Michigan Secretary Of State Jocelyn Benson Takes It Upon Herself To Negotiate Gerrymandering Public Private Partnership Lawsuit - Completely Forgets About SIGTARP

In the spirit of fuchsia...

Michigan Secretary of Usurpation
Jocelyn Benson

GOP asks Supreme Court to block Dem settlement in gerrymandering suit

Lansing — Michigan Republicans are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hit pause on a federal lawsuit alleging GOP gerrymandering, a move that could disrupt a settlement agreement announced Friday by Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson.

Work with me on this one.  You mean to tell me that the Michigan GOP filed in SCOTUS to stay a lawsuit alleging they participated in gerrymandering through the Emergency Manager Law for the fake Detroit Bankruptcy where the Detroit Land Bank Authority was a creditor to put people out of their families' generational homes, based upon fake property tax foreclosure, asset forfeiture fraud schemes they introduced, and promulgated through money they laundered through their campaigns into their legislative back pockets, for the purposes of redistricting based upon the people who survived the reign of terror from the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending)?

Well, that is awkward, considering that there is another case in federal court, at the judicial threshold of the same exact matter, which means that this Detroit case could be, possibly, enjoined?

Benson's deal with plaintiffs would require Michigan to redraw at least 11 state House districts. It would likely force a recalibration of an unknown number of surrounding districts as well.

Stay with me because this is the part where I have serious privatization issues going on.  I need someone to explain to me why the Michigan Secretary of State can negotiate in a matter pending before the court, and not the Attorney General, without advise and consent of the Senate, from the Executive Branch, by disregarding existing law, where only the Legislature can make law.  That is called a usurpation, the last time I read my Michigan Petition for Writ of Quo Warranto. 

But attorneys for Republican lawmakers are asking the nation’s highest court to intervene and delay any action in the suit until justices consider arguments in similar gerrymandering cases out of North Carolina and Maryland they are expected to take up in March.

Looks like that Detroit Land Bank Authority case is going to be on hold until March.

“The Supreme Court will be ruling soon on the exact issues presented in this case, and this afternoon we asked the United States Supreme Court to stay this entire proceeding,” attorney Charlie Spies told The Detroit News by email.

State House Speaker Lee Chatfield of Levering, Rep. Aaron Miller of Sturgis and several congressional Republicans directed their request to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a Democratic nominee.

The Michigan lawsuit alleges maps approved by the Republican-led Legislature in 2011 intentionally diluted the power of Democratic voters by “packing” or “cracking” them into specific districts.

It did. It was called fake property tax and mortgage foreclosure schemes.  I was there when they came up with the idea.

The new districts would only apply for the 2020 elections. Voters last fall approved the creation of a citizen redistricting commission that will draw maps for 2022 and beyond.

That citizen redistricting commission is another one of those "Authorities", like the Detroit Land Bank Authority, a Public Private Partnership.

As part of the deal with Benson, which would require approval by a three-judge panel overseeing the case, plaintiffs agreed to drop challenges to congressional and state Senate districts, along with four other state House Districts.

I should file an amicus curiea monkey wrench just for fun. I always wanted to file in SCOTUS. I want to have fun making them waive the fees and giving me special powers in case law.  The Justices need to bond with me, anyway.

The 11 state House districts targeted in the agreement “represent some of the most egregious examples of the unconstitutional attempts by past legislators to draw legislative districts in an effort to rig the partisan outcomes of elections,” Benson told reporters at a Friday briefing.

Several neighboring districts would likely need to be redrawn as well, but “that’s going to be a question for the Legislature,” Benson said.

Districts in settlement proposal, in green here, are all south of Mt. Pleasant. So likely no changes needed to northern lower and UP pic.twitter.com/fASSrBs4FO

— Jonathan Oosting (@jonathanoosting) January 25, 2019

The Michigan gerrymandering case is currently scheduled to go to trial Feb. 5. In their application to the U.S. Supreme Court, GOP attorneys suggested federal judges are aware of settlement talks but made clear they do not plan to delay the trial for “any reason.”

Plaintiff attorneys submitted the proposed settlement Friday afternoon in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

“The next step is whether the court will accept it, and we’ll go from there,” Benson said.​​​​​​

February 5, 2019 is the magic day because it is not just the start of the gerrrymandering trial, it is also the State of the Union Address!

​Benson: Deal avoids 'upheaval' 

The Detroit Democrat said she pushed plaintiffs to drop congressional and state Senate district challenges to minimize “upheaval." But the deal still reflects her view that gerrymandering occurred in a way that violated the constitutional mandate of “one person, one vote.”

No, she is dropping the congressional and state Senate district challenges because she knows that stuff is criminal.  Who gave her the powers to negotiate settlements?

Benson has been the subject of considerable GOP scorn the past week after signaling her intent to settle the federal lawsuit brought by the League of Women Voters, a group of Democratic voters and attorney Mark Brewer, former chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party.

Ah, she is with the "Legal Genius" (trademark pending) Mark Brewer.

Michigan Republican Party spokesman Tony Zammit blasted the deal, saying Benson “has shown she cannot be impartial in this case, and therefore she must be replaced as it’s defendant.” Former Secretary of State Ruth Johnson, a Republican, had defended the GOP maps.

Can you smell the fear? Both Republicans and Democrats in Michigan are terrified right about now. #FreeMariaButina

Benson denied partisan motivation for settling the case she inherited after taking office this month, suggesting she did not want to waste taxpayer resources fighting a case she believes the state would lose. The deal would give the Republican-led Legislature the first opportunity to redraw the state House lines, subject to judicial review.

She was not partisan, she is desperately trying to preserve her freedom.

“It does not matter to me who or what parties drew the districts," Benson said. "What matters to me is whether they were drawn to circumvent the will of the voters.”

Technically, if you snatch people's homes, they will no longer live there, which means there are no longer voters, so I guess you can say the will of the voters were not circumvented if no one resides in the properties anymore.

The proposed consent decree would require the state to redraw state House districts 24, 32, 51, 55, 60, 63, 76, 91, 92, 94 and 95. Six of those seats are currently held by Republicans and five are controlled by Democrats. Republicans currently represent 58 of 110 state House districts, a six-seat majority.

I bet they picked those State House Districts arbitrarily and capriciously.

“The Democrats know it will be nearly impossible to redraw these 11 districts without affecting countless others causing electoral chaos,” Zammit said. “Worse yet, outdated 10-year-old data will be utilized to draw the new lines which will not accurately reflect the demographics of our state.”

All those data are corrupt.  Please. All you have to do is compare the voter rolls with a drive by of the addresses. 

