Sunday, June 24, 2018

Another Classic Example Of Child Abuse Propaganda - MEDIA

And not one peep from media about the U.S. Child Welfare Industry on Child Protective Services, Foster Care, Adoption, Juvenile Justice or Health Care,

Image may contain: 2 people, text

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Saturday, June 23, 2018

Russian Adoptions Through Trust Funds & The Ukraine

From a Russian fan.

These children are what we call "paper orphans", meaning, they have living parents but were "abandoned".

The term abandoned actually means these children come from other countries and are dropped off at these orphanages.

Orphanages and international adoptions is a multi-billion dollar industry where the operations are funded through the government, profits of adoptions, or rather selling of children to the U.S., through NGOs.

In this situation, we shall call these money laundering operations child welfare trust funds through the Ukraine, to circumvent the Magnitsky Act.

Happy Foster Care Month - Trafficking Tiny Humans, Russian Style

These same practices of drugging kids, rape, torture and fraudulent billing are done in privatized U.S. residential institutions, and they get away with it, in the name of the tax exempt god.

This is international and no one cares because the industry is too big to fail.

This documentary was funded by the Jurov Foundation, below.

The ex-head of the Russian bank "Trust" Yurov was detained in Ukraine

The ex-head of the Russian bank "Trust" Yurov was detained in Ukraine
Ilya Yurov
Ilya Yurov, former chairman of the board of directors of the Trust transferred to the rehabilitation of the National Trust, was detained by Ukrainian border guards at the airport Borispol (Kiev region).

Tass on Tuesday said an assistant head of the State Border Service of Ukraine, a spokesman Oleg Slobodyan.

"The situation was the day before yesterday, November 20. The base of Interpol worked. We transferred it to the Interior Ministry (Ukraine), "said Slobodyan. However, he did not specify where or from where the ex-head of the bank followed.

According to the Ukrainian newspaper Obozrevatel , Yurov flew to Kiev from London on personal business. According to sources of the publication, at the airport he presented a passport of a citizen of Cyprus. Now the former banker is kept in the pre-trial prison of Belaya Tserkov. His extradition, as the newspaper notes, can take from a month to six months.

In April, the High Court of London froze assets of the former owners of Trust Bank Ilya Yurov, Nikolai Fetisov and Sergei Belyaev for a total of $ 830 million. The bank suspects its former owners of loans to the offshore companies under its control in the amount of about $ 1 billion, which turned out to be on personal bank accounts or were reinvested into real estate in Moscow.

The Judge of the London Commercial Court, Justice Miles, acknowledged the actions of the former co-owner of the Trust Bank, Ilya Yurov, to manage the financial institution by the organization of the "fraudulent pyramid".

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Behind The Magnitsky Act: Казенные дети / Children of the State

I remember this.

This was the beginning of the Magnitsky Act where Russia suspended U.S. adoptions for, basically, the trafficking of tiny humans through NGOs.

At the time I had no idea of the questionable banking activities exfiltrating the ill gotten profits from property foreclosure fraud scheme through bogus mortgages, the pilfering of property taxes and other illicit biomedical activities of private entitites from Russia through U.S. child welfare NGOs, many of them christian.

I only knew about the child trafficking and the organ trade.

I even went to the FBI to report christian adoption agencies, from Africa and Russia, that were promoting the adoption of children for the purposes of organ transplants.

I was dismissed, right Julia Pidgeon?

See, it is legal for a relative to donate an organ, even if that relative was adopted for the sole purposes of harvesting organs, because it is the work of the christian god.

From both sides of the world, we were watching the U.S. industry of trafficking tiny humans grow, with condemnation and fear through the promulgation of propaganda by these NGOs.

Very few know where these "orphans" came from and no one knows what happens to them after they are adopted.

Here is a bit of a background:

Spies, Lies And An Idiot Professor

The following was sent to me from a Russian fan:

In the interview he speaks about how about 50,000 russian children disappeared in the US for organs.

Bev, while watching the documentary about orphanages in Russia, noticed the interview with Russian poet Valeri Hatjushin. He recited his poem that I found and used google translate We finished badly, we survived ... -

We finished badly, we survived, we have come, we have reached ... His house - thoroughly gutted and nothing was saved. In minds - mindless freedom. Under the general laughter - a general pestilence. And indifferent nature swallows our shame silently. Scabby rabble is mired in debauchery. And greed governs people. And whether to wait for God's grace a country that sells children? ..

He starts to speak from 41:27. He's a poet and chief editor of magazine "Mologaja Gvardija", "Young Guard"

He's part of Putin's cabinet , commissioner for Children's Rights. The journalist who spoke earlier in the video assumed that Dima's Law was retaliation by russia for Magnitski Act. I now understand that he has no clue.

However, it is more propaganda and focuses on NGOs.

Have a great day!

