whether or not to continue Fannie's pilot Enterprise-Paid Mortgage Insurance program and Freddie's similar Integrated Mortgage Insurance pilot, which both debuted this year. Some have criticized the mortgage insurance programs as being too far outside the bounds of the GSEs’ mission.
An FHFA director with the view that the GSEs' footprint should be reduced could oppose the mortgage insurance pilots.
However, the pilot programs are too new to automatically write off, and the FHFA director could just as easily wait to see if the programs are effective before making a decision to implement them further, said Laurence Platt, an attorney at Mayer Brown.
“I don’t think this is an issue that will be dependent on who the new FHFA director is,” Platt said. “I don’t think there’s a partisan side to this, per se.”
To be sure, there are clear limits on what the next FHFA director can do administratively. Creating some new housing finance structure to replace the GSEs is the territory of Congress. Instituting an explicit government guarantee or changing the ownership charter or structure of the GSEs would need congressional approval, which is unlikely to happen in the short term.
Besides congressional reforms, there are other policy areas where the FHFA cannot move unilaterally. The FHFA would have to work with the Treasury Department to change the preferred stock purchase agreements, which require Fannie and Freddie to direct nearly all of their profit to Treasury. Investors have long claimed this is unfair, and have unsuccessfully challenged the legality of this agreement in court for several years.
FTC & DEPT OF VETERAN AFFAIRS CRACKS DOWN ON FAKE VETERAN CHARITIES:
FAKE VETERAN ORGANIZATIONS RECEIVE MILLIONS ANNUALLY FROM THE VA BUT DON’T HELP VETS.
FAKE VETERAN ORGANIZATIONS ARE GRANTED NON-PROFIT IRS STATUS BUT DON’T HELP VETS.
IT’S TIME FOR CONGRESS TO ORDER ANNUAL AUDITS OF ALL AGENCIES & CHARITIES CLAIMING TO HELP VETS.
Post Sources: Military Times, Forbes, USA Today, Non-Profit Quarterly, WTVA, Youtube
******Here’s how state and federal authorities are targeting sham veteran charities
Federal and state authorities have put sham veteran charities on notice.
“I’m here to warn scam artists: Watch out. We’re investigating complaints. We will track you down, and in partnerships with our [state] attorneys general, we will shut you down,” said John Wobensmith, Maryland Secretary of State, during a news conference announcing the initiative that included other states’ attorneys general, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance..
The FTC ― with law enforcement officials and charity regulators in 70 offices from every state, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam and Puerto Rico ― announced “Operation Donate with Honor,” which includes the crackdown on sham charities, as well as an education campaign for potential donors. Officials announced more than 100 actions across the country.
FTC Chairman Joe Simons announced action against a charity, Help the Vets, Inc., which was run by Neil G. “Paul” Paulson, Sr., who is reportedly an Army veteran, according to his Guidestar charity profile, and according to an Internet Archive of Help The Vets’ website. His military service couldn’t be immediately confirmed. The Guidestar profile says the charity is closed.
Paulson and Help the Vets Inc. will be banned from soliciting charitable contributions under settlements with the FTC and the states of Florida, California, Maryland, Minnesota, Ohio and Oregon, for allegedly falsely promising donors their contributions would help wounded and disabled veterans. Officials alleged that Help the Vets collected more than $20 million from 2014 through 2017, and that 95 percent of those donations went to fundraising, administrative expenses and Paulson’s salary and benefits ... not to veterans.
Attorneys for Paulson and for Help the Vets Inc. declined to comment, they said, “because there is a lawsuit pending.”
Paulson also reportedly operated charities under the names of American Disabled Veterans Foundation, Veterans Fighting Breast Cancer, Vets Fighting Breast Cancer, Military Families of America and Veterans Emergency Blood Bank.
The FTC has also charged another charity operator, Travis Deloy Peterson, with using fake veterans charities and making millions of illegal robocalls to solicit donations of cars, boats and other property, claiming that the donations would go to veterans charities and that they were tax deductible. Instead, officials allege, he sold the items for his own benefit.
A federal court in Utah has issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting Peterson from making unlawful robocalls or engaging in misrepresentations about charitable donations, as the FTC moves ahead with its enforcement action. Peterson is accused of violating the FTC Act and the FTC’s telemarketing sales rule.
Attempts to reach Peterson were unsuccessful.
According to the FTC complaint, Peterson allegedly used the charity names Veterans of America, Vehicles for Veterans, Saving Our Soldiers, Donate your Car, Donate That Car, Act of Valor, and Medal of Honor.
The state enforcement actions involved charities seeking donations online, and by telemarketing, direct mail, door-to-door contacts, and at retail stores, falsely promising to help homeless and disabled veterans, to provide veterans with employment counseling, and to send care packages to service members.
“It’s the sad truth there are individuals and organizations that seek to take advantage of the genuine altruism of potential donors, and seek fraudulently to raise money on the backs of veterans to benefit themselves,” said Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen.
That said, officials noted that the vast majority of charitable organizations do good and important work. The “Operation Donate with Honor:” campaign is providing resources to help donors find those charities that legitimately meet the needs the donor wants to help address.