The deal does not dictate how the Republican-led Legislature should redraw the state House districts, but it encourages them to do so in “transparent proceedings open to the public.”

Encouragement can be creative when you use terms like "should" and "may" because there is not statutory oversight to challenge anything coming out of the privatized redistricting commission.

The 11 targeted districts include two Republican-held seats in Metro Detroit, both in Macomb County, currently represented by Rep. Steve Marino of Harrison Township and Pamela Hornberger of Chesterfield Township.

I wonder if these negotiations took place in Michigan.

None of the settlement districts are north of Mount Pleasant, meaning seats in the northern Lower Peninsula and Upper Peninsula where Republicans are dominant are unlikely to be affected.

That is because southeastern Michigan, specifically Detroit, has the "highest concentration of voter potential", (my new term for what happens after the Michigan passes laws for stealin' the children, the land, and the votes.)

The federal court would be responsible for establishing a deadline for the redrawn state House maps and determining how it would judge the partisan fairness of the proposed districts.

The federal court should not be responsible for participating in a complex fraud scheme dealing with multiple, ongoing federal investigations.

Brewer ties blasted

Republican lawmakers have denied overt political bias in the district boundaries they approved in 2011, but emails between map makers revealed in the federal case have included partisan references and commentary on the prospects of maintaining GOP power.

If you go through my archive, you can find the links to what they were talking about and who were the biggest cheerleaders.

Benson told reporters she expected Republican opposition to the settlement despite its limited nature, which means state senators just elected to four-year terms would not need to run for re-election in 2020.

By what right does the Secretary of State, through a private attorney, unless Brewer is a Special Counsel, which he is not and should know better.  Well, on second thought, Brewer does know better which is why he is covering his arse for his engagements with Perkins Coie Sucks operations through the DNC and MDP.

“I think no matter what decision I made in this case, someone was going to be upset, whether we went to trial or whether we settled or not,” she said.

Well, I say you, my dear, shall be called to bear witness by what right you have to even hold that office, 

Republicans have blasted Benson for connections to Brewer, the former state Democratic party chairman who donated $500 to her campaign and is a lead attorney for plaintiffs in the case.

The lady doth have a reputation for just about anything to get elected.

Earlier this week, the Michigan GOP accused Benson and Brewer of trying to orchestrate “the greatest partisan power grab in Michigan history,” and attorneys for Republican lawmakers asked court permission to demand their communications donating back to 2017.

Michigan GOP is asking for the Wikileaks files and the DNC servers?  Oh, this is going to be interesting because the MDP was running shop in Detroit through lots of political campaigns.  This sounds like a call for the FEC.

Benson noted she raised more than $1 million for her campaign and received donations from both Republicans and Democrats.

Everyone does the nasty together in Michigan politics, you just do not know it...yet.

“If anyone giving me $500 can influence a decision I made when you raise that much money from thousands of people, then we’re in trouble,” she said. “And so that’s certainly not the case here.”

The settlement does not require any state payments to cover the cost of plaintiff attorneys but makes clear that the parties could agree to award fees at a later date.

“How much money are the taxpayers of Michigan going to be paying Mark Brewer’s law firm in this case?” Zammit said.

Excellent question!  I have one better.  Who approved Brewer's law firm to take on this case?

This is nothing but another Public Private Partnership takeover of Michigan.

And that ends my incredible ability of throwing legal monkey wrenches in cases dealing with SIGTARP.

League of Women Voters v Mi... by on Scribd

Again, the moral of the story is, "Do not be mean to my Sweetie. Period". 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DMC Joins Detroit Funeral Homes In Warehousing Hundreds Of Fetuses

I have so many questions, starting with the Medicaid billing for the births, but you know the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services does not like to give up records and the Michigan Medicaid Fraud Control Unit is useless.

That is where you start, with the records, because you know someone was making money.

Where are the identities, now?

I would be extremely curios to find out the forensic condition of the fetuses, just to take an organ inventory and cause of death, because Detroit is #1 in the world for a geographic population in infant mortality and #1 in the world for parenatal research.

It would be horrible to allege these global milestones in Detroit are found to harken from involuntary human subject research.

Police remove 26 fetuses from Detroit Medical Center

Detroit — In the latest twist to a wide-ranging investigation into funeral homes' disposition of infant and fetal remains, a police task force Monday removed 26 fetuses from a Detroit Medical Center morgue, all of which were allegedly mishandled by Perry Funeral Home.

Members of the Detroit police homicide task force executed a search warrant Monday at Detroit Receiving Hospital, where the DMC's morgue is located, Detroit police Chief James Craig said.

"This is a continuation into our criminal investigation into Perry Funeral Home," Craig said. "We removed 26 fetuses from the DMC."

Craig added: "DMC was not a target of this action."

DMC spokeswoman Tonita Cheatham said in an email: "We are working closely with local law enforcement in their ongoing investigation of Perry Funeral Home. The DMC has assisted law enforcement with the transfer of the unburied, Perry-related remains into their custody.”

Perry spokesman Tom Shields said Tuesday he would ask the funeral home's attorneys to comment, but he did not provide a response.

Twenty of the bodies taken from the DMC cooler had dates-of-birth listed from 1998 and earlier, with six dating to the 1970s, police sources told The Detroit News. The earliest date of birth accompanying a fetus was Aug. 11, 1971.

Investigators are trying to determine whether those dates represent the infants' or parents' dates of birth, sources said. Perry has contracted with area hospitals to handle unclaimed infant and fetal remains since at least the 1960s.

Only partial information was available about some remains because the bodies were decomposed, and identifying paperwork was either missing or too soiled to be legible, sources told The News.

Meanwhile, state authorities are looking into another case of dozens of infant remains allegedly lying unnoticed for years in a DMC hospital.

LARA since October has been investigating a tip from a former Harper-Hutzel Hospital employee that hospital officials in April 2015 found the dead bodies of more than 50 infants in a basement morgue.

The former hospital employee told The News and officials with the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs that at least 20 of the babies had identification tags indicating they had been in the hospital morgue for more than 10 years.

LARA spokesman Jason Moon said Tuesday the state agency is investigating the former employee's claims.

"LARA received an anonymous complaint regarding the allegations ... and we are discussing it with law enforcement to determine whether our department has regulatory oversight over the issues addressed by the complainant," Moon said.

Cheatham did not respond to questions about the former employee's allegations.

LARA was not involved in Monday's search warrant, Moon said.

The 26 remains removed from the DMC morgue Monday were taken to a mortuary transport company.

