FBI: Seeking Information on Individuals Inciting Violence During First Amendment-Protected Peaceful Demonstrations

If you know of an alleged crime and do nothing about it, you are part of the problem and probably a co-conspirator.

The FBI respects the rights of individuals to peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights. Our mission of protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution is dual and simultaneous, not contradictory.

Accordingly, we are committed to apprehending and charging violent instigators who are exploiting legitimate, peaceful protests and engaging in violations of federal law. The continued violence, potential threat to life, and destruction of property across the United States interferes with the rights and safety of First Amendment-protected peaceful demonstrators, as well as all other citizens.

To help us identify actors who are actively instigating violence in the wake of Mr. George Floyd’s death, the FBI is accepting tips and digital media depicting violent encounters surrounding the civil unrest that is happening throughout the country.

If you witness or have witnessed unlawful violent actions, we urge you to submit any information, photos, or videos that could be relevant to the case at fbi.gov/violence.

You may also call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) to verbally report tips and/or information related to this investigation.Seeking Information on Individuals Inciting Violence During First Amendment-Protected Peaceful Demonstrations
The FBI respects the rights of individuals to peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights. Our mission of protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution is dual and simultaneous, not contradictory.

Accordingly, we are committed to apprehending and charging violent instigators who are exploiting legitimate, peaceful protests and engaging in violations of federal law. The continued violence, potential threat to life, and destruction of property across the United States interferes with the rights and safety of First Amendment-protected peaceful demonstrators, as well as all other citizens.

To help us identify actors who are actively instigating violence in the wake of Mr. George Floyd’s death, the FBI is accepting tips and digital media depicting violent encounters surrounding the civil unrest that is happening throughout the country.

If you witness or have witnessed unlawful violent actions, we urge you to submit any information, photos, or videos that could be relevant to the case at fbi.gov/violence.

You may also call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) to verbally report tips and/or information related to this investigation.

18 U.S. Code § 2101.Riots

(a)Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent—
(1)to incite a riot; or
(2)to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or
(3)to commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or
(4)to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot;
and who either during the course of any such travel or use or thereafter performs or attempts to perform any other overt act for any purpose specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this paragraph— [1]
Shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(b)In any prosecution under this section, proof that a defendant engaged or attempted to engage in one or more of the overt acts described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) [2] and (1) has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce, or (2) has use of or used any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including but not limited to, mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, to communicate with or broadcast to any person or group of persons prior to such overt acts, such travel or use shall be admissible proof to establish that such defendant traveled in or used such facility of interstate or foreign commerce.
(c)A judgment of conviction or acquittal on the merits under the laws of any State shall be a bar to any prosecution hereunder for the same act or acts.
(d)Whenever, in the opinion of the Attorney General or of the appropriate officer of the Department of Justice charged by law or under the instructions of the Attorney General with authority to act, any person shall have violated this chapter, the Department shall proceed as speedily as possible with a prosecution of such person hereunder and with any appeal which may lie from any decision adverse to the Government resulting from such prosecution.
(e)Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to make it unlawful for any person to travel in, or use any facility of, interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of pursuing the legitimate objectives of organized labor, through orderly and lawful means.
(f)Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to prevent any State, any possession or Commonwealth of the United States, or the District of Columbia, from exercising jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the absence of this section; nor shall anything in this section be construed as depriving State and local law enforcement authorities of responsibility for prosecuting acts that may be violations of this section and that are violations of State and local law.
(Added Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 104(a), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; amended Pub. L. 99–386, title I, § 106, Aug. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 822; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 601(f)(15), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3500.)

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS’ Remarks at Press Conference To Condemn Senseless Violence & Call For Congress To Act

Conyers: Out of Respect for All Who Have Lost Their Lives – Both Law Enforcement and Civilian – We Must Dedicate Ourselves to Engaging the Difficult Issues

Washington, D.C. – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) joined members of the Congressional Black Caucus at a press conference today to denounce the slayings of police officers in Dallas,  and the slayings of Alton Sterling in Louisiana and Philando Castile in Minnesota. Below are Congressman Conyers’ remarks as prepared for delivery: 

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“I stand here today with a heavy heart. From Orlando, to Baton Rouge, to Falcon Heights and Dallas – our Nation is reeling from recent acts of violence. My heart goes out to the families of every single one of the victims this week, including the fallen officers in Dallas.