As part of their education campaign, officials are urging potential donors to be aware that just because a charity’s name includes words such as “veteran” or “military,” it doesn’t mean the organization is legitimate. At www.ftc.gov/Charity, officials have provided materials on donating to charities that help veterans, those that help service members and their families, and donating through an online giving portal.
This isn’t the first time the FTC has addressed the problem.
In 2009, the FTC and officials in 49 states launched “Operation False Charity,” a crackdown on allegedly fraudulent telemarketers who claimed to help police, firefighters and veterans.
THEY SERVED & SACRIFICED HONORABLY, SO WHY MUST THEY NOW BEG TO RECEIVE HELP?
WHY ARE SO MANY NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, AGENCIES & CHURCHES CLAIMING TO HELP VETS, ALLOWED BY CONGRESS TO DO VERY LITTLE FOR VETS TO MAINTAIN THEIR NON-PROFIT STATUS?
WHY DOESN’T CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO ANNUALLY AUDIT ALL NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS & AGENCIES WHICH CLAIM TO HELP HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS?
WHY ARE SO MANY HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS BEING DENIED VA LOANS BY FANNIE MAE AND MORTGAGE SERVICE COMPANIES?
WHY ARE SO MANY HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS BEING FORCED INTO FORECLOSURE BY LENDERS?
WHY ARE SO MANY HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS HOMELESS OR AT-RISK OF BEING HOMELESS?
WHY ARE SO MANY HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS HUNGRY OR BEING DENIED FOOD STAMPS?
WHY ARE SO MANY HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS BEING BURDENED WITH STUDENT LOAN DEBT WITH NO RELIEF?
WHY ARE SO MANY HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS BEING DENIED SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE BLOCKING THEM FROM CREATING JOBS?
WHY ARE SO MANY HONORABLE U.S. MILITARY VETS IN SOUTHERN STATES BEING PAID VERY LOW WAGES?
WHY???
Post Sources: CNN, FTC, Huffington Post, AP, Military Family Support Foundation, Youtube
******** Veterans Charity Fraud: Despite Widespread Outrage, Groups Continue To Abuse Public Trust
For hundreds of thousands of veterans returning home from the battlefronts in Iraq and Afghanistan, making it home alive is just the first challenge.
An estimated 25 percent of returning U.S. service members will experience combat-related problems such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury (TBI), depression or anxiety disorders. More veterans are committing suicide than are dying in combat overseas — 1,000 former soldiers receiving care from the Department of Veterans Affairs attempt suicide every month. About 50,000 veterans are experiencing chronic homelessness, according to nonprofit housing group HELP USA.
And the unemployment rate for 18 to 24-year-old veterans is 21 percent, much higher than the 16.6 percent rate for non-veterans of the same age.
Though the VA has come a long way from the 1970s, when many Vietnam veterans failed to reintegrate into society and became homeless and addicted to drugs, the department still has problems. The VA bureaucracy is notoriously difficult to navigate, and veterans are left to figure out on their own what benefits they are eligible for. As a result, many fall through the cracks — more than 720,000 veterans do not take advantage of VA benefits for which they are eligible.
To fill in the gap, veterans charities are a crucial resource — providing financial assistance and job training, funding medical research and rehabilitative services, and helping veterans obtain government benefits. Every year, Americans give millions of dollars to such groups, expecting that the money will assist those who’ve served their country.
But as a group, veterans charities are prone to abuse, profiteering and outright fraud, say philanthropy watchdogs.
Almost half of the 39 veterans charities rated by the American Institute of Philanthropy in its April/May 2011 report received F grades, largely because they devoted only a small ratio of their expenses to charitable programs, in part due to excessive fundraising expenses. Some of these groups defend their spending by arguing that reliance on such ratios is misleading, claiming that new nonprofits may have to spend over 50 percent of their revenue on outreach, education and fundraising for a while. But charities that spend up to 90 percent of their donations on overhead have been widely condemned and were the subject of congressional hearings in 2007.
Despite bipartisan outrage at such practices, there was no real follow-up, either through enforcement efforts or new rules and regulations. And several of the charities publicly shamed at those hearings continue to receive poor grades. In the last few years, there have been several prominent cases of nonprofit groups that preyed on the public’s patriotism and generosity, promising assistance to veterans while lining their own pockets. They range from an impostor — currently one of the most-sought fugitives in the country — who claimed he was a Navy commander and ripped off at least $2 million, to a classic fraudster, who set up a table for non-existent veterans groups in front of the local post office and raked in money for years.
CRUCIAL LIFELINE TO THOUSANDS OF VETERANS
Their misdeeds cast a pall over the sector, making the public skeptical of veterans charities and threatening future donations to those groups that deserve praise.
“Veterans charities are extraordinarily important,” Oregon Attorney General John Kroger tells The Huffington Post. “There is a lot the VA doesn’t do, and charities help fill that gap. And the majority of them do an excellent job, but if you’re looking to line your own pocket, it’s an easy way to raise money. If you’re looking for a feel-good cause that can raise money on the phone, there is very little that has as much appeal as veterans’ issues.”