One fetus among the 26 is listed as “Mary Doe” because there’s no identifying information about her, according to sources.

Sources said Perry removed the remains from the hospital at some point, then returned them, and investigators are trying to figure out why. Paperwork at the morgue indicated Perry brought the remains back to the DMC morgue on July 28, 2017, sources told The News.

Monday's action was the latest development in a multi-tentacled investigation into the handling of infant and fetal remains.

The probe started in October, when Detroit police and LARA inspectors discovered 11 infant and fetal remains stored in a false ceiling at Detroit's Cantrell Funeral Home, after receiving a letter that also alleged fraud at the funeral home.

Craig said he launched the investigation because failing to properly dispose of remains more than 180 days after death is a felony in Michigan, punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

When a man who was suing Perry and others for allegedly mishandling his daughter's remains saw news coverage of the Cantrell discovery, his attorneys alerted Detroit police. Police met with the attorneys and then expanded their investigation to include Perry Funeral Home.

The lawsuit being handled by the attorneys, Peter Parks and Daniel Cieslak, was granted class-action status in November after the lawyers argued there could be more than 200 mishandled remains.

The parents involved in the lawsuit had arranged for the remains of their stillborn or live-birth babies to go to Wayne State's medical school for research. Instead, the lawsuit alleges, many of the bodies ended up in Wayne State's morgue, which had a longstanding arrangement allowing Perry Funeral Home to store bodies in its cooler.

In June 2017, the university told Perry to remove the remains stored in the cooler because there wasn't enough room, and the remains were taken back to the funeral home.

On Oct. 19, Detroit police and LARA raided Perry and removed 63 fetuses, 36 of which were stored in an unrefrigerated box. Following the raid, LARA shut down Perry and suspended the mortuary science licenses of the funeral home and its director, Gary Deak.

In December, LARA moved to permanently revoke Cantrell's license, after state officials said they found "numerous acts of fraud, deceit, dishonesty, incompetence and gross negligence."

The alleged violations included reusing caskets, and knowingly making false statements on death certificates.

Knollwood Park Cemetery in Canton Township is also part of the investigation, which is being handled by a multi-jurisdictional task force involving Detroit police, Michigan State Police, the FBI, LARA and the Michigan Attorney General's Office.

In December, LARA officials halted all new activity at the cemetery, after inspectors found more than 300 improperly-stored infant and fetal remains in multiple crypts.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: What A Clever Girl - Anastasia Vashukevich Hustles Her Way Out Of A Thai Prison - The Porn Is Coming

What a clever girl!

She used the old John Mark Karr - JonBenet Ramsey, Thailand Switch-O-Change-O-Get-Out-Of-Jail Card.

Perhaps, Oleg would like to tell us about how she ended up in such a profession, for historic purposes of due process, only, of course.

The porn is coming.

I suggest a nice Russian vodka as a choice of cocktail.

This is going to get really nasty, for many people.

MODEL ADMITS SHE MADE UP RUSSIAN COLLUSION STORY ABOUT TRUMP TO GET OUT OF JAIL

Anastasia Vashukevich is a clever girl!

A Belarusian model who originally said she had secret recordings that tied President Donald Trump to Russian tycoon Oleg Deripaska and showed collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign now says she lied.

Anastasia Vashukevich, who goes by the alias Nastya Rybka on the internet, told CNN in a report published Tuesday that she made up the whole story as a means of getting out of a Thai prison last year.

Vashukevich was doing hard time in Thailand for offering her sex coach talents to the locals.

Arrested and convicted for solicitation, she was sent to prison. Allegedly fearing for life behind bars, she decided to attract some international media attention with her story of having information that would link Trump to the Russian oligarchy.

(RELATED: Report: FBI Agents Interviewed Russian Oligarch About Collusion Prior To Election)

She asked for political asylum in the U.S. to tell her story. She eventually received deportation back to Russia.

It appears the whole ordeal was about publicity.

“I think it saved my life, how can I regret it? If journalists had not come at that time and that story had not come to the newspapers, maybe I would die [be dead by] now,” she told CNN.

The model and reportedly high-priced escort says she has been counseled by Russian security to say no more about her alleged affair with Deripaska.

“They explained to me very clear[ly] what should I do, what should I say and what I shouldn’t say,” she said. “They said to me, ‘Don’t touch Oleg Deripaska anymore.'”

Deripaska is closely linked with Russian President Vladimir Putin and has had business dealings with Paul Manafort, who ran Trump’s presidential campaign. Manafort plea bargained with special counsel Robert Mueller for the investigation into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. He had been charged with illegal lobbying on behalf of Ukraine.

(RELATED: Manafort, WikiLeaks Deny Bombshell Report Of Assange Meeting)

Deripaska has never acknowledged any relationship with Vashukevich. He has been linked with Christopher Steele, the author of the salacious Trump dossier that purported to describe Trump’s sexual peccadilloes while in Russia.

Vashukevich’s checkered past also includes a nude protest in front of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, when she and another internet model took off their clothes in support of disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. The two stated at the time: “We came here to support the producer who offered women sex. Sex is right, sex is cool!”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Carmack Fires Attorney, Gets New Attorneys & Raises The Attorney Client Privilege Possibilities

"The popcorn is popping."

On this exciting episode of Cocktails & Popcorn, we have Bob "wired up" Carmack, firing his attorneys in the criminal case that Mike Duggan & friends have put together over a criminal case of a land sale...featuring the Detroit Land Bank Authority.

But this is not the focus of this particular nugget of historic, legal enjoyment.

Neil Rockind, has a long and illustrious history in Detroit community charities, as does Steve Hanley, another prominent Detroit litigator, who is also very active in Hamtramck matters of interest.

Attorney Mark Korio sent out the following press release, January 3, 2019:

A massive federal civil rights and discrimination lawsuit has been filed by Ray Ahmed Fayad, a Lebanese-American businessman, over the seizure of 90 vehicles by the multijurisdictional COBRA auto theft unit in January 2016. It has been assigned U.S. District Court Case No. 2:18-cv-13982 in the Eastern District of Michigan. The City of Ecorse, Hamtramck, Highland Park and Investigators Stout and McMahon are among about a dozen defendants - including some police chiefs . It is assigned to Judge Terrence Berg and noted Brooklyn human rights activist and civil rights lawyer Huwaida Arraf is Plaintiff's counsel. It was filed on 12/20/18 and served on 12/27/18.
Also, in an unrelated development, following a closed session of Hamtramck City Council at the last council meeting held in December of 2018, a Muslim councilman and a non-Muslim councilperson reportedly had an altercation at City Hall resulting in police reports being made. It is expected a local Hamtramck paper may run a story on the incident to be published Friday and there is speculation as to whether attempts may be made to censure any culpable party or parties via City Council action. 3, 2019.