“Whether mass shootings, officers dying in the line of duty, killings on our streets, or lives lost at the hands of misguided police - there are too many such tragedies. Congress cannot continue to sit on the sidelines while blood flows in our streets. There are real issues of public safety impacting Americans that must be addressed at the federal level.

“I’ve said it before, and I will say it again: we need to adopt gun violence prevention legislation to expand background checks to all gun purchases, and we need to reinstate a ban on the sale of military-style assault weapons.   And at the same time, I also believe we need to take a comprehensive approach at addressing the issue of building and strengthening trust between local police and their communities.

“As the longest serving Member of Congress, I have dedicated a major portion of my career to policing issues and gun violence prevention, introducing legislation, chairing town hall discussions across the country, and meeting with the grieving families of fallen officers and citizens alike.  As part of the now controversial 1994 Crime Bill, I was able to pass the Federal Pattern and Practice Enforcement provision that allows the Department of Justice to investigate state and local police departments, most recently like Ferguson and Baltimore, for unconstitutional and discriminatory conduct.

“Last year, the Judiciary Committee held a hearing on 21^st Century Policing Strategies to begin addressing the issue at the Federal level.  Shortly before the hearing, I introduced the End Racial Profiling Act which works to eliminate racial profiling through changing the policies and procedures underlying the practice.

“Following the hearing, I introduced the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act, which would provide incentives for local police organizations to voluntarily adopt performance-based standards to ensure that incidents of misconduct will be minimized through appropriate management, training and oversight protocols and that if such incidents do occur, that they will be properly investigated.  The bill also provides police officers -- the vast majority of whom are great people who are concerned about their communities -- with the tools necessary to work with their communities and to enhance their professional growth and education.

“Since that time, Chairman Goodlatte and I have been hard at work on negotiating a version the Law Enforcement Trust & Integrity Act to bring before the Committee.  However, like too many well intended efforts, we are stuck at the 1 yard line, trying to push toward a finish.

“We have been able to find agreement on major items, like accreditation standards, best practices, body cameras and even data collection.  The real challenge now is finding the support to bring the bill forward in the Committee.  We must find a way past objections to this most basic tenet: if you don’t measure it, you can’t manage it....

“Though there has been a consistent call for mandatory data collection by law enforcement agencies – with 28 states passing some form of data collection requirements and 17 others having proposed legislation – data collection remains a serious matter of controversy in the law enforcement community. 

“The tragic shooting deaths of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile might have been avoided with better training, particularly in detentions and use of force, as addressed by accreditation standards and best practice provisions currently in negotiation before the Committee. 

           

“I will continue to work with Chairman Goodlatte to see this bill progress. I will also continue to work with my colleagues to push for passage of commonsense gun violence prevention bills that we know will make us safer.

           

“Out of respect for all who have lost their lives – both law enforcement and civilian – we must dedicate ourselves to engaging the difficult issues to make lasting change in our communities and heal as a Nation.”

Congressman Conyers introduced both the End Racial Profiling Act and the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act to help build trust and strengthen the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they serve.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

MR. CONYERS: TO SPEAK TO THE URGENT NEED TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS OF GUN VIOLENCE IN THIS COUNTRY

 WE NEED TO CONSIDER NOT ONLY MASS SHOOTINGS, BUT THE DAILY TOLL OF GUN VIOLENCE THAT AFFLICTS ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES. IN ONE YEAR ON AVERAGE, 108,000 AMERICANS ARE SHOT IN MURDERS, ASSAULTS, SUICIDE, AND SUICIDE ATTEMPTS, ACCIDENTS, AND POLICE ACTION. APPROXIMATELY 32,000 -- 32,500 OF THESE INDIVIDUALS DIE. NEARLY 12,000 ARE MURDERED. MORE THAN 31 AMERICANS EVERY DAY. WE KNOW WHAT WILL WORK TO REDUCE THAT. WE MUST ACT TO EXPAND BACKGROUND CHECKS TO CLOSE THE PRIVATE SALE LOOPHOLE AND MAKE SURE THOSE CHECKS PREVENT THE SALES OF GUNS TO TERRORISTS. WE SHOULD COME TOGETHER TO VOTE ON THE TWO BILLS AND REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

 Michigan Democratic Congressional Delegation along with community leaders of the Metropolitan Detroit Region at the Berkley Police Department, June 29, 2016 addressing an end to gun violence.