Darnell Epps, a 52-year-old veteran living in Virginia Beach, was homeless for years until he discovered Vetshouse, the only nonprofit in Virginia to help homeless veterans. Through the group, he was given a car to help him start his cleaning business and provided with transitional housing and food.
“If it wasn’t for them, I would probably still be out on the street,” he says. “They gave me my life back. The VA can’t do it all and these charities are key; they’ve helped many of us vets.”
Ed Edmundson credits veterans charities with easing the burden of his son, Eric, who incurred shrapnel wounds and a brain injury in a roadside bomb explosion in Iraq. The North Carolina native says he sold his business and cashed in his savings and retirement to pay for the cost of moving in with Eric and his family to provide round-the-clock care. Some of the family’s expenses, including the cost of flying Eric’s wife and daughter from Alaska to Walter Reed Medical Center, were covered by various charities, such as the Wounded Warrior Project and the Semper Fi Fund.
“Non-profit organizations became an answer to our prayers,” says Edmundson.
The Wounded Warrior Project and several other prominent veterans charities such as Fisher House Foundation, the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society and the National Military Family Association, have been praised for assisting thousands of veterans.
ABUSING THE TRUST OF DONORS: ‘THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM’
Attorney General Kroger says the issue is close to his heart since he himself is a veteran of the Marine Corps. But when his office recently surveyed the rising number of charities in Oregon and which ones spend the most on overhead as opposed to charity, “a number of veterans groups came up extraordinarily high on the list. One was outright fraud — a guy setting up a table at a shopping mall — and another problem was people who were raising money and not being honest about where the money was going. This is a huge problem.”
Since taking office in 2009, Kroger has been particularly aggressive in taking legal action against veterans charities that abuse the trust of donors. Among his cases is a lawsuit against Veterans of Oregon, charging that the charity claimed that donations were helping homeless and hospitalized veterans when in fact it was largely used to award medals to veterans. In addition, the group failed to disclose to donors that its fundraising partner kept 80 percent of the money it raised. The head of the charity, William “John” Neuman, is fighting the case, adamantly denying to the Chronicle of Philanthropy that he misled donors.
Kroger also sued the Oregon War Veterans Association and Military Family Support Foundation, claiming that founder Greg Warnock kept most of the money he raised and used donations to make contributions to powerful politicians in the state. The group has called the suit “baseless” and called for an investigation of Kroger.
After initially declining to comment, Warnock wrote HuffPost a lengthy statement. Among his claims, he states that “Kroger’s claims are purely political in nature and do not warrant the kind of destructive abuse we are enduring from him, especially considering all of the amazing accomplishments we have made on behalf of veterans in Oregon and beyond.” Warnock vehemently denies that he kept most of the money his group raised and claims that Kroger neglected to interview the group’s board members, donors or recipients. Warnock also says the campaign contributions were permitted political activity.
The attorney general says he can’t comment due to the pending litigation but emphasizes, “When you’re going after people and trying to hold them accountable, lots of them fire back.”
Such schemes that exploit patriotic sentiment for the plight of veterans have been around for many decades. In 1926, the New York Evening Post exposed a plot hatched in the wake of the armistice that ended World War One by the “battalions of bunk” to raise several million dollars “purporting to aid former soldiers but actually hiding the proceeds away in secret bank accounts.” Part of the scheme involved several cleaning women who borrowed neighbors’ children, dressed them in rags and pleaded for money from passersby. And in 1958, five Chicagoans were dragged before the House veterans affairs committee to defend themselves against charges that they bilked Disabled American Veterans of $2 million — three of them were later charged with mail fraud and conspiracy. That same year, Rep. Olin Teague “found so much abuse in fund raising [sic] for veterans” that he urged the House Government Operations Committee to open a wide-ranging probe into the entire field of tax-exempt charitable fundraising, reported the Gadsden Times.
“The most popular causes — veterans, firefighters, police — tend to be the least efficient because they attract money-hungry types,” says Daniel Borochoff, the president of the American Institute of Philanthropy. “There is very little oversight so it keeps happening again and again.” He notes that most enforcement happens on the state level, which often just prompts fraudulent groups to cross state lines “and come out under a different name.”
BIPARTISAN OUTRAGE AT ‘INTOLERABLE FRAUD’
The prevalence of fraud and misrepresentation in the sector has prompted Congressional scrutiny and bipartisan outrage but very few repercussions. In 2004, the Senate Finance Committee called for a panel to examine nonprofit governance, transparency and ethical standards. Though it concluded that government oversight and regulation was necessary to deter abuse, misrepresentation and fraud, it also maintained that charities are granted wide latitude in their activities due to First Amendment protections and did not recommend any new legislation.
In December 2007 and January 2008, the House Oversight Committee held hearings to spotlight abuses in the system, highlighting several egregious examples. Then-chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) noted that the American Institute of Philanthropy had given failing grades to 70 percent of the veterans charities it examined for several reasons: managing their resources poorly, paying high overhead costs and direct mail campaigns and excessive salaries. Citing the example of the American Veterans Relief Foundation, which raised $3.6 million and spent only $21,000 on veterans’ grants and assistance, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) thundered:
They fall into the category of what I would call “profiteering,” profiteering by those who use the name of a soldier or a cause in order to justify fundraising that ultimately leads to profit for individuals who may or may not be veterans, may or may not have any need, may simply be good at fundraising.