I just thought it wise to include the amended complaint, below, since it seems, there exists what I love to call the spurious relationship when it comes to the network of "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending).

So, the police bust a man, in possession of vehicles, that may be stolen, but says that they are his because his name is on the title, the exact same legal argument of the Detroit Land Bank Authority.

Instead of using preparing for a legal defense, you can always start a "Colored" Revolution and file an Elliot Larson case, screaming discrimination, or something like that.

Wasel v. Hamtramck Amended ... by on Scribd

I wonder if Neil and Steve are going to be active participants in that pesky "attorney-client privilege" thing floating around the inner sanctum of the legal community.

Carmack fires attorneys in criminal case over land sale

Neil Rockind, Board of Directors for the
 Friends of the Israeli Defense Force – Michigan Chapter

Detroit businessman Robert Carmack fired the two attorneys representing him in a real estate fraud case Monday and asked for a delay in the preliminary examination.

During a hearing in 36th District Court, Carmack told Judge Deborah Lewis Langston he felt he would be in "better hands" with his two new lawyers, Neil Rockind and Steve Haney, than with the attorneys he dismissed, Mike Rataj and Paul Stablein.

Rataj told the judge there had been a "breakdown" in communications with Carmack and said after the brief hearing there were no hard feelings toward Carmack.

"We wish him only the best," said Rataj. "Sometimes there's just a breakdown in the relationship ... people are not on the same page. It doesn't change our opinion of Mr. Carmack. We still believe in his innocence."

Carmack said his defense will hinge on 14 years worth of records and testimony from 30 witnesses. His new court date is Feb. 11.

Steve Haney, Detroit litigator very
familiar with other high profile casesin Hamtramck.

Carmack, 59, of Woodhaven, is accused of stealing a million-dollar parcel of property from the city. He was charged last month with one count of false pretenses with intent to defraud $100,000 or more, and three counts of uttering and publishing a document affecting real property tied to a decade-old land deal.

The false pretenses charge carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison, according to state statute. Uttering and publishing carries a penalty of up to 14 years.

The case centers around the purchase of property on Melville Street on Detroit's southwest side. The city maintains that Carmack, who sold the property for $1 million, did not legally own the site.

Carmack been locked in a legal battle with Detroit and a public feud with Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan.

Carmack made headlines in November after airing private investigator footage of the mayor's comings and goings on a billboard truck outside City Hall. The footage, obtained by a private investigator hired by Carmack, showed the mayor visiting a condominium in Novi and separately showed a woman arriving there on other occasions.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CORBETT REPORT: The 2nd Annual REAL Fake News Awards - 2019

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Paul Ryan Beared False Witness To Trump In The Pilfering Of The U.S. Treasury

Is this a situation where the Speaker of the House beared false witness to a sitting POTUS?

The U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives falsely advised in the manipulation in the signing of law.

Paul Ryan lied into the public record in the pilfering of the U.S. Treasury by breaching the trust in the right to bear the armoralities of the U.S. Speaker of the House.

I bet people have been severely effected, and even died because of lies.

That is treason, right, Nancy?

EXCLUSIVE: TRUMP SAYS PAUL RYAN RENEGED ON DEAL TO FUND WALL FOR OMNIBUS SIGNATURE

President Donald Trump says former House Speaker Paul Ryan promised to secure wall funding while Republicans controlled both Houses in exchange for the president’s signature on the 2018 omnibus spending bill.

But after the president signed the massive, $1.3 trillion spending package, Ryan reneged on his commitment.

“Well, I was going to veto the omnibus bill and Paul told me in the strongest of language, ‘Please don’t do that, we’ll get you the wall.’ And I said, ‘I hope you mean that, because I don’t like this bill,’” the president recounted in an exclusive Wednesday interview with The Daily Caller.

“Paul told me in the strongest of terms that, ‘please sign this and if you sign this we will get you that wall.’ Which is desperately needed by our country. Humanitarian crisis, trafficking, drugs, you know, everything — people, criminals, gangs, so, you know, we need the wall.”

“And then he went lame duck,” Trump said.

“And once he went lame duck, it was just really an exercise in waving to people and the power was gone so I was very disappointed. I was very disappointed in Paul because the wall was so desperately needed. And I’ll get the wall.”

—

TRANSCRIPT:

THE DAILY CALLER: Well, the people who elected you are very interested in the immigration decision and what’s going on with this negotiation. Republicans in charge of Congress for two years didn’t get to your wall promise in Congress. How big of a roadblock to wall funding was Paul Ryan, now that he’s gone?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Well, I was going to veto the omnibus bill and Paul told me in the strongest of language, ‘Please don’t do that, we’ll get you the wall.’ And I said, ‘I hope you mean that, because I don’t like this bill,’ although I love the bill for what it did for the military. And therefore, if it weren’t for the military, I would have vetoed it.

Just so you understand, our military needed funding desperately. Totally depleted. And this bill was great for the military. Had I vetoed it, you would never have gotten the numbers back that I got. 700 and 716 billion dollars over the past two years. Which is substantially more — much more than President Obama was able to get for the military.

So that was a negative, but a big factor as to why that was the reason I signed it. But another very big factor was the fact that Paul told me in the strongest of terms that, ‘please sign this and if you sign this we will get you that wall.’ Which is desperately needed by our country. Humanitarian crisis, trafficking, drugs, you know, everything — people, criminals, gangs, so, you know, we need the wall.

And then he went lame duck. And once he went lame duck it was just really an exercise in waving to people and the power was gone so I was very disappointed. I was very disappointed in Paul because the wall was so desperately needed. And I’ll get the wall.

THE DAILY CALLER: Did he lie to you? Did he play you?

TRUMP: I don’t want to say he lied. I think he probably meant it at the time, I guess. I hope. So I don’t call that lying. But when he went lame duck, meaning, he said he’s not running again — and it was very unusual because usually they’ll do that sometime after an election and he didn’t want to do that because it’s somewhat misrepresenting and I understand that too. But maybe you don’t run, okay? Maybe you just don’t run. And he had an excellent person taking his place in Congress, he ran a really great campaign, did a really good job.

So Paul said, please sign the omnibus bill. Now, in all fairness to Paul, I may have signed it anyway because it was so much more money than anyone ever thought possible for the military and equal to the wall, and maybe even greater than the wall was my promise to refurbish the military.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Roger Stone Trolls On How To Dress For Court

Yes, we are watching the art of law.