Moms Demand Action for gun sense in America were one of the groups speaking out in support.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: We Must Never Forget The Nine Lives Lost In Charleston

"It’s been one year since the brutal murder of nine innocent African-Americans at the historically black Emmanuel AME Church in South Carolina. 

Today we remember them as we reflect on the tragic loss of life. 

I am reminded that while the killer was bound by evil hatred, the system failed us in that situation. 

We must strengthen our gun laws to close loopholes that allow guns to fall into the wrong hands." said Conyers.

#EndHateCrimes #EndGunViolence

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michele Bachmann Refuses To Speak Out On Violence In Foster Care Caucus

Michele Bachmannn speaks about Congressional Caucus on Foster Care.  What she does not speak upon are the suicides, rapes, drugs, Medicaid fraud, double-billing, fraudulently generated documents, wrongful and unnecessary removals, lost, forged and never maintained educational records, homelessness...I could go on and on but these are things you will never hear her speak upon.

Here is a link to her email: http://bachmann.house.gov/contact/zipcode.htm you could attempt to ask her why she will not address in public the horrors of child welfare but her congressional email is set up to filter.

You could try to email her campaign http://www.michelebachmann.com/ but you have to contribute, first.

If you try to write a letter to her congressional office, do not wait for a return communication.  She will never speak of the violence in foster care.  It's a secret.




 Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Guest commentary: Congress must not weaken the Violence Against Women Act

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

For nearly 20 years, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) has been effective at protecting victims of domestic and sexual violence and holding perpetrators accountable. Domestic violence has dropped by more than half since the legislation became law in 1994.

Yet the House of Representatives is set to consider a bill this week that would repeal and weaken some of VAWA's most critical protections.

VAWA has long enjoyed overwhelming bipartisan support. Bills to reauthorize and further strengthen its protections passed by near-unanimous votes in 2000 and 2005. Bipartisanship was also on display last month when Senate Democrats and Republicans passed their own bill to strengthen VAWA with supermajority support.

But the bill now being pushed by House Republican leadership is different. Unlike every VAWA reauthorization before it, this bill would leave women less protected than under current law. The bill would endanger victims, embolden perpetrators of violence, and eliminate essential law enforcement tools to keep women safe. It is a giant leap backward.

House Republican leaders argue that opposition to their bill is hollow partisanship. But a diverse and wide-ranging coalition of domestic violence organizations, women's groups, faith-based groups, and law enforcement agencies beg to differ.

U.S. Representative
Zoe Lufgren

The leading domestic violence organizations, including the thousands of service providers in the National Network to End Domestic Violence, strongly oppose the bill because it would "weaken, rather than enhance, protections for victims of domestic violence." Leading researchers in universities across the country echo their concerns over how the bill will "roll back and eviscerate protections."

These are the real people on the front lines against domestic and sexual violence in the country. They are not partisan organizations seeking to score political points.

Neither are the faith-based groups, including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Association of Evangelicals, that also harbor deep concerns over the sections of the bill repealing protections for battered immigrant women. Many of these protections have been in the law for almost 20 years. A recent letter to Congress states that that they are "deeply troubled" by the bill's efforts to "roll back protections in current law for battered non-citizens, making them more vulnerable and, in some cases, endangering their lives."

The National Organization for Women (NOW) denounced last Tuesday's passage of the bill in committee. The Evangelical Church and NOW usually don't agree. But both groups share similar concerns and oppose the House bill.

A coalition of law enforcement officers with expertise in domestic and sexual violence cases has also expressed in a letter to Congress their "strong opposition" to provisions in the House bill. Among other things, the bill fails to include provisions requested by law enforcement organizations -- including the Fraternal Order of Police and its 330,000 officers -- critical to investigating crimes and prosecuting offenders.

In contrast, the few supporters of the House Republican bill we know of include anti-immigrant organizations, groups that purport to represent the interests of men accused of domestic violence and one international marriage brokerage company reported to have a financial incentive in eliminating protections for "mail order brides." A Federal jury in 2006 found that the head of this company, who lobbies for the changes contained in the House bill, intentionally withheld information about VAWA protections to a pregnant and severely battered immigrant woman to protect her company's "95% success rate."