That particular charity is now defunct, but two other prominent charities whose leaders were subpoenaed to appear before the committee still operate and continue their questionable practices.
One of the hearing’s most dramatic confrontations was with Roger Chapin, a self-described “nonprofit entrepreneur” and former
real-estate developer who has launched more than 20 charities. One of those charities, Help Hospitalized Veterans, has been praised for distributing millions of therapeutic arts and crafts gifts to patients at VA medical centers, state nursing homes and military hospitals. The group, which also provides a variety of services to homebound veterans and cash support to many VA special events, has been praised by presidents and Congressional leaders since its founding in 1971.
But a Forbes magazine articles questioned whether Chapin and his wife were using their charities to fund their high salaries and illegitimate expenses such as vehicles, real estate investments and a $17,000 annual country club membership. In addition, the magazine reported that out of every dollar donated to HHV, only 9 cents went to the kits, 5 cents went to administrative expenses and for counselors visiting hospitals and 47 cents went to direct-mail expenses.
One of the charities’ critics was Edmundson, who said he didn’t feel it was “appropriate” to give a small percentage of donations to charity. He added, “I am concerned, the negative effect that the few self-serving non-profits will have on the ability of the legitimate non-profits to obtain funding from the general public. It would be an unfortunate turn of events if the service they provide is not available. As I have shared, the service they provide is immediate and personalized to the needs of the soldiers and their families.”
Chapin didn’t win any friends by reportedly going into hiding after refusing to comply with a subpoena to appear before the committee. When he did finally appear a month later, he explained that fundraising for many charities across the country depends on direct-mail expenses and that it was unfair to pick on his charity. Chapin claimed that HHV was awarded two stars by Charity Navigator, a leading watchdog group. Coming to his defense was Richard Viguerie, prominent conservative fundraiser, who lashed out at the committee, claiming that Waxman’s agenda was “unconstitutional” and “mean” and stating that advertising mail can be valuable just by generating sympathy for returning veterans.
Chapin retired from Help Hospitalized Veterans in 2009 with a $2.2 million payment package. He still serves as the president of another of his charities, the Salute to America’s Heroes Foundation. Both charities were given zero stars in Charity Navigator’s most recent evaluation, though they have increased the percentage of funds they spent on charitable programs.
Reached at home, Chapin said both charities had not made any changes in response to the criticism of their fundraising expenses, defiantly stating, “Hell, we just keep doing what we’ve been doing.” He called the hearing a “charade” and a “witch hunt,” explaining that SAHF has helped almost 20,000 veterans. He continued to defend the heavy reliance and spending on direct mail practitioners, even in the age of Facebook and Twitter and online charitable tools. “It’s an expensive way to raise money but we’re all challenged and it’s tough as hell to get donations. But something is a hell of a lot better than nothing.”
The other target in the sights of lawmakers at the 2007 hearing was Pamela Seman, the executive director of the Disabled Veterans Association, a charity which kept only $500,000 out of $4.5 million in donations raised — about 10 percent — through a professional fundraising group.
“It makes all of us angry that the veterans, people who have served our country are used to raise money to give [to] some professional organization in the business,” said Waxman. “It’s absolutely inexcusable.”
Seman, who still leads the organization, did not return calls for comment. DVA received zero stars in its latest evaluation from Charity Navigator and an F rating from the American Institute of Philanthropy. Its fundraising ratio has grown even higher, with only 5 percent going to charitable programs.
WASHINGTON DITHERS WHILE FRAUD CONTINUES
In Washington, there has not been much action. On the first day of the 2007 hearings, former Rep. Sarbanes, the author of the post-Enron accounting rules that bear his name, stated that there may be a need for stricter regulation of charities, emphasizing that “charities that serve our veterans have an extra obligation because there is a deeper trust placed in them, a broader trust than with respect to just about any other charitable endeavor.”
Though there was some discussion of legislative remedies in the wake of the hearings, especially in regard to requiring more disclosure of charity spending in direct mail pitches, nothing happened. Though some watchdog groups have pressed for more hearings to re-examine the issue, none are planned. A spokesman for Rep. Issa, who now chairs the Oversight Committee, did not return emails requesting comment.
“It got a lot of press attention during the hearings but after that died down, there wasn’t any significant demand for more disclosure or information,” says Bennett Weiner, the COO of the Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance and an advocate of voluntary standards rather than government regulation. He says that veterans charities have slightly improved their performance, noting that the number which failed to meet one or more of their standards dropped from 62 to 54 percent. But he notes: “No question about it, veterans and police and firefighter groups have been well-known to be subject to questionable practices by those who got involved in the field and realize that there is public sympathy and the chance to raise money.”
Meanwhile, the alleged scams continue. Last month, prosecutors in Ohio pursued Vietnam veteran Michael Muhammad, claiming that he raised money for himself through his charities, Help Homeless Veterans and Veterans Hope Community House. They also claim that he was charging veterans to stay at a shelter that offered horrible living conditions. His lawyer denies the charges, saying that the money raised went to aid veterans.