Roger is definitely an Old School Civil Rights Legal Playa because he most certainly is always dapper.

Someone needs to do a "how to" for the gals.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Hey SIGTARP! Detroit Land Bank Authority Is Going To Let Michigan Lt. Governor Gilbert Gilchrist Sell Evidence & Wipe Claims

"GG, the tech guru" who has been silent on the Detroit
Land Bank Authority and 2016 & 2018 Election Interference

Uh, what happened to the blind trusts when addressing emoluments, or rather personal inurement of elected office?

This is a blatant breach of the public trust and someone needs to stand up, to bear witness, and testify, that we are dealing with "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending).

I am just clutching my pearls to see how the Detroit Land Bank Authority is going to approve the deal, and present its legal ability to "wipe out" any claims, which would be public claims if it was part of the City of Detroit when the original transfer was executed, like how did they even get the property in the first place.

As a matter of fact, I think the public deserves to see copy of that Detroit Land Bank Authority agreement with "GG, the tech guru".

I just want to see if the Detroit Land Bank Authority gave equal treatment by comparing the language of the agreement, you know, with an executed contract with "The Poors", you know, a concurrent language thing.

As a matter of fact, how did "GG the tech guru" pay for the acquisition?

If it was with a check, to whom was the check issued, which bank, were there any financial instruments created to secure funding, and if so, was it foreign funding, or a campaign "gratutity" (I would never accuse him of taking any form of personal enjoyment from a Ham Sandwich that never incorporated.)

This information is of the greatest interest as some have alleged false voter registrations, fraudulent abentee ballots, and fake votes being registered at vacant Detroit Land Bank Authority addresses, but may have exchanged silence to become Lieutenant Governor.

If these allegations have been found to be....how shall I say this....validated...well, that would mean the 2016, oops, I mean, 2018 election would be considered for nullification under the extraordinary writs, but hey, what do I know?

I know there are grand juries mulling over the same aforementioned queries.

I also know there is a federal Election Integrity conjugal collaborative going on.

Here is all you ever wanted to know about "GG, the tech guru".

I wonder what Dana Nessel is doing right about now....

Oh, wait! SIGTARP is busy, busy, busy sending out more subpoenas.

Gilchrist selling troubled Detroit apartment building

Detroit – Don’t look for Michigan’s new lieutenant governor on a home makeover show.

Garlin Gilchrist II is getting rid of a fire-damaged Detroit apartment building after spending $225,000 to try to revive it. He got the building from the Detroit Land Bank Authority for just $13,500.

The building became an issue in the fall campaign when neighbors complained about the eyesore, two years after Gilchrist acquired it. He said at the time that he’d made progress and was trying to get loans.

Records obtained by The Associated Press show Gilchrist is selling the vacant building for $190,000. The Land Bank needs to approve the deal.

Land Bank spokeswoman Alyssa Strickland says Gilchrist won’t owe anything to the agency because he’s selling the property for less than what he put into it.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Are Roger Stone & Trey Gowdy Old School Civil Rights Legal Dogs?

Is Roger Stone an Old School Civil Rights Legal Dog?

No one possesses the legal acumen to report from the front lines of the #cyberwars because he is absolutely perfect to do the "Colored" Commentary.

Roger has been around, for a hot minute in history, going all the way back to Watergate.

Yes, Watergate is back open, and all its ancillary assassinations, even in character.

Roger is not stupid.

He continues to introduce the legal term "to bear false witness", which is ethics, the basis of the extraordinary writs, into the public discourse.

Roger knows we are ushering in the Quantum Renaissance and is joining the rank and file of those who are willing to fall on their swords.

Pay attention to how he talks about not being able to afford justice, going broke, being shunned from society without due process.

Sound familiar?

So, I am going to go out there and claim Roger Stone as an Old School Civil Rights Legal Dog, because he has a few stories to tell.

Is Trey Gowdy an Old School Civil Rights Legal Dog?

Do I really need to even answer this?

Do not be mean to my Trey.  He knows stuff.

Appreciative to Fox News for the chance to weigh in on legal/political issues. Sure to be a lot of both in 2019. Practicing law with Nelson Mullins, contributing where appropriate with Fox, and living in South Carolina. Looking forward to a great year.

— Trey Gowdy (@TGowdySC) January 30, 2019

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: OIG FBI Findings On Why Perkins Coie Sucks - Investigative Summary

Just one more reason why Perkins Coie Sucks.

#perkinscoiesucks

DOJ OIG Findings of Miscond... by on Scribd

Again, the moral of the story is, "Do not be mean to my Sweetie. Period."

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Detroit DHS LARP Busts First Layer Of Major Modern Day Human Trafficking Ops Through Michigan Universities

Dilly, Dilly, Detroit DHS!

Yes, the Detroit U.S. Department of Homeland Security, ICE, set up a Live Action Role Play (LARP) to demonstrate, in other jurisdictions, that it is quite plausible that universities run fake immigration operations, bringing in people from other countries, by issuing fake ass degrees, doing fake research, to cash fake checks, because these fake Corporate Shape Shifters, never incorporated, like the Clinton Foundation, et al having to cash checks through Michigan State University.

Now, how come this legal defense PR marketing video was put out in less than an hour after the arrests broke?

I am going with LARP!

Yes, ICE has other universities on its INA radar, and those places like to trafficking tiny humans, too.

I strongly encourage anyone who is caught up in a similar confusion, to watch this video as they explain the Student VISA of the U.S. State Department and how much time you have to exit the country, by February 4, 2019, or correct your immigration status.

https://www.rnlawgroup.com/

This is what I like to call, a transposable model because the exact same fraud scams are all over the social media, even promulgating propaganda, under some fake ass authority.

I bet these captured student scouts will be extremely helpful as DOJ proceeds with its other LARPs.

Feds used fake Michigan university to find undocumented immigrants

Federal agents used a fake university in Farmington Hills to lure undocumented immigrants who were trying to stay in the United States illegally.

The University of Farmington had no staff, no instructors, no curriculum and no classes but was utilized by undercover Homeland Security agents to identify people involved in immigration fraud, according to federal grand jury indictments unsealed Wednesday.

Eight people were charged with participating in a conspiracy to help at least 600 foreign citizens stay in the U.S. illegally, according to the indictments, which describe an innovative investigation that dates to 2015 but intensified one month into President Donald Trump's tenure as part of a broader crackdown on illegal immigration.