House Republicans can continue to dismiss opposition to their bill as knee-jerk partisanship. But the broad coalition opposed to the bill tells quite a different story.

John Conyers, a Democrat from Detroit, represents Michigan's 14th District in the U.S. House of Representatives and has filed to run for re-election in the 13th District. Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat from San Jose, Calif., represents that state's 16th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Democrats Fight to Protect All Victims of Domestic Violence

House Judiciary Committee Democrats oppose Republican bill to roll back existing protections for immigrant women and omits protections for vulnerable communities included in Senate passed bipartisan bill       

(WASHINGTON) – Today at markup, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Committee Democrats opposed H.R. 4970, a Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”) Reauthorization bill that omits protections for vulnerable communities and removes existing protections for immigrant women.  The bill omits language designed to protect Native American women by allowing tribal authorities to prosecute their abusers.  It also omits language to ensure lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered persons do not face discrimination when seeking services from VAWA funded programs.  This language is already included in a bipartisan bill passed by a supermajority in the Senate.  

Additionally, H.R. 4970 rolls back longstanding protections for immigrant women, who are particularly vulnerable because they are reliant on their spouses for immigration status.  It eliminates the confidentiality of VAWA petitions for protection by allowing immigration officials to contact a battered woman’s abusive spouse, tipping off the abuser to the victim’s efforts to leave.  The bill also weakens the so-called “U Visa” process for victims of serious crimes such as rape and sexual assault, and it eliminates existing provisions that allow recipients of U visas who cooperate with law enforcement to apply for green cards.  These changes impede law enforcement officials’ ability to use these visas to protect victims, prosecute serious criminals, and make our streets safer.

                       

All Democratic Members and one Republican opposed H.R. 4970 on the vote for final passage.  House Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) released this statement following the markup.        

               

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

“I cannot consider a bill that worsens existing protections for vulnerable women a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act,” said Conyers.  “Since the Violence Against Women Act originally passed in 1994, Congress has worked on a bipartisan basis to not only reauthorize the law, but improve upon it.  Until today, every subsequent reauthorization considered by this Committee strengthened the law to make it easier for victims to escape their abusers and for law enforcement officials to prosecute them.  This bill does the opposite.

“This bill omits important provisions that would help protect Native American women and ensure that all victims regardless of sexual orientation can access services without facing discrimination.  Worse, it actually eliminates existing protections for immigrant women, ending the confidentiality of their VAWA petitions, and putting these women in further danger by allowing immigration officials to contact their abusers.  It erects additional hurdles for crime victims seeking a ‘U’ visa, making it more difficult for law enforcement officials to gain the cooperation of immigrant women fearful to speak against perpetrators.  This bill doesn’t just fail to move the law forward, it takes a giant step back. 

“That is why hundreds of advocacy organizations oppose this legislation, including: the National Task Force to end Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women; the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs; the National Council Against Domestic Violence; the National Network to End Domestic Violence; the National Congress of American Indians; the National Organization for Women; the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; and the Human Rights Campaign. 

“The Senate set aside partisan differences to protect the most vulnerable members of our society.  The Senate bill, which passed with a supermajority of Democrats and Republicans, including every woman Senator, is a true reauthorization of VAWA, as is the bill introduced in the House by Representative Gwen Moore.  This Body needs to consider one of those bills.”    

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

GOP Etch A Sketch can’t erase war on women

GOP Etch A Sketch can’t erase war on women

By John Conyers, Jr.

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

Republicans are sensing a monumental misstep with their attacks on women’s rights this election season. So they recently took a page from their presumptive presidential nominee and reached for the Etch A Sketch. There is no war on women, according to them, and never was. It was just a figment of our imagination.

But evidence of a war is all too clear. The latest battle is, ironically, being waged on a dangerous bill introduced by House Republican leaders to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

The VAWA first passed with strong bipartisan support in 1994. Subsequent efforts to increase its protections passed Congress with little controversy. The Senate continued this tradition last month by strengthening protections with a bipartisan supermajority.

But the House Republican bill is a far cry from the Senate bill. It not only fails to include the Senate’s improvements, like protections for Native American and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender victims, it eliminates long-standing protections for immigrant women — leaving them more vulnerable to abuse.