And last week, an associate of one of the most brazen fundraising fraudsters in recent history pled guilty to corruption, theft and money laundering at a county court in Ohio. Bianca Contreras was the treasurer of the U.S. Navy Veterans Association, a group founded by a man known as Bobby Thompson, who is accused of using a false identity to raise millions of dollars.
Though the money was ostensibly intended for Navy veterans and Thompson attracted praise from Congressional leaders for his purported efforts, the money went into his own pocket, say attorneys general in several states. Thompson is currently a fugitive, and officials remain tight-lipped about any progress in finding him. But Contreras is expected to cooperate with prosecutors, which may reveal some clues to his identity. The 39-year-old Tampa woman faces up to 25 years in prison when she comes up for sentencing in August.
Donors who’ve been misled can be hard to identify, since most are not aware that they’ve been ripped off, says Weiner. “The number one recommendation for people wanting to contribute to a good cause is to check out the charity — the vast majority of people don’t do that. Get a financial report from the group’s website, verify that they are properly registered in your state, check with a third-party group that checks these groups out.”
This story has been updated to include comment from Greg Warnock, founder of Military Family Support Foundation.
For nearly two years, Republicans have watched uncomfortably, and often in silence, as President Trump has swatted away accusations that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential race, attacked his own intelligence agencies and flattered President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
On Monday, even for members of his own party, Mr. Trump apparently went too far.
The president’s extraordinary news conference with Mr. Putin in Helsinki, Finland, stunned Republicans across the ideological spectrum and the party’s political apparatus, leaving them struggling to respond after the president undermined his national intelligence director, blamed both the United States and Russia for poor relations between the two countries and seemingly agreed to Mr. Putin’s suggestion that Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, cooperate with Russia.
Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, declared, “No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant.” Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and Trump adviser, declared the news conference “the most serious mistake of his presidency.” Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee and current Senate candidate from Utah, called it “disgraceful and detrimental to our democratic principles.”
The effect extended far beyond official Washington. One local official — Chris Gagin, the chairman of the Republican Party in Belmont County, Ohio — resigned his post, announcing on Twitter that he “did so as a matter of conscience, and my sense of duty.” Neil Cavuto, a Fox Business Network host, called Mr. Trump’s performance “disgusting,” adding, “I’m sorry, it’s the only way I feel. It’s not a right or left thing to me, it’s just wrong.”
Yet no Republican in Congress pledged any particular action to punish Mr. Trump, such as holding up his nominees or delaying legislation, nor did any Republican promise hearings or increased oversight.
It was left to Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, to demand actual action. He called for increased sanctions on Russia; for Mr. Trump’s national security team to testify before Congress; for defense of the Department of Justice and other intelligence agencies; and for Mr. Trump to press Mr. Putin to extradite the 12 Russian intelligence agents who were indicted Friday.
“In the entire history of our country, Americans have never seen a president of the United States support an adversary the way President Trump has supported President Putin,” Mr. Schumer said.
He added: “A single, ominous question now hangs over the White House: What could possibly cause President Trump to put the interests of Russia over those of the United States? Millions of Americans will continue to wonder. The only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump.”
Republican leaders largely tempered their remarks, confining their backhanded comments to denunciations of Russia and expressions of faith in American intelligence agencies. But even they appeared to have given up hope that they could shape the actions of an erratic and unpredictable president.
Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, concluded that Mr. Trump was unable to distinguish between the fact that Russia had interfered in the election and the accusation — as yet unproven — that the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia.
“In the president’s mind, I think he’s conflating different things — the meddling and the collusion allegations for which there does not appear to be any evidence,” Mr. Cornyn said.
Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York and a former chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, who has defended Mr. Trump amid the Russia inquiry, was not quite as charitable: “I understand in the bigger picture the president genuinely feels that he can establish better relations with Russia the way Nixon did with China,” Mr. King said in an interview, “but the nuance eludes him.”
And as to Mr. Trump’s openness to having Russia cooperate with Mr. Mueller’s investigation, Mr. King said, “It would be like bringing ISIS into a joint terrorism task force.”
At least one Republican, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, veered from the script and delivered a full-throated defense of Mr. Trump: “I think it’s a good idea to have engagement, and I guess I don’t quite understand all of the people who have gone completely deranged criticizing the president.”
Elected Republicans have been uneasy about Mr. Trump’s unorthodox views toward Russia and his willingness to embrace Mr. Putin since Mr. Trump first grabbed the attention of the party as its primary contest heated up in summer 2015. Many thought that once he was in office, surrounded by Washington’s national security experts, Mr. Trump would adopt the wary stance that has guided previous American presidents.
Instead, time and again he has defied those expectations, as he repeatedly called into question the collective conclusions of the C.I.A., the F.B.I. and other intelligence agencies, and ignored his own advisers’ advice in seeking a personal relationship with Mr. Putin.
For most Republicans on Capitol Hill and around the country, Mr. Trump’s stance toward Mr. Putin, coupled with his recent attacks on the United States’ allies in Europe, have presented a challenge: either defend the post-World War II international order, and risk angering a president who is immensely popular with their voters, or hold their tongues.