Фильм о российских сиротах и их праве на любовь.
Герои фильма Журналист Александр Колесниченко – единственный, кто на пресс-конференции Владимира Путина осмелился назвать этот закон «людоедским». Несколько лет назад Александр и его жена Юлия усыновили мальчика из детского дома. В процессе съемки фильма Александр и Юлия знакомятся с семьей Моррис из США. Катрина и Стивен Моррис хотели удочерить русскую девочку Леру с синдромом Дауна. Но закон Димы Яковлева разлучил их навсегда. У зрителей будет возможность услышать эксклюзивные комментарии Уполномоченного по правам ребенка в РФ Павла Астахова, представителей Молодой Гвардии ЕР, которые активно занимались пропагандой закона, директоров детских домов. А также их оппонентов – психолога Людмилы Петрановской, специалиста по иностранным усыновлениям Алены Синкевич, общественного деятеля и выпускника детского дома Александра Гезалова.

Journalist Alexander Kolesnichenko - the only one who at the press conference of Vladimir Putin dared to call this law "cannibalistic." Several years ago, Alexander and his wife Yulia adopted a boy from an orphanage.

In the process of shooting the film, Alexander and Julia get acquainted with the Morris family from the USA. Katrina and Stephen Morris wanted to adopt the Russian girl Leroux with Down syndrome.

But Dima Yakovlev's law separated them forever. The audience will have the opportunity to hear the exclusive comments of the Ombudsman for the Rights of the Child in the Russian Federation Pavel Astakhov, representatives of the Young Guard of the EP, who were actively involved in the propaganda of the law, directors of orphanages. And also their opponents - the psychologist Lyudmila Petranovskaya, the specialist on foreign adoptions Alena Sinkevich, the public figure and the graduate of the orphanage Alexander Gezalov.
Ольга Арлаускас, режиссер фильма: «Этот фильм не политический. Снимая его, мы не занимали сторону ни России, ни Америки, ни Европы. Мы постарались встать на место детей. И стало очень страшно»
Максим Суханов, российский актёр театра и кино, закадровый голос фильма:
«Я всегда думал, что законы, которые принимаются, должны помогать жить гражданам, в том числе и детям. Когда принимаются законы абсурдные, об этом не надо молчать»
В создании и продвижении проекта приняли участие: Гильдия Неигрового кино и ТВ (Россия) European Documentary Network (Дания) East Doc Platform (Чехия) Информационный центр ООН (Россия) Catndocs World Sales Documentary (Франция)
Авторы сценария: Гаянэ Петросян, Ольга Арлаускас Режиссёр: Никита Тихонов-Рау Продюсер: Никита Тихонов-Рау Операторы: Арсений Калашников, Дмитрий Иванов, Никита Тихонов-Рау Композитор: Эдуард Пургин Звукорежиссёр: Игорь Ерин

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Historic $1.2 Billion Settlement In New York City Housing & Child Welfare Fraud - Are Detroit & Michigan Next?

The federal complaint and settlement decree is based on child welfare fraud.

Children residing in properties of New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) were intentionally subjected to lead poisoning, under the guise of millions and millions, generations and generations, in fraud.

The Detroit Land Bank Authority, et al and Michigan are next, because the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed has issued her public decree for these people to stop using children as chattel.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Settlement With NYCHA and NYC To Fundamentally Reform NYCHA Through the Appointment Of a Federal Monitor and the Payment By NYC Of $1.2 Billion Of Additional Capital Money Over the Next Five Years

Consent Decree Provides Comprehensive Relief, Requiring NYCHA to Promptly Address Lead Paint Hazards, Remedy Mold and Pest Infestations, and Provide Adequate Heat and Elevator Service

Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Ben Carson, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), Helen M. Albert, Principal Deputy Inspector General, performing the duties of the Inspector General, HUD Office of the Inspector General (“HUD OIG”), and Scott Pruitt, Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), announced today the simultaneous filing of a Complaint against defendant NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY (“NYCHA”) and a proposed settlement agreement, in the form of a Consent Decree, with NYCHA and the City of New York (the “City”).  The Complaint alleges that NYCHA for years has violated and continues to violate basic federal health and safety regulations, including regulations requiring NYCHA to protect children from lead paint and otherwise to provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing.  The Complaint further alleges that NYCHA has repeatedly made false statements to HUD and the public regarding its lead paint compliance, and has intentionally deceived HUD inspectors.  To fundamentally reform NYCHA and ensure that it provides housing that complies with federal law, the Consent Decree – which is subject to the review and approval of the Court – imposes a strong federal Monitor and requires the City, among other things, to provide $1.2 billion of additional capital funding to NYCHA over the next five years, and $200 million every year thereafter until the problems are fixed and the Consent Decree is no longer necessary.
Along with other federal, state, and city funding, there will be approximately $ 4 billion available for capital improvements the first four years.
U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman stated:  “NYCHA’s failure to provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing is simply unacceptable, and illegal.  Children must be protected from toxic lead paint, apartments must be free of mold and pest infestations, and developments must provide adequate heat in winter and elevator service.  NYCHA has put its residents at risk.  Today’s unprecedented settlement will improve life for the 400,000 residents who call NYCHA home, while ensuring accountability, reform, and oversight at this troubled institution. The City’s commitment of resources to NYCHA is extraordinary and promises real relief for NYCHA residents.”
HUD Secretary Ben Carson said:  “This historic agreement marks a new era for New York City’s public housing, one that puts families and their children first.  New York City and New York State are making an unprecedented commitment to put NYCHA on a new path.  The cooperation of Federal, State and city officials will vastly improve the living conditions for hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who call NYCHA home.”
HUD OIG Principal Deputy Inspector General Helen M. Albert said:  “We are proud of the integral work that the OIG staff performed which led to today’s settlement.  This represents a consequential partnership with the U.S. Attorney and others to ensure that those who reside in NYCHA housing will do so in safe and sanitary conditions.”
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said:  “Instead of protecting children from lead poisoning, NYCHA systematically violated EPA and HUD lead paint safety regulations and covered up its noncompliance.  Today’s landmark settlement puts a stop to that.  It is not only a great example of what EPA and HUD can achieve by working together, but it also sends a strong message to housing authorities, landlords, and renovators – violating the law and endangering public health will not be tolerated.  This agreement will dramatically improve the living conditions of New York City’s most vulnerable residents.”  
According to the Complaint filed today in Manhattan federal court:
For years, NYCHA has failed to comply with key HUD and EPA lead paint safety regulations, including by failing to inspect apartments for lead paint hazards and failing to remediate peeling lead paint.  NYCHA also fails to ensure that its workers use lead-safe work practices.  Children have been harmed as a result of NYCHA’s failures.  Between 2010 and 2016, at least 19 lead-poisoned children were found to have been exposed to deteriorated lead paint in their NYCHA apartments, and thousands more were put at risk. 
NYCHA also fails to provide “decent, safe, and sanitary” housing as required by HUD regulations.  Mold grows unchecked at many NYCHA developments, often on a very large scale, threatening the health of residents with asthma.  Across the city, NYCHA residents are provided inadequate heat in winter, leading to frigid apartment temperatures.  Pest and vermin infestations are common.  Elevators fail, leaving elderly or disabled residents trapped in their apartments or sleeping in building lobbies. 
NYCHA has repeatedly made false statements to HUD and the public regarding these matters.  These include false certifications by NYCHA each year that it would comply with HUD’s lead paint safety regulations.  NYCHA also deceived HUD about living conditions at NYCHA, going so far as to publish a “Quick Tips” training guide for how to hide conditions from HUD’s inspectors.
*                *                *
The United States has filed a proposed Consent Decree today, which would resolve the allegations in the Complaint.  The Consent Decree remains subject to review and approval by the Court.  The Consent Decree provides for the appointment of a federal monitor to oversee fundamental reform at NYCHA.  The Monitor has the authority, under the review of the Court, to set the performance standards that NYCHA must meet, devise the plans by which NYCHA will achieve those standards (including by implementing changes to NYCHA’s management, organization, and workforce structure), and require NYCHA to select independent contractors to perform certain work.  The Monitor will be selected by the United States, after consultation with City and state officials and NYCHA stakeholders, and subject to approval by the Court.
The Consent Decree also commits the City of New York to provide an additional $1 billion in capital funds over the next four years, over and above what the City has budgeted, and at least an additional $200 million in capital funds each subsequent year until the conditions identified in the Complaint are addressed.  Further, the Consent Decree requires NYCHA to comply immediately with HUD’s and EPA’s lead-safe work practices rules and to provide notice to residents in any apartment where NYCHA has identified lead paint.
*                *                *
In the Consent Decree submitted today, NYCHA admits, acknowledges, and accepts responsibility for the following:
    • At least once a year, beginning no later than 2010 and extending through 2016, NYCHA’s certifications to HUD contained untrue representations that NYCHA “will comply with” HUD’s federal lead paint safety regulations.
    • In more than half of NYCHA’s developments, NYCHA’s inspections (including statistical sampling) have confirmed the presence of lead paint somewhere on the premises, and in at least 92 developments, the inspections (including statistical sampling) have confirmed the presence of lead paint inside apartment units. 
    • Since at least 2010, NYCHA has not performed most of the biennial lead paint risk assessment reevaluations required by regulation for developments containing lead paint. 
    • From at least 2012 to 2016, NYCHA failed to perform visual assessments of apartments for lead paint hazards as required by regulation.  In 2016, NYCHA began performing visual assessments in units where children under six reside, but NYCHA has not yet performed visual assessments in the majority of apartments that may contain lead paint. 
    • Since at least 2010, NYCHA has not ensured that staff use lead-safe work practices when performing work on surfaces that may contain lead paint.
    • Currently, after NYCHA has removed mold from apartments, the mold returns at least 30% of the time. 
    • In Winter 2017-2018 alone, more than 320,000 residents, 80% of the public housing population, lost heat.
    • In 2016 alone, NYCHA experienced an average of more than 13 outages per elevator.
    • NYCHA’s data reflects more than 260,000 work orders for roaches between 2013 and 2016.  For the same period, there were more than 90,000 mouse work orders and nearly 36,000 rat work orders.
    • For a decade, NYCHA provided its staff with a list of “Quick Fix Tips” to improve its Public Housing Assessment System inspection scores.
Mr. Berman thanked HUD, HUD OIG, and EPA for their invaluable assistance in this matter.  Mr. Berman also thanked Mark Peters and the Department of Investigation for their important wok in this area.
This case is being handled by the Office’s Environmental Protection Unit in the Civil Division.  Assistant United States Attorneys Robert William Yalen, Mónica P. Folch, Jacob Lillywhite, Talia Kraemer, and Sharanya Mohan are in charge of the case.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: RICO Complaint Alleges Election Interference By Melanie Sloan, CREW & Clinton Foundation