The VAWA was designed to protect all women and empower law enforcement to go after abusers. Of prime importance are protections for immigrant women — particularly vulnerable because of their dependence on spouses for immigration status. Abusers often use threats of deportation and permanent separation from children as powerful tools to control their battered wives.

The VAWA’s principal protection gives victims the ability to petition for their own immigration status. By letting women take control of their own lives and provide for their children, the law helps them leave abusive relationships and cooperate with police to hold perpetrators accountable.

The House bill butchers this protection by violating a sacred component of the process — that the wife’s petition be kept secret. Rather than preserve confidentiality protections, the bill would have immigration officers contact abusers whose wives are seeking protection — tipping them off to the fact that their wives are taking steps to leave.

This is a horrendous step backward. It is well-established that the most dangerous time for a battered wife is when she begins the separation process. When the abuser first realizes that his wife is asserting control over her own life, he often retaliates. The House Republican bill would make the government complicit in this.

The House bill further dismantles the VAWA protections by eviscerating the U visa process, which is critical to protecting women from severe abuse. The VAWA has long authorized police officers to recommend victims of serious crimes for U visas if necessary, both to protect the victims and to ensure their continued cooperation. Two-thirds of U visa recipients are victims of domestic violence, sexual assault or rape.

The House bill would deny a victim protection unless she reports the crime within 60 days. This essentially abandons those who need protection most — women who can’t come forward because of a continuing threat of retaliation or the social stigma and psychological damage attendant on heinous crimes such as rape.

We don’t bar the prosecution of a serious crime for failure to report it within 60 days. Why deny a victim protection and law enforcement the tools it needs to secure the victim’s cooperation for such a failure?

The House Republican bill would also eliminate a long-standing provision that allows victims with U visas, which offer temporary benefits, to get permanent protection through green cards if they cooperate fully with law enforcement. Eliminating this opportunity would likely result in less cooperation, fewer prosecutions and more criminal conduct that endangers women.

The VAWA has had two purposes: to protect victims and to help prosecute perpetrators. The House Republican bill undermines both — eliminating existing protections for women and depriving police of the tools needed to hold offenders accountable. All this serves to undermine years of community-policing efforts that are widely credited with reducing violence against women across the country.

Republicans may have reached for the Etch A Sketch. But the picture they have drawn can’t easily be erased.

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) is the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/75959.html#ixzz1u9076Woy

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Attorney General Holder To Stop Child Welfare Fraud

U.S. Department of Justice "Defending Childhood" public testimony in Detroit at Wayne State University.

Last year I participated in the "National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention" in Washington, D.C. with Detroit Mayor Dave Bing, City Councilman James Tate, Detroit Police Chief Ralph Godbee, Detroit Youth Violence Prevention Director Ulrich Baker, Detroit U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade and U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr.

This was the first time in history multiple departments within the Cabinet partnered to address youth violence.  This is how youth violence was approached:  it was the beginning of the end of child abuse and neglect.

Yes, not one time was the term "Child Abuse" utilized and the reason why is the issue was to be examined as violence and even domestic violence.  Domestic violence is inclusive of all violence in a living situation being it foster care, juvenile justice or residential institutions.

The basic approach is to provide resources to prevent violence such as housing, medical, psychological, transportation, education, employment, child care and more.  Instead of removing a child for being in conditions of poverty, as itemized above, and placing the child in foster care or juvenile justice system which is extremely costly and has not proven very successful, resources are provided, and a significant lesser cost with extreme success.

Instead of focusing on the child, the entire family unit is engaged.  The child abuse imperialistic morality paraders do not like this at all.  They face loosing their gravy train.  This is why the child abuse propaganda machine is in full gear this month.  The battle has begun and I am putting my money on the U.S. Department of Justice.

At the Forum last year he hem was "busting silos" where I participated in the Data session.  Of course, I spoke out, loudly at the roundtable on child welfare fraud.  I went off on kiddie kickbacks, phantom services, double-billing, everything in my video.  I spoke of the fraud in Wayne County and the Detroit Department of Human Services.  I must say, I did not realize how prophetic that moment was.

Back to the Detroit public testimony.  I could not believe my ears.  I was speechless (yes, miracles do happen).  These people were testifying on the hell of foster care and juvenile justice.  These people were telling the truth, in a public venue, to the U.S. Attorney General.  They know, very well, about child abuse propaganda.  They know, very well, about child abuse propaganda.