That challenge is especially tricky for Republican leaders, who must work closely with Mr. Trump and are especially reluctant to criticize him in public.
Hours passed on Monday before Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, commented. During a rare hallway interview in the Capitol, he uttered three terse sentences: “The Russians are not our friends. I’ve said that repeatedly, I say it again today. And I have complete confidence in our intelligence community and the findings that they have announced.” He refused to answer questions.
Speaker Paul D. Ryan was a bit more pointed. “The president must appreciate that Russia is not our ally,” he said in a carefully worded statement. “There is no moral equivalence between the United States and Russia, which remains hostile to our most basic values and ideals.”
Democrats wanted more than carefully calibrated statements.
“This is a disgraceful moment. The president’s party knows better,” John Kerry, the former secretary of state and senator, wrote in a statement. “America needs them to speak out with clarity and conviction not just in this news cycle, but until there’s common sense governing America’s foreign policy.”
Senator Brian Schatz, Democrat of Hawaii, suggested on Twitter that if Republicans “were serious,” they would pass a long-stalled legislation protecting the jobs of special counsels such as Mr. Mueller.
But Republican leaders did not appear ready to go beyond measured phrases. Mr. Cornyn told reporters that it was “wishful thinking” to expect Mr. Putin to agree to the extradition of the 12 Russian agents. “Much of what Senator Schumer’s asking for, I think we’ve already done,” he added.
As Republican leaders struggled to come up with tactful ways to respond to a stunning news conference, responses from some of their colleagues signified a moment when Republicans could not defend their president.
Mr. McCain’s was undoubtedly the harshest.
“It is tempting to describe the press conference as a pathetic rout — as an illustration of the perils of under-preparation and inexperience,” said Mr. McCain, who has brain cancer.
“But these were not the errant tweets of a novice politician,” he continued. “These were the deliberate choices of a president who seems determined to realize his delusions of a warm relationship with Putin’s regime without any regard for the true nature of his rule, his violent disregard for the sovereignty of his neighbors, his complicity in the slaughter of the Syrian people, his violation of international treaties and his assault on democratic institutions throughout the world.”
Mr. McCain’s fellow Republican senator from Arizona, Jeff Flake, released his own rebuke: “I never thought I would see the day when our American President would stand on the stage with the Russian President and place blame on the United States for Russian aggression. This is shameful.”
Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican Alaska, struck a mournful tone: “Sadly President Trump did not defend America to the Russian president, and for the world to see. Instead, what I saw today was not ‘America First,’ it was simply a sad diminishment of our great nation.”
Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska and a frequent critic of Mr. Trump, echoed the sentiment. “Everyone in this body should be disgusted by what happened in Helsinki today,” he said Monday in a speech on the Senate floor.
Even for congressional Republicans used to avoiding commenting on the president’s outbursts, Mr. Trump’s performance in Helsinki was difficult to ignore. For those who are accustomed to speaking out against Mr. Trump, and those whose impending retirements have freed them to do so, it was yet another occasion for public hand-wringing.
Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, the retiring chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that he “did not think this was a good moment for our country.”
It was, he added, a very good moment for Mr. Putin.
“It was almost an approval, if you will, a public approval by the greatest nation on earth towards him,” Mr. Corker told reporters. “I would guess he’s having caviar right now.”
Sources: CNBC News, PBS News, Washington Post, Youtube
***** Thousands gather to march for gun control and spark activism
Organizers of the "March for Our Lives" rally in Washington hoped their protest would match in numbers and spirit last year's women's march.
After the Feb. 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, students have tapped into pro-gun control sentiment that has been building for years.
Organizers hope the passions of the crowds and the under-18 roster of speakers will translate into a tipping point starting in the midterm elections this year.
Summoned by high school students swept up in school violence, thousands swarmed into the nation's capital and cities across America on Saturday to march for gun control and ignite political activism among the young.
Organizers of the "March for Our Lives" rally in Washington hoped their protest would match in numbers and spirit last year's women's march, one of the largest Washington protests since the Vietnam era and one that far exceeded predictions of 300,000 demonstrators.
By 11:00 a.m., large crowds had already started to gather in the nation's capital.
Bearing signs reading "We Are the Change," "No More Silence," "Keep NRA Money Out of Politics," protesters lined Pennsylvania Avenue from the stage near the Capitol, stretching back toward the White House.
The route also takes in the Trump International Hotel. President Donald Trump was in Florida for the weekend; a motorcade took him to his West Palm Beach golf club on Saturday morning.
After the Feb. 14 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, students have tapped into a current of pro-gun control sentiment that has been building for years -- yet still faces a powerful counterpoint from supporters of gun rights.
Organizers hope the passions of the crowds and the under-18 roster of speakers will translate into a tipping point starting in the midterm elections this year.
People flocked, too, to a "March for Our Lives" event near the Parkland school where the massacre happened. Police presence was heavy as organizers set up and demonstrators streamed in.
Eden Kinlock, 17, came from 20 miles away to pass out water, "a small thing but it helps in the bigger picture." Many Parkland students came to the Washington rally.
Washington is generally nonchalant about protests, but Saturday's gathering prompted more attention and speculation than usual.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Lindsay Walters released a statement on Saturday in support of the protesters.