Image result for kids eating popcorn movies
Haaaaaahhhh, they did the same exact thing to Conyers!
We need more popcorn.
It seems there is more to Melanie Sloan, who is mentioned in the alleged RICO claims of the federal complaint, below, than what is being reported.

I am sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for the depositions...or congressional hearings...or other legal actions of federal law enforcement.

Much will be revealed herein concerning Brock’s own admissions about Enterprise illicit use of nonprofit entities, but the court should also keep in mind that the Enterprise – as conceded by Brock in Exhibit “A” - also uses tactical defamatory tactics, as alleged herein, to obstruct justice and as part and parcel of their numerous predicate acts used to gain illicit control of the Democratic Party. For instance, what was at one time a tough but fair entity named CREW, including the inimitable Melanie Sloane, has now become daily Twitter and CNN rants with Norman Eisen, Noah Bookbinder and Richard Painter defaming without compunction - and engaging in vitriolic guesswork about matters of which they know little to nothing. CREW has become a joke, with the mediocre Eisen and Painter (who now seeks a United States Senate seat using free media given him by like-minded co-conspirators described in “Exhibit A”) making defamatory attacks daily on social media and on CNN. Bookbinder himself has committed CREW to #Resistance, and simply takes marching orders from Brock and the Enterprise, with the funding of defendant George Soros. Their “Exhibit A” misuse of the nonprofit CREW results in a felony penalty each day (sometimes several times per day), as it has done since soon after the 2016 presidential election was certified and Donald J. Trump, Sr. took the oath of office to become the 45th President of the United States. And in what can only be described as comedic, these CREW individuals offer their unexceptional services to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who not surprisingly has declined to work with them while at the same time Enterprise surrogate Mueller had agreed to work with the misogynist former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who had apparently taken the lead, working with Mueller, in denying the pardon power – and breaking the jaws of women who trusted him while routinely bumping cocaine and drinking alcohol to extreme excess. Each of these individuals also, by instruction of the Enterprise, work full time at the seditious task of undermining their own government while engaging in serial violation of United States statutory law, regulation, and much else.
I extend my sincerest apologies for my negligence in reminding the public, every single waking moment of life, that Perkins Coie Sucks.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: DoD Partners With AG To Stop Staffer Emoluments

Did you use you elected office to make money?

Were you a staffer who used your position to make money?

Did you or your relatives run a business out a federal, state or local governmental office?

Were you stealin'?

If you can answer "yes" to any of these questions, you may want to seek legal counsel.

I wonder if this is a teaser for the Department of Defense Audit?

Former Director of the Program Management Office in the Secretary of Defense Communications Office Pleads Guilty to Conflicts of Interest Law Prohibiting Acts Affecting Personal Financial Interest

The former Director of the Program Management Office in the Secretary of Defense Communications Office (SDC) pleaded guilty today to a criminal conflicts of interest charge for using her federal employment to participate in acts that financially benefited her and her husband’s company.  Acting Assistant Attorney General John P. Cronan of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division made the announcement.
Kimberly S. Brewer, 37, of Fredericksburg, Virginia, pleaded guilty before Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to a one-count information charging her with violating a criminal conflicts of interest law that prohibits federal employees from using their federal employment to personally and financially benefit themselves or certain immediate family members, including spouses.
According to the plea documents, the SDC is the office within the U.S. Department of Defense responsible for, among other things, operating and maintaining the communications systems supporting the U.S. Secretary of Defense.  During the relevant time period, Brewer served as SDC’s Director of the Program Management Office at the same time that her husband’s company, Insight Technology Group LLC (ITG), was a subcontractor for a company that had a $4.68 million contract with the SDC.  Even though Brewer signed a disqualification statement in which she agreed to refrain from participating in any matters that would affect ITG, Brewer repeatedly personally and substantially participated in matters that affected the company’s financial interests, including advocating with her superiors on behalf of ITG and interfering in personnel matters affecting the company.  These acts directly impacted financial matters affecting ITG’s financial interests and, indirectly, her own. 
The case was investigated by the Defense Criminal Investigative Service of the U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, and is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Victor R. Salgado of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Samantha P. Bateman of the Eastern District of Virginia.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Friday, June 22, 2018

More Concerns In Privatization In Foster Care

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to hold hearings on the privatization of foster care.

MENTOR is a publicly traded company, just so you know.

Does Privatized Foster Care Put Kids at Risk?

The number of kids in foster care is climbing, and so are public costs. In search of efficiencies, many states have at least partially privatized their systems.