Those charged include:

• Bharath Kakireddy, 29, of Lake Mary, Florida.
• Aswanth Nune, 26, of Atlanta
• Suresh Reddy Kandala, 31, of Culpeper, Virginia.
• Phanideep Karnati, 35, of Louisville, Kentucky.
• Prem Kumar Rampeesa, 26, of Charlotte, North Carolina.
• Santosh Reddy Sama, 28, of Fremont, California.
• Avinash Thakkallapally, 28, of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
• Naveen Prathipati, 29, of Dallas.

Starting in 2015, the university was part of an undercover operation designed to identify recruiters and entities engaged in immigration fraud, according to the indictment. Homeland Security agents started posing as university officials in February 2017.

Immigration crimes outlined in the indictment date to February 2017 and continued until this month and involved Homeland Security agents posing as owners and employees of the university. The university had a professional website and a physical location at a commercial building on Northwestern Highway.

The University of Farmington's headquarters was in this office building on Northwestern Highway north of Inkster Road in Farmington Hills. (Photo: Google Maps)

"... the university was being used by foreign citizens as a 'pay to stay' scheme which allowed these individuals to stay in the United States as a result of of foreign citizens falsely asserting that they were enrolled as full-time students in an approved educational program and that they were making normal progress toward completion of the course of study," the indictment reads.

The students knew that the university's program was illegal, according to the indictment.

Those charged included recruiters who received cash and kickbacks to find students to attend the university, the government alleges.

Come back for more on this developing story.

The Immigration and Nation... by on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Bundy Ranch Peter Santilli Files DC Attorney Grievance Against Judicial Watch Larry Klayman For Fraud

Peter Santilli files an attorney grievance on Larry Klayman, Judiciary Watch, a foreign corporation, for fraud.

I filed FCPA.

Cocktails & Popcorn: Judicial Watch, Clinton Foundation, Mark Meadows & John Huber - A Non-Profit Oversight Christmas Tale

Judicial Watch & Center For Security Policy Are Foreign Corporations Not Found In DOJ FARA Database

Basically, Larry was hired to sue for what happened with the Bundy Ranch situation.

Larry raised legal defense money and kept it for himself.

Instead, Larry kept the money and Peter stayed in jail.

Charges Dismissed Against Refuge Occupier Pete Santilli

DC Bar Complaint Against At... by on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Fraud On The Taxpayer - Deputy Associate Attorney General Stephen Cox Delivers Remarks at the 2019 Advanced Forum on False Claims and Qui Tam Enforcement

New York, NY

 ~

Monday, January 28, 2019

Thank you for that introduction, and thank you to the American Conference Institute and all of its sponsors for hosting me here today. 

I serve in the Office of the Associate Attorney General at the Department of Justice.  Our office oversees five litigating divisions, including the Civil Division, and I spend most of my time working with the Consumer Protection Branch and the Commercial Litigation Branch on enforcement.  Relevant to this audience, I’ve had the privilege of working closely with the Civil Fraud Section within the Commercial Litigation Branch that is responsible for investigating and litigating violations of the False Claims Act. 

The new Administration is two years old this month.  My plan today is to offer some thoughts about this Administration’s commitment to enforcing the False Claims Act and then describe some of the Department’s enforcement principles, policies, and perspectives that guide us.

Fraud on the Taxpayer
(I prefer to just call it stealin')

Let me begin by describing the Department’s commitment to fighting fraud on the taxpayer—and specifically our duty to responsibly enforce the False Claims Act to recover loss to the taxpayer and deter misconduct. 

The Act was passed during the Civil War to fight fraud on the Union Army, and it is sometimes called “Lincoln’s Law.”  As Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt recently noted, there were crooked contractors defrauding the Union Army by selling sick mules, lame horses, sawdust instead of gunpowder, and rotted ships with fresh paint.  Lincoln’s Law was an answer to those problems one hundred and fifty years ago.

The Act fell into relative disuse over the years, but was revitalized in 1986 through amendments spearheaded by Senator Grassley.  For example, the 1986 amendments increased the incentives for whistleblowers to file lawsuits alleging false claims on behalf of the government.  Since the 1986 amendments, the False Claims Act has returned over $59 billion to the U.S. Treasury—over $42 billion of which came through qui tam actions filed by whistleblowers.

Today, we use the False Claims Act to fight not only contracting fraud, but also healthcare fraud, grant fraud, financial fraud, and many other types of fraud. 

Enforcing the False Claims Act is a top priority for the Department—not just for our office. 

Last month, we announced that the Department recovered approximately $2.8 billion this past fiscal year.  $2.5 billion involved the health care industry, including drug and medical device manufacturers, managed care providers, hospitals, pharmacies, hospice organizations, laboratories, and physicians.  This is the ninth consecutive year that the Department’s civil health care fraud settlements and judgments have exceeded $2 billion.

This year we settled a number of large and important cases.  We settled a case with Amerisource Bergen for $645 million involving improper repackaging and distribution of cancer drugs.  The Department’s position was that the company circumvented important safeguards designed to preserve the integrity of the nation’s drug supply.

We also settled a case with United Therapeutics Corporation for $210 million.  This case involved the use of a foundation as an illegal conduit to pay the co-pays of thousands of Medicare patients taking the company’s drugs.  We settled a similar case with Pfizer for $23.85 million to settle allegations that it was also improperly using a foundation to pay Medicare patient co-pays.  Co-pay requirements can serve as an important check on healthcare costs, including the cost of drugs, but these cases show how drug manufacturers can make an end-run around these requirements to facilitate increases in drug prices.

We settled a case with Toyobo for $66 million in a case involving the sale of defective Zylon fiber used in bullet proof vests that the United States purchased for federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies.  Defective Zylon can render bullet proof vests unfit for use and put our men and women in blue at unnecessary risk.

Another important case was the Deloitte & Touche settlement for $149.5 million.  Deloitte served as independent outside auditor for an originator engaged in a long-running mortgage fraud scheme involving loans insured by the Federal Housing Authority.  The allegations against Deloitte were that they knowing deviated from auditing standards and therefore failed to detect the fraud.

It is also worth highlighting cases where we pursued individuals because individual accountability remains a top priority for the Department.  The Department obtained $114 million in judgments against three individuals found to have paid kickbacks to doctors disguised as “handling fees” resulting in medically unnecessary tests that were billed to Medicare.

We also settled our case against Lance Armstrong for $5 million.  The allegations in that case were that his cycling team used performance enhancing drugs while making numerous false statements denying it and concealing the drug use during the U.S. Postal Service’s sponsorship of the team for the Tour de France.

I could tell you about many more cases, and you might hear about more throughout this conference.  But the point is that we just finished another big year demonstrating our commitment to False Claims Act enforcement.