Yes, boys and girls, General Eric Holder is very versed in child welfare fraud and he is listening.  Trust me.

In 1994 this is qui tam False Claims Act $26.97 million settlement with then U.S. Attorney Eric H. Holder Jr. representing relator against New York and its public University for child welfare fraud in no bid contracts. New York Denoncourt Settlement with U.S. DOJ Assistant Attorney General Eric Holder on Child Welfare Fraud
Keep in mind that this has never been enforced.  Antitrust and fraud still thrives but hopefully, not for long.

 

I apologize for the tardiness of this post but I have been on a mission....

Even though the deadline has expired, I still suggest you send in testimony. Tell them your story and show Attorney General Holder your support to end child welfare fraud and defend our children.

The Defending Childhood Task Force is interested in hearing from community members and professionals working with children and families who have experienced violence. To submit written testimony to the Task Force, please e-maildefendingchildhoodtaskforce@nccdcrc.org or send to NCCD, Attn: Defending Childhood Task Force, 1970 Broadway, Suite 500, Oakland, CA, 94612. You must include your name and contact information for the testimony to be considered by the Task Force; however, the Task Force will not be able to send a response. Testimony must be submitted by April 24, 2012, to be considered by the Task Force.

Testimony is not confidential. Testimony may be made available to members and staff of the Task Force, and may be read aloud during a public hearing or published in a publicly available document.

The Task Force does not provide direct services to individuals and cannot respond to urgent or emergency messages. If you or someone you know is currently in danger of being harmed, please contact your local police department or call 911 if it is an emergency. The following hotlines may also serve as resources for individuals. These hotlines are not affiliated with the Task Force or the Department of Justice.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Task force on children exposed to violence holds last public hearing Monday in Detroit

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's task force on children exposed to violence is holding its last public hearing Monday in Detroit. Holder launched the task force in the fall as part of his Defending Childhood initiative, with ex-New York Yankees and Los Angeles Dodgers manager Joe Torre as co-chair. The task force is to take public testimony 5-7 p.m. Monday at Wayne State University's Adamany Undergraduate Library.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Hamtramck "Take Back The Night" Event,March 16, 2012

Hamtramck "Take Back the Night" Event, March 16, 2012

Universal Health Care: Providing For The Common Defense and General Welfare

The issues surrounding unruly town hall meetings and angry mobs were addressed over 200 years ago in the Federalist Papers, specifically #9, Hamilton and #10 Madison.

Hamilton #9: The utility of a Confederacy, as well to suppress faction and to guard the internal tranquillity of States, as to increase their external force and security, is in reality not a new idea. It has been practiced upon in different countries and ages, and has received the sanction of the most approved writers on the subject of politics.

What Hamilton basically says is that an insurgent faction disrupts consolidation and consensus of groups, better known as a republic. This idea was expounded and refined in Madison #10.

Madison identified the "inner tranquility" of the consolidation and consensus of groups as the "majority". He further spoke of the futility of non-peaceful protests as they disregarded established legislative processes, having elected government representatives.

"Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people."

Historically, civil disobedience only works when functioning under the policy of peace. These protests are not peaceful in language or activities, an early presentation of failure of the insurgence.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise therof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.The Bill of Rights: First Amendment

The key word is "peace". Once this tenet of the First Amendment is violated, peace, the government is empowered to protect the people, pursuant to the General Welfare Clause in the U.S. Constitution. The following is an excerpt of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States, called the General Welfare Clause:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Violence, be it verbal, economic, emotional or physical, becomes grounds for government intervention, or rather the calling of the police to maintain the peace. When this happens you have an insurrection, pursuant to the General Welfare Clause. Under this light, health care as commerce, or rather Universal Health Care, is seen as a "provision for the common defense social disease, meaning maintainability of individual and social health, becoming interchangeable with the temporal terminology of General Welfare.

Quintessentially, Universal Health Care is one in the same with the Common Defense and General Welfare of the people of the United States of America. Here is a visual model for greater understanding:

Universal = Common

Health = Defense

Care = General Welfare

There is a lack of organization and understanding, as the insurrections constantly demonstrate a significant failure in mastering a rudimentary education of the social mobilization.

Peace.