In 2012, when Alexandria Hill was a year old, Texas’s child welfare agency found her parents unfit to care for her. The baby’s biological mother was prone to seizures, officials said, and both parents were using marijuana. So the state authorized a for-profit company, The MENTOR Network, to locate foster parents.

The first family MENTOR placed Alexandria with neglected her; when her biological parents complained after finding her filthy at a supervised visit, the company moved her to another home—that of a 53-year-old woman named Sherill Small. Less than a year later, Small killed Alexandria. She told police she’d been frustrated with the girl and swung her until her head crashed into the floor.

Buzzfeed’s harrowing 2015 investigation into MENTOR exposed the grim repercussions of privatized foster care, detailing Alexandria’s and others’ tragic cases that likely resulted from shortcuts made in the pursuit of profit. Piling too many cases on social workers, for instance, can result in abuse when foster parents aren’t properly vetted or monitored. Among the omissions in Alexandria’s case: MENTOR failed to interview Small’s sisters, who said they would have warned the company about her. (MENTOR denied that it cuts corners to make money.)

The lessons of such an investigation are perhaps even more important today, as more children are entering foster care because of the impact of the widening opioid crisis. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration on Children and Families, the number of children in foster care rose almost 7 percentfrom 2013 to 2015, nearing 430,000. In 32 percent of all foster placements parental substance abuse was cited as a factor—an increase of 10 percent compared to 2005.

When a state privatizes foster care, it uses federal, state, and local funds to contract out services, such as locating and monitoring foster parents, to private agencies. In most cases, public agencies still manage children’s long-term outcomes, such as reunification or adoption—but more jurisdictions are shifting even that responsibility to the private sector.

These private agencies are usually nonprofit, making MENTOR, as a for-profit corporation, an extreme example of privatization. Yet nonprofits can subcontract their work to for-profit companies; in states that forbid for-profit entities from administering foster care, MENTOR used this loophole as a workaround. And even in more straightforward nonprofit arrangements, privatization has negatively impacted children.

Over the past three decades, many states have privatized at least part of their foster care systems; some, like Kansas and Florida, have privatized theirs completely. Despite high-profile cases like Alexandria’s—which helped prompt a 2015 Senate Finance Committee investigation that resulted in proposed legislation to strengthen government oversight of foster care—some states and officials continue to see privatization as an antidote to a bloated and inefficient public sector. Kentucky, for instance, recently pledged to investigate whether it should fully privatize its foster care system; private agencies currently provide services for around half of the children in the state’s care. In Texas, a pilot program that privatizes the monitoring of homes identified as at risk for child abuse or neglect is moving forward, despite some lawmakers’ concerns. Proponents of privatization often claim that private entities are more efficient than government agencies, and calls for the privatization of foster care have been no different. Yet Tracey Feild, director of the Child Welfare Strategy Group at the Annie E. Casey Foundation, questions that idea. Private agencies, she said, have “certainly not done the work for a lower cost.”

Feild, whose Child Welfare Strategy Group provides consulting to child welfare agencies, said that the private sector has in fact brought more resources to the foster care system through, for example, successfully lobbying politicians for funds. Though this might be a positive development, she said the argument can also be made that if those additional resources had gone to the public sector to begin with, it could have solved the problems that spurred calls for privatization. For instance, new resources could be used for services such as more and better substance abuse treatment to keep families intact rather than rely on foster care.

And while public agencies still conduct the initial investigations into abuse or neglect, once a system is privatized legislators often assume they no longer need to give them money. This leaves the public agencies chronically underfunded, making it difficult to monitor their private contractors. “A public agency can be handing out tens of millions of dollars to private providers with very little oversight,” said Feild.

Private agencies can be effective in providing foster care services, Feild says. But they often face a steep learning curve. “If you’ve got the patience and good providers, you can make a go of privatization,” she said. “But it’s not going to take two to three years to improve outcomes. It’s more like 10 years.” Kansas’ privatized system, for example, is quite strong, she noted, as it’s been in operation for over 20 years. (Still, the state is struggling to keep up with cases due to the opioid epidemic and funding cuts.)

In less established systems, the private agencies can get overwhelmed with their new responsibilities—and kids can suffer, languishing in foster care or shelters. “Child welfare workers get crisis focused; they’re worried about getting a child a bed for that night,” said Feild. “So the initial priority for the new privatization provider isn’t the child who may be able to return to his family because the provider has been doing work with the parents. It’s who is coming through the provider’s front door, which results in kids staying longer than necessary.”

Jessalyn Schwartz, a Boston attorney focusing on child welfare and mental health law, added that in these circumstances children are usually placed in what is available rather than what is needed. “And they often don’t get much say in where they end up or how often they move,” she said. “Though privatized foster care is often labeled as a corrective, it’s imperative to better understand it before declaring it as such.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Irish Catholic Trafficking Of Tiny Humans Through Adoption Under Investigation

Keep in mind, these children who were adopted out were considered to be "bastards" of "unwed" mothers of "The Poors", a practice that has been perpetuated for generations.

Have a great day!