Before I turn to certain principles we apply and reforms that we have brought about, I want to note that our work in the False Claims Act space not only protects the taxpayer, but it serves other important goals.  The taxpayer is not the only victim of fraud on the government.

When a company falsely certifies the quality of military equipment, it sends our brave men and women into harm’s way with less protection.  When medical providers submit false claims to Medicare, they often fail to provide adequate medical care to their patients.  Kick-back schemes not only defraud the government, they also drive up consumer costs, undermine competition, and may distort independent medical decision-making.   

By effectively enforcing the False Claims Act, we protect the taxpayer, we deter bad actors, we protect victims, and we level the playing field in the markets.

Now let me turn to some of the principles that guide the Department in False Claims Act enforcement.

Qui Tam Dismissals

Let me first start with an internal memo that has become known as the Granston Memo.  Last January, the Director of our Civil Fraud Section issued internal guidelines for our litigators in determining when it is appropriate in a qui tam case to exercise our dismissal authority under the False Claims Act. 

As I mentioned earlier, the success of the False Claims Act is due in large part to the qui tam provisions and the partnership between the federal government and whistleblowers.  Of the recoveries last year, more than $2 billion was recovered in qui tam cases.  

One of the reasons for this partnership is that whistleblowers are often uniquely situated to bring fraudulent practices to light—particularly in suits filed by corporate insiders, who have frequently disclosed complex corporate wrongdoing that the government would have been hard-pressed to understand and unearth without their assistance.  

Qui tam filings have been on the rise for many years.  The Department intervenes in only about 1 in 5 cases that are filed.  But even the other 4 in 5 cases consume Department time and resources – not only in investigating them initially, but also in terms of monitoring and participating in any ensuing litigation if the relator elects to proceed.

When relators litigate cases in which the Department declines to intervene, the relators essentially stand in the shoes of the Attorney General.  Because relators may not always have the same interests as the United States, we take very seriously our responsibility to monitor False Claims Act cases when we decline to intervene.  Indeed, the Department serves an important role as a gatekeeper. 

The Granston Memo is about our gatekeeping role.  Part of the reasoning behind the memo is that when qui tam cases are non-meritorious, abusive, or contrary to the interests of justice, they impose unnecessary costs on the Department, on the judiciary, and on the defendants.  Bad cases that result in bad case law inhibit our ability to enforce the False Claims Act in good and meritorious cases.  And from a resource perspective, when the Department’s resources are consumed for other things, we have less time to fulfill our priorities.  This is why we have instructed our lawyers to consider dismissing qui tamcases when they are not in our best interests.  This authority is an important tool to protect the integrity of the False Claims Act and the interests of the United States.

U.S. Attorney Sessions Proh... by on Scribd

The Granston Memo is not really a change in the Department’s historical position.  In fact, it reflects the factors that the Department has historically considered in deciding to dismiss a case.  But we did think it was important that all of our False Claims Act litigators had the benefit of understanding the Department’s practice so that the authority could be used more consistently.

It is true that this authority has been used sparingly.  In the past, in a given year, the Department might have dismissed a few cases—if it dismissed any at all—but since 2017, the Department has moved to dismiss about two dozen cases.  Our exercise of this authority will remain judicious, but we will use this tool more consistently to preserve our resources for cases that are in the United States’ interests.

Subregulatory Guidance

Second, I’ll address the Department’s reforms concerning the issue of rulemaking by guidance.  As you know, when an agency has statutory authority to issue regulations, it normally goes through the notice-and-comment process of rulemaking, which can be cumbersome and slow.  Sometimes agencies have instead taken a shortcut by issuing “guidance” in lieu of regulations, knowing that it will achieve a similar effect of changing behavior.

To be fair, subregulatory guidance documents can be helpful in educating the public about statutes, regulations, and legal developments.  But it is improper to try to use guidance to bind the public by imposing legal obligations beyond those already enshrined in existing statutes or properly promulgated regulatory provisions.  Put simply, agency guidance should educate, not regulate.  

Leaked Confidential DOJ Mem... by on Scribd

That is why, in November 2017, former Attorney General Sessions announced that the Department will no longer issue any kind of binding sub-regulatory guidance.  In other words, the Department will no longer issue guidance documents that effectively bind the public without undergoing the notice-and-comment rulemaking process.

We hoped to serve as an example for other agencies to follow, and shortly after the policy was announced, then-Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley, sent a letter to the President praising the Attorney General’s policy and suggesting that other agencies follow its commonsense principles.

SENATE JUDICIARY: Confirmation Hearing Of Bill Barr - Honoring Grassley & His Legacy On Medicaid Fraud In Child Welfare - The False Claims Act - My Color Commentary

Last January, in the affirmative civil litigation context (which includes the False Claims Act), then-Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand instructed Department attorneys not to use our affirmative civil enforcement authority to convert other agencies’ sub-regulatory guidance into rules that have the force or effect of law.  In other words, noncompliance with a nonbinding guidance document cannot be used to establish a violation of law.  This policy has been called the “Brand Memo.”  Its principles have been codified in the Justice Manual, and they apply not only in False Claims Act and civil enforcement cases, but also in criminal actions now.

Let me make a few points about how these principles might apply in False Claims Act cases.  As we have noted before, there are, of course, circumstances where it may be appropriate to rely on agency guidance, including to show the defendant’s awareness of an agency’s interpretation of a particular requirement or the agency’s views on the materiality of that requirement.  This is not to say that the guidance will carry the day—just because a company knows an agency’s nonbinding interpretation of the law does not mean it’s correct or that the company’s interpretation is unreasonable.

Some guidance documents may be relevant to professional standards that are incorporated into statutes.  For example, there are statutory and regulatory requirements that procedures billed to Medicare and Medicaid be medically “reasonable and necessary,” and there may be guidance documents discussing an agency’s non-binding views on what is medically reasonable and necessary.  The guidance document might be probative, even if it isn’t binding.  Of course, we must be careful not to run afoul of first principles.  Agency guidance cannot be dispositive on what a statute or regulation means—it is not a thumb on the scale—and it cannot create binding requirements.  But just like other statements of medical standards—such as professional standards from the medical industry or expert testimony—the guidance may have some probative value.  It’s not necessarily more probative than guidance from the industry, but it can have probative weight.

A particular guidance document may also be relevant if it is expressly incorporated into a contract or a certification.  For example, if a party and the government agree in a contract that compliance with some specified guidance document is required, the guidance document will be contractually binding on the party and noncompliance will be relevant under principles of contract law. 