"We applaud the many courageous young Americans exercising their First Amendment rights today.
Keeping our children safe is a top priority of the President¹s, which is why he urged Congress to pass the Fix NICS and STOPSchool Violence Acts, and signed them into law. Additionally, on Friday, the Department of Justice issued the rule to ban bump stocks following through on the President¹s commitment to ban devices that turn legal weapons into illegal machine guns," Walters said in a statement.
The protesters, many of them high school students, claim that the youth leadership of this initiative is what will set it apart from previous attempts to enact stronger gun-control legislation.
Polls indicate that public opinion nationwide may indeed be shifting on an issue that has simmered for generations, and through dozens of mass shootings.
A new poll conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 69 percent of Americans think gun laws in the United States should be tightened.
That's up from 61 percent who said the same in October of 2016 and 55 percent when the AP first asked the question in October of 2013.
Overall, 90 percent of Democrats, 50 percent of Republicans and 54 percent of gun owners now favor stricter gun control laws.
But even with claims of historic social momentum on the issue of gun control, the AP poll also found that nearly half of Americans do not expect elected officials to take action.
Among the questions facing march organizers and participants will be how to translate this one-day event, regardless of turnout, into meaningful legislative change.
One way is by channeling the current energy into the midterm congressional elections this fall.
Students in Florida have focused on youth voter registration and there will be a registration booth at the Saturday rally.
CONOR LAMB, 33, DEMOCRAT, GEN Y, 2018 SPECIAL ELECTION WINNER (PA):
CONOR’S CAMPAIGN PLAYBOOK WAS BORROWED FROM JFK, OBAMA & TRUMP.
LEADERS LIKE CONOR CAN USHER IN EFFECTIVE LANDMARK GUN CONTROL & UPHOLD THE 2nd AMENDNENT.
CONOR ATTRACTED VOTERS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE POLITICAL AISLE.
CONOR’S WIN PROVES DEMOCRAT VOTERS ARE SICK & TIRED OF LYING, COMPLACENT, GREEDY, CAREER POLITICIANS IN CONGRESS WHO ARE SELL OUTS.
CONGRESS NEEDS NEW BLOOD & ACTION.
CONOR IS THE BEGINNING OF THAT MOVEMENT.
CONGRATS TO CONOR ON HIS WIN.
Sources: NBC News, NY Times, Youtube
****** Who Is Conor Lamb, Winner in a Special House Race in Pennsylvania?
For the Democratic Party, Conor Lamb seemed like a candidate generated from reams of election data mined and analyzed to produce an ideal fit for his Southwestern Pennsylvania congressional district.
A former Marine who favored gun rights, he was culturally conservative enough to appeal to rural voters. He was pro labor and pro tariff in an area that still has thousands of steelworkers union members. As a federal prosecutor, he cracked down on drug dealers but also offered empathy about the tragedy of opioid addiction. And his Ivy League polish and earnest manner played well with college-educated suburban voters.
And now, with his victory in a district so Republican that Democrats did not even field a candidate in the last two elections, Mr. Lamb, 33, has offered a template that will be studied in congressional races where Democratic candidates need to win over voters who supported President Trump.
“He is like the type of Democrat that won in ruby-red districts in 2006, who breaks the mold and is much more of a nontraditional, outside-the-mainstream, everyday American law enforcement type,” said John Lapp, a Democratic strategist who was executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2006, when the party wrested control of the House from Republicans.
Mr. Lamb had to navigate a district that President Trump had won by nearly 20 percentage points in 2016. The president labeled him “Lamb the sham” in a campaign appearance in Pennsylvania last Saturday, and the administration deployed Vice President Mike Pence, Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, and Donald Trump Jr. to defeat him.
In turn, he showed restraint and discipline in talking about the president and was quick to support Mr. Trump’s proposed tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. He did not respond to the president’s mockery, and on Wednesday morning, refused to engage when he was asked on CNN to comment about Mr. Trump’s remarks.
“You call it a red district,” Mr. Lamb said on CNN. “I call it western Pennsylvania. We worked extremely hard to get out and campaign in person over every square inch of this district. And I think just through talking to people, looking them in the eye, figuring out what the issues are for them and trying to come out with solutions, we seemed to have reached a lot of people. We saw huge turnout on both sides which is great. People around here are engaged.”
Mr. Lamb also said he thought voters were weary of pettiness and name calling.
“There was a lot of foolishness in this election and cartoonish campaigning,” he said. “By the time of the president’s visit last weekend, people were tired of that entire approach. I had people, especially elderly people, come up to me and say, I hate those ads against you. It’s not right. It’s not worthy of us. I think there is a little bit of burnout on that type of campaign before the president ever got here.”
Mr. Lamb built his coalition from many disparate parts. He bridged the divide between labor union leaders and their members. “He married the union leaders and rank-and-file for the first time in two decades,” said G. Terry Madonna, a professor at Franklin and Marshall College who has conducted polls in Pennsylvania for more than three decades.
He also focused heavily on local issues and mostly avoided getting into a fight with his Republican opponent, Rick Saccone, over Mr. Trump.