Irish adoption files under examination

HUNDREDS, if not thousands, of Irish people are unaware that their parents are not their birth parents after the uncovering of a scandal in which adoption societies, from at least the 1940s until 1969, incorrectly registered births when they gave or sold “illegitimate” children to adoptive parents.

The practice of adoption of such babies was run by religious orders of nuns, including the Sisters of Charity. An investigation of files on children at the Sisters of Charity’s adoption society, St Patrick’s Guild, has revealed that at least 126 people were affected and are now being traced and informed of the situation.

None of the nuns involved in these cases is still alive, and the Guild was closed as recently as 2010.
Ireland’s Minister for Children, Dr Katherine Zappone, has initiated an investigation into the Guild, as well as other adoption agencies, to establish how widespread the illegal practice was. Dr Zappone described the revelations as a failure on behalf of the State, and warned that there could be inheritance issues for those affected as they had been improperly and illegally registered as children of people to whom they were not related by blood.

She said that she had personally wrestled, as did her colleagues, with the question of whether the people affected should be told at all, but concluded: “People have a right to know who they are.”

Closer examination of the 70,000 adoption files held by the state child and family agency is now under way, and the Garda authorities have been notified.

Dr Zappone plans a two-stage investigation, beginning with a sampling, and following up with a full-scale inspection of files.

Some adoption support groups say that, despite repeated requests, the State ignored calls for a comprehensive investigation into what the Coalition of Mother and Baby Homes Survivors described as “the tip of a very large iceberg of fraud, forgery, baby trafficking, child abduction and criminal activity by rogue Irish adoption agencies”.

The falsification of adoption records by the Guild had been reported to every minister for children since 2001, the Adoption Rights Alliance said, but no action had been taken. Barnardos has called on the government to legislate so that all adopted adults over the age of 18 have a legal right to their full information.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

New Political Campaign Fundraising Activities In Michigan

Due to the precipitous conditions of Michigan's economy, political candidates have had to resort to creative fundraising practises for their campaigns.

I wonder if Zyburski is going to call "attorney-client privilege" for his legal defense.

Coke bust snags Macomb judicial candidate
A candidate running for judge in Macomb County has a date with a federal judge Tuesday after being charged in a cocaine trafficking case.

Prosecutors unsealed the criminal case Thursday against Paul Zyburski, 57, after wiretap and other evidence showed he was using a phone to facilitate drug trafficking.

Zyburski, a veteran criminal-defense lawyer in Mount Clemens, was charged in the midst of an election campaign for a judicial opening in 39th District Court, which covers Roseville and Fraser.

“Right now, these are only allegations. We are going to conduct a thorough investigation,” Zyburski’s defense lawyer Joseph Arnone said Friday. “He is going to maintain his innocence and the presumption of innocence that he is entitled to.”

Zyburski became embroiled in the drug case last fall after the FBI's Macomb County Gang and Violent Crime Task Force started tapping the phone of accused drug dealer, and A&A Dynasty party bus operator Antonio Lewis, 53, of St. Clair Shores.

Lewis was identified by investigators as distributing cocaine across Macomb County, typically packs of 1.2 grams that he would sell on or near the party bus, according to federal court records. He was indicted on drug conspiracy and other charges in May alongside a third man, Demetrius Alderson.

Investigators learned Lewis was using a particular phone number to coordinate drug deals and obtained a wiretap in November 2017 to monitor his phone calls, according to court records.

Lewis was in frequent contact with one phone number that a subpoena showed belonged to Zyburski, according to court records.

Zyburski could not be reached for comment Friday. He was campaigning for the six-year judicial post as recently as Sunday, according to his Facebook page.
Zyburski is running against four others, including Macomb County Commissioner Kathy Tocco.
On Nov. 27, investigators monitored text messages between Zyburski and Lewis.

Zyburski texted Lewis, writing "Yo...I'm getting ready to go to Columbia can you get me in the mood."

"K," Lewis replied. "How many."

"2," Zyburski texted.

The two exchanged more messages in the ensuing months and arranged drug deals at Macomb County restaurants and a tennis court, according to court records.

On Jan. 20, investigators monitored more text messages and believe Zyburski ordered cocaine for himself and a female.

"...can you stop by I got some 18 year old broad coming here so you know," Zyburski texted Lewis, according to court records.

"1?" Lewis replied.

"Actually 2 sounds better if you got it," Zyburski texted.

"K omw," Lewis texted, using the acronym for "on my way."

In all, the FBI alleges Zyburski and Lewis used phones more than 30 times to engage in drug distribution. If convicted, Zyburski could be sentenced to up to four years in federal prison.

He is scheduled to make an initial appearance in federal court Tuesday.

“One of the unfortunate things about being a criminal defense attorney, especially if you’re successful, is it’s not uncommon for people to make accusations against you that are just not true,” Arnone said.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JUDICIARY: Senate Addresses EB-5 & Its Child Welfare Fraud Issues

Chuck Grassley is a bit passionate in his opening statement that the nation is in its third administration where nothing has been done to address updating immigration policies.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is speaking upon child welfare, or rather the removal of children from parents, but, once again, horribly fails to address foster care and adoption.