Of course, all of these examples need to line up with the general principle that we’re not going to use “violations” of nonbinding guidance documents to establish a violation of law.  Guidance is not law.  It’s not binding.  And it shouldn’t be given the force or effect of law.

As I mentioned earlier, we hope that the Department’s policies on subregulatory guidance have been informative to other agencies, and we see evidence of that.  Last September, six of the banking regulators followed the Department’s lead and announced limits on the issuance and enforcement of sub-regulatory guidance.  In December, with similar principles in mind, the Department of Transportation issued an important memo clarifying and updating its procedures for guidance documents.   We hope other agencies follow suit.  These policies keep government restrained and promote the rule of law, fair notice, and due process. 

Piling On

Third, let me turn to a Department policy discouraging what we think of as “piling on.”  This policy was announced by the Deputy Attorney General last summer, and it applies across the board, including in False Claims Act cases. 

As you know, often the same conduct can violate multiple statutes.

When multiple law enforcement and regulatory agencies pursue a single entity for the same or substantially similar conduct, and then impose unwarranted and disproportionate penalties for that conduct, this is what we mean by “piling on.”  This can be seen as inconsistent with the concepts of fair play and the need for certainty and finality.

To avoid piling on, we are promoting coordination within the Department and with other agencies to apportion penalties and fines where appropriate. Under the same policy, we are also reminding our attorneys not to use our criminal enforcement authority for purposes unrelated to the investigation and prosecution of a possible crime. For example, we are not going to invoke the threat of criminal prosecution just to persuade a company to pay a larger settlement in a False Claims Act case or any other civil case.

That is why we have this thing called referrals to other law enforcement divisions outside DOJ, like SIGTARP and FinCEN.  Or, there is that special circumstances provision of the Act which allows the Attorney General to intervene if there are other ongoing investigations, not that I know anything, but just saying, considering the Detroit Land Bank Authority just got a bunch of new subpoenas sent to its contractors, that ended up going to its former attorney Rebecca Camargo, who just so happens to be the attorney for the contractors.

The most prominent example of this policy in action was a $680 million Foreign Corrupt Practices Act settlement in June with Société Générale, a global financial services institution based in Paris, for FCPA violations in Libya and for LIBOR manipulation.  This was handled by the Department’s Criminal Division, which is not supervised by our office, but the Department’s press release made clear that it credited $292 million that the firm paid to the French Authorities, an amount equal to 50% of the total criminal penalty otherwise payable to the United States.

But let me give you one example in the False Claims Act context:   In November, the Department announced a global resolution with three South Korea-based fuel companies for their involvement in a decade-long bid-rigging conspiracy that targeted contracts to supply fuel to U.S. military bases in South Korea.  This was a global resolution of criminal Sherman Act violations, civil claims under the Clayton Act, and civil claims under the False Claims Act.  I can tell you that the Antitrust Division’s criminal and civil sections and the Civil Division’s Fraud Section worked together effectively with the policy in mind so that they could reach coordinated global settlements that were equitable and proportionate to the defendants’ conduct, and they were careful not to impose fines, penalties, or damages that are unnecessarily duplicative of each other.

Cooperation Credit

Finally, let me turn to the issue of cooperation and policy initiatives of relevance to the False Claims Act. 

As the Deputy Attorney General has made clear in other contexts, and as senior officials from our office and the Civil Fraud Section have echoed in the False Claims Act context, the Department is committed to rewarding companies that invest in strong compliance programs and who cooperate with our investigations into wrongdoing. 

In November of 2017, the Department announced a corporate enforcement policy that takes voluntary disclosure, cooperation, and compliance into account in criminal cases.   This policy was, in a sense, a culmination of the FCPA Pilot that was announced in early 2016, but the corporate enforcement policy has been applied in criminal cases outside the FCPA space. 

In November of 2018, the Deputy Attorney General announced changes to Department’s policies on awarding cooperation credit based on, for example, whether a company identifies the individual wrongdoers.  Much ink has been spilled about the changes, and I won’t go into each and every one of them.  But for this audience I would like to focus on one change in particular relating to civil cases.

There is no longer an “all or nothing” approach to awarding credit for cooperation in civil cases.  You don’t have to boil the ocean in an effort to identify every employee who played any role in the conduct in order to receive any credit for cooperating.  If a corporation wants to earn maximum credit, it must identify every individual person who was substantially involved in or responsible for the misconduct. But when a company honestly does meaningfully assist the government’s investigation, our civil attorneys now have discretion to offer some credit even if the company does not qualify for maximum credit.

In announcing these changes, the Deputy Attorney General gave a False Claims Act example:  “A company might make a voluntary disclosure and provide valuable assistance that justifies some credit even if the company is either unwilling to stipulate about which non-managerial employees are culpable, or eager to resolve the case without conducting a costly investigation to identify every individual who might face civil liability in theory, but in reality would not be sued personally.”

In short, the policy changes return discretion to our civil lawyers to resolve each case consistent with relevant facts and circumstances.

That is if there is intervention.

Last June, then-Acting Associate Attorney General Jesse Panuccio made clear that False Claims Act investigations are no exception to the Department’s policy of incentivizing cooperation.  Corporate defendants can receive a more favorable resolution for cooperating with our False Claims Act investigations – from voluntary disclosure, which is the most valuable form of cooperation, to other efforts such as sharing information gleaned from an internal investigation and making witnesses available.    He also made clear that we will reward companies that invest in strong compliance measures.

As you know, strong compliance programs are good for business and fair competition, they raise awareness of legal obligations, they mitigate risk of legal jeopardy, and they promote reporting up.  When there’s been a case of overbilling Medicare or Medicaid, for example, we want you to know that having an effective and robust compliance program in place is something we will consider at the outset in determining whether it was a mistake or an anomaly or whether there was a knowing violation.  And that in turn will inform whether a False Claims Act case is merited, or whether pursuing another remedy is appropriate to make the government whole.   

We also want you to know that, if there’s a problem, the Department welcomes and will reward companies that make voluntary disclosures and provide meaningful, candid assistance in False Claims Act investigations.

The Department has significant discretion under the False Claims Act to resolve cases in a way that provides a material discount based on cooperation while still making the government whole.  Stay tuned on this front.

Oh, I shall be watching.

*        *        *

It is a privilege working at the Department of Justice on False Claims Act enforcement, and you should know that our lawyers are committed to exercising the Department’s enforcement discretion consistent with the rule of law. 

I hope that my remarks today have given you a better understanding of how we do our work, so that you can feel more confident that you know the rules of the road and the priorities of the Justice Department.

Thank you.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©