“He decided early on he would not turn this into a national election,” Mr. Madonna said. “It was a local election. Number two, he did events, but more important, he knocked on the door, put the yard sign up, emphasizing his personal connection with people, something Saccone did not do.”
He added, “And also, he was like, ‘Donald who? Who’s that guy?’”
Though the race was Mr. Lamb’s first attempt at public office, politics is part of his family pedigree. His grandfather, Thomas Lamb, was the Democratic leader of the State Senate in the 1970s and served in the administration of Gov. Robert P. Casey.
Michael Lamb, his uncle, is the controller for the city of Pittsburgh and an avid supporter. His younger brother, Coleman Lamb, is helping out as well, on loan from his day job as press secretary for a New York congresswoman.
Mr. Lamb leaned hard on his military background — he served as a prosecutor in the Marine Corps and was stationed in Okinawa while on active duty — and his support for gun rights, beginning with his first commercial.
That same ad also featured a picture of him at a gun range, noting that he “still loves to shoot.” These were acts of political inoculation: Mr. Lamb was sending a message to the district’s conservative-leaning voters that he was his own person.
He also effectively neutralized Republican attempts to label him a liberal in the mold of the House Democratic leader, Representative Nancy Pelosi, by saying that he would not vote for her in a leadership election. Republicans, who poured in millions of dollars in ads against Mr. Lamb, tried to paint him as a slavish follower of the California Democrat. He countered with a commercial noting that his opposition to her had been reported on the front page of a local newspaper.
Mr. Lamb had another résumé-enhancing line to offer voters: federal prosecutor. After clerking for a federal judge in New York, he did a stint as an assistant United States attorney in Pittsburgh, prosecuting a range of cases that gave him a law-and-order credential.
But his time in the Justice Department during the Obama administration also provided Republicans with some fodder. In one ad, the National Republican Congressional Committee noted that Mr. Lamb had reached a plea bargain with a drug kingpin, a potentially damaging line of attack in a region ravaged by opioids.
Like the other attacks Republicans hurled at him, it ultimately proved ineffective.
Welcome to the BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog. (Established 2008)
My name is Laurel. (Author & Publisher)
I Blog with a focus on POLITICS, Business, and occasionally Entertainment.
FACTS ABOUT LAUREL:
Wife,
Mother of a U.S. Soldier,
Sister,
Woman of GOD,
Loyal Friend,
Creative,
Blood-related to a nationally known Charlotte Politician.
Black Female, Intelligent,
Married,
Love to Travel,
Credentialed by the RNC and DNC.
Political Blogger/ Commentator
Grassroots Activist,
PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Credential Political Blogger/ Commentator,
Registered Independent Voter
Original Native of BROOKLYN, NY
Currently reside in CHARLOTTE, NC
I’m Nice but don’t get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Since You’ve Chosen to Visit and Read the Contents of this Blog by Personal Choice, and of Your Own Free Will,
Please don’t ask me to Compensate you for Expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Expression.
No Intentionally Malicious Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character content will be published and I will always Credit all Sources.
NOTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, APPOINTED OFFICIALS & PUBLIC FIGURES:
Per the Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case: 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan………
The Public has a Right to Criticize the People who Govern them, so the least Protection from Defamation is given to Public Officials. When officials are accused of something that involves their behavior in office, they have to prove all of the above elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” (For a definition of actual malice, see the “History of Defamation and the First Amendment, below.”)
People who aren’t Elected but who are Still Public Figures because they are influential or famous — like Actors, Actresses, Movie Stars, Singers & Entertainers, Journalists, TV Hosts, Bloggers, etc., — also have to Prove that Defamatory statements were made with Actual Malice, in most cases.
To the Associated Press and other Media Organizations:
When I use your Content Links., I’m also citing the Fair Use Doctrine (Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission.
Posts and Links published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel’s Employer, nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Links, Posts and Comments posted on Black Political Buzz’s Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are Independently-Owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel’s Employer.)
(No Personal Offense intended) Please know that Black Political Buzz is not responsible for nor do I endorse Requests for Donations from Third Parties on this Blog.
I will Only Endorse Requests for Donations made on behalf of BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog for Business Purposes & Operating Expenses.
I will also Only Endorse Requests for Donations on behalf of Legitimate Politicians and Legitimate Political Candidates. PERIOD!!
If anyone else or another Organization wishes to post a link to Request Donations, I am NOT endorsing ANY of those Requests!
Unless I receive a personal Request to do so and I have Professionally Confirmed that the Third Party Organization or Charity is indeed a Legitimate Entity.
NOTE: Anyone who chooses to give to any Third Party Organization NOT Endorsed by BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ is doing so at his or her own risk.
BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ does NOT Discriminate against Politicians, Political Candidates, Organizations or Charities based on Race, Color, Nationality, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Faith, Disability, Political Affiliation, Creed, Education, Social Status, Age.
This disclaimer applies to ANY and All requests for Donations on this Blog. Thanks for understanding. Again No Personal Offense intended.
For Story Tips….Corrections…….. or Requests for Endorsements:
Please contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com
or via my Facebook page: facebook.com/blackpoliticalbuzz
Thanks for stopping by
God Bless
Laurel @BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES
.jpg)