Slowly, the nation is learning about child welfare law, but they better hurry up on that learning curve, because the fraud schemes continue to grow, as do the off shore bank accounts and money laundering through child welfare NGOs through real estate.

Dilly, dilly!

Make sure to click the link, below, to learn more about the origins of the EB-5 complex fraud schemes that also fund political campaigns.

The Sordid Tale Of Michigan Privatization: From Emergency Manager To Russia

Learn more: BEVERLY TRAN: The Sordid Tale Of Michigan Privatization: From Emergency Manager To Russia
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare 

Prepared Statement by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee “Citizenship for Sale: Oversight of the EB-5 Investor Visa Program” Tuesday, June 19, 2018 

 Good morning. I would like to thank Director Cissna for being here today for this very important hearing on a topic that goes to the very integrity of our nation’s lawful immigration system. 

Before I begin my formal remarks, I want to remind both my Democratic and Republican colleagues that the purpose of today’s hearing is to conduct oversight of a particular immigration program, the EB-5 Investor Visa. 

Our general, annual oversight hearing for Citizenship and Immigration Services is a separate hearing which will happen in September. 

Today, we should focus on the very important and persistent issue at hand: fixing the beleaguered EB-5 Investor Visa Program. Congress created the investor visa program in 1990 to stimulate our economy through job creation and capital investment. 

In 1992, we created a “pilot program” which allowed petitioners to pool their investments in regional centers designated by USCIS. 

Since the regional center program’s creation, interest in the EB-5 program has grown. 

Today, almost all EB-5 petitioners invest in one of 903 approved regional centers. 

As interest in the EB-5 Regional Center Program has grown, so have cases of fraud, corruption and threats to national security. 

There are many, many well-documented examples of the inherent problems in this program. 

In fact, over the last five years, I along with several of my colleagues, have written over 30 oversight letters highlighting the various vulnerabilities of this visa program. 

Because I have consistently raised awareness of the rampant fraud and abuse of this program, I don’t need to tell you about the ex-wife of China’s third most wanted government official who pled guilty to committing EB-5 fraud by submitting false documents as part of a scheme to escape to the U.S. with stolen funds. 

I don’t need to tell you how Homeland Security Investigations discovered a group of Iranian operatives attempting to infiltrate the U.S. and facilitate terrorism through an illegal procurement network back in 2013. 

I also don’t need to detail the concerns with exporting sensitive technology, investment fraud, or other criminal activity. 

So, I’ll only mention some of the most egregious recent cases. 

This past January, a group of over 120 Chinese nationals sued an Idaho real estate development company and claimed they were fraudulently coerced into investing over $60 million. 

The real estate company in question allegedly promised there was “zero risk” to invest in their specific EB-5 project, a claim that clearly violates the program’s requirements that capital be at risk. 

As a result, this specific EB-5 project was terminated by USCIS and the investors’ immigration status was jeopardized—all because this project misrepresented themselves in order to gain quick, easy money. 

In May, the SEC barred two EB-5 companies from selling securities after it was discovered the companies’ president and manager fraudulently raised $22.5 million in EB-5 capital from Chinese investors. 

According to the SEC, these two companies were supposed to use the raised money for the development of a condominium complex. Instead, the companies’ President and his wife stole more than $12 million in order to purchase homes for themselves. 

Finally, and also in May, two Maryland residents were charged with defrauding 31 immigrant investors and using money intended to create jobs after Hurricane Katrina for personal gain. 

The indictment claims the duo contracted with New Orleans to create a $15.5 million investment fund, but instead used the money to buy themselves vacation and rental properties. 

Several months ago, my staff was briefed by officials from the Department’s Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate on its recent EB-5 National Security Concern Assessment. 

Unsurprisingly, the report found that the program is susceptible to Ponzi schemes and financial fraud, and warned that current vetting by law enforcement systems may have missed national security concerns due to insufficiencies in vetting and data collection. 

I hope today we have the opportunity to hear about the improvements made as a result of this review. Today, in spite of this ample evidence of fraud and corruption, and the concerning national security loopholes, the EB-5 “pilot program” continues to operate exactly the same way it did 25 years ago. 

However, it’s not for a lack of trying. For the past four and a half years, I’ve worked in a bipartisan, bicameral fashion with Senators Leahy, Chairman Goodlatte, and then-Ranking Member John Conyers to reform this program. 

Our staffers have spent countless hours, often working nights, weekends, and holidays, to produce consensus reform packages. 

Each and every time we’ve gotten an agreement at the last minute, powerful, well-connected EB-5 industry groups have torpedoed our efforts. 

For the last year, my staff, along with Chairman Goodlatte, Senator Cornyn, and Senator Flake’s teams, worked around the clock to produce an EB-5 reform package. 

Everyone made numerous concessions in order to reach a deal, and we produced a reform package that was fair and that everyone agreed to. 

Our reforms had the unanimous support of Invest in the USA, the largest EB-5 trade association. 

Our reforms had the support of the EB-5 Rural Alliance, a group working to ensure that rural America has a fair shake at attracting EB-5 money. 

But, these reforms weren’t acceptable to the big moneyed New York industry stakeholders who currently dominate the program. 

And because big money interests weren’t happy with these reforms, they didn’t become law. Let that sink in for a minute. 

In spite of the fact that reforms were agreed to by Congressional offices and had the support of the largest EB-5 trade association, they didn’t become law because a few EB-5 businesses with a lot of money used their political connections and influence to block them. 

While legislative reforms are absolutely necessary, thankfully there is much the administration can do on its own to end corruption in this program. 

Since January of last year, there have been pending regulations at the Department of Homeland Security, which would modernize the program and ensure capital is actually flowing to rural and underserved urban areas. 

As of today, those regulations still have not been implemented. 

I’m looking forward to a fulsome discussion with Director Cissna on all of these topics. I’m hoping he can shed some light on steps USCIS is taking to crack down on fraud and abuse in the program. 

I’d also be curious to hear his thoughts on potential paths forward for legislative reforms. 

Finally, and most importantly, I hope Director Cissna can provide an update on the status of the pending modernization regulations. As I have stated very clearly in several bicameral, bipartisan letters, the administration should finalize the modernization regulation as soon as possible. 

That regulation is a critical and necessary step towards reforming this troubled program. I now turn to the Ranking Minority Member for her opening remarks.

SCOTUS Rules On Preservation Of Evidence In Private Data

Image result for supreme court of the united statesThe issue with warrants and data have been previously addressed in Congress, but long forgotten, well, that is unless you do a metatag keyword search of data on my blog.

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. on H.R. 699, “The Email Privacy Act”

Learn more: BEVERLY TRAN: Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. on H.R. 699, “The Email Privacy Act”
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare 

If SCOTUS rules law enforcement needs warrant to search private cellphone data, then, I shall assume, it applies to emails, and the emails & cellphone data of private corporations, because, after all, "corporations are people, too".

See, if law enforcement does not follow proper procedure in securing evidence in a criminal proceeding, then all that evidence can be thrown out which is why the Hillary Clinton email investigation is going through meticulous scrutiny in DOJ and FBI internal policies and operations.

One just might want to get this one right because this looks like we now have a backdoor into some regulation of those Public Private Partnerships and anything else dealing with privatization when it comes to national security, be it domestic or foreign.

What is interesting to keep in mind, in child welfare proceedings, there is an exception called "exigent circumstances" dealing with children where Child Protective Services will obtain personal information without need of warrant.

Supreme Court rules law enforcement needs warrant to search cellphone data

The Supreme Court ruled Friday that law enforcement in most cases has to obtain a warrant in order to search and seize long-term cell phone records that would show a person's location.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court held that the Fourth Amendment's protections against an unreasonable search protects people from having the government acquire their cell-site records from wireless providers in run-of-the-mill criminal investigations.

Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court's four liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, to make up the majority.

Justice Anthony Kennedy dissented along with conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch.

The case before the court centered on Timothy Carpenter, who argued the government violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure when it obtained records from his wireless provider revealing his location over 127 days.

Authorities used the data as evidence at his trial to convict him of a string of robberies at Radio Shack and T-Mobile stores in Michigan and Ohio from December 2010 to March 2011.

The government claimed it was well within its right under the Stored Communications Act of 1986 to obtain the records through a court order, which requires police to show reasonable grounds to believe the information is relevant to their criminal investigation.

For a warrant, police have to show probable cause that the crime occurred. <===right there is the purpose of OIG investigations.

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Carpenter, upholding the district court ruling, sentencing Carpenter to 1,395 months in prison.

The court held that no search occurred under the Fourth Amendment because Carpenter had no reasonable expectation of privacy in cell phone location records held by his service provider.

In reversing the lower court ruling, Roberts disagreed. He said Carpenter did have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

“As with GPS information, the time-stamped data provides an intimate window into a person’s life revealing not only his particular movements, but through them his familial, political, professional, religious and sexual associations,” he said. “These location records hold for many Americans the ‘privacies of life.’”

Roberts noted that location data has become so precise that it gives the government a near perfect surveillance. Unlike with GPS tracking, he said police don’t even need to know in advance who they want to follow or when.

“Whoever the suspect turns out to be, he has effectively been tailed every moment of every day for five years, and the police may — in the government’s view — call upon the results of that surveillance without regard to the constraints of the Fourth Amendment,” he said.

"Only a few without cell phones could escape this tireless and absolute surveillance.”

In a dissenting opinion, Kennedy said the court's ruling puts needed, reasonable, accepted, lawful and congressionally authorized criminal investigations at risk in serious cases.

"And it places undue restrictions on the lawful and necessary enforcement powers exercised not only by the federal government, but also by law enforcement in every state and locality throughout the nation."

But Roberts said law enforcement can obtain an exemption from the warrant requirement in urgent situations.

“Lower courts for instance, have approved warrantless searches related to bomb threats, active shootings and child abductions,” he said. “Our decision today does not call into doubt warrantless access to CSLI [cell-site location information] in such circumstances.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©