A former Harris County District Judge, who was indicted on wire fraud charges last year, has been arrested again, according to court records. She is accused of assaulting her husband’s girlfriend.
Alexandra Smoots-Thomas was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon Wednesday. According to court records, she fired a shotgun in the direction of a woman outside a home in the 1400 block of Jewel Meadow Drive on Monday.
“My client was in a car and the other woman was outside the car. I believe she was carrying a club or some sort of stick with the intent to assault my client and a gun appeared. A shot was fired but nobody was hurt,” said Smoots-Thomas’ attorney Kent Schaffer.
Smoots-Thomas is out on bond and not permitted to possess a weapon.
“We have reason to believe that they will move to revoke her bond in federal court and because of that we are already getting ready for a bond hearing to try and keep her out on bond,” Schaffer said.
Smoots-Thomas was scheduled to appear in federal court in November on wire fraud charges for allegedly misusing campaign funds.
“The government has alleged that she used her campaign account to pay personal expenses,” Schaffer said.
Schaffer said his client is accused of using funds to pay her home mortgage and tuition for one of her children.
Where is the Certificate of Oath, with the Great Seal of the United States, Signed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States? #Sealsmatter
Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector. The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice President....unless those electors engaged in election interference fraud schemes like stealin' the children, land & vote through what is called gerrymandering, through a political party who has had its parental rights to keep and bear the arms of the United States, as a registered business entity, terminated, making any casting of the vote and tally to be illegitimate because, as a nullified entity, there are no duly existing quorum, the 2016 vote was fraudulently certified through the Secretaries of State, all the way down to the City Clerks, like what was done in Detroit, in Wayne County, by its Secretary of State, who filed the fake ass Michigan certification of the 2016 election with the Clerk of the House in that fake ass 2016 Special Election, which means Trump is not duly elected, hence he is illegitimate, where the Senate, U.S. Attorney General, and Chief Justice of SCOTUS, who administered the fake ass oath of Donald J. Trump, because his real legal name is Donald John Trump, and they all know it, because McGahn and the JonesDay crew made sure to cloak the foreign invasion of Detroit and is about to sell Trump down the river in another round of the 202 fake ass election.
The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States....there are no electors for the Democratic National Committee nor the Republican National Committee because their fake all LLCs and backdoor inc. were dissolved, December 2015 and everyone covered it up because they are covering up the residuals of the peculiar institution, which is child welfare, the trafficking of tiny humans.
Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee as his last two opponents, Ted Cruz and John Kasich, dropped out of the race. Running against the Democratic Party’s candidate, former First Lady Hillary Clinton, Trump won a number of critical “Rust Belt” states and was elected the 45th U.S. President on November 8, 2016. Trump took the oath of office on January 20, 2017 in Washington, D.C.
Offered is President Trump’s signature, in blue marker, on a typewritten copy of the Oath of Office, dated January 20, 2017 on White House stationary. The 8½ x 11-inch white sheet has “Memorandum The White House Washington” in blue type across the top of the page, with the date and oath in bold black type. Trump’s signature is on the lower third of the page. The sheet has blue ink on the top edge. Trump was administered the oath by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on the steps of the U.S. Capital. This comes with a LOA from Beckett Authentication. https://goldinauctions.com/Donald_Trump_Signed_Presidential_Oath_of_Office__B-LOT56879.aspx
{My apologies for bringing you with me into one of my Post Traumatic Fraud Disorder Episodes, but I had flashbacks when it came to forging names of elected officials behind their backs, or having them sign documents under false advisement, or Chiefs of Staff and anyone else who has sold the signatures of Members of Congress and the White House, for about the same price range......, but hey, what do I know....}
The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them....wherefore this doctrine of emolument also applies to his cabinet, Chiefs of Staff, White House counsel, and campaign, like JonesDay, including the Vice President and CIA Director because they all have foreign corporations who raped Detroit in TARP through the act of gerrymandering, otherwise known as stealin' the children, land & vote, by executing an international coup in a well funded insurrection, to remove a sitting member of congress and U.S. icon, like they are tearing down statues, bleachbitting history, in foreign titles of lands, under a crown.
In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected....if there exists what is called a tacit resignation, then, in the converse, there must also exist a tacit election, where tacit means, in this instance, someone lied, making Obama, the Archpresident, transposing Ecclesiastic models of juridic persons, under the Second Amendment, where, it may be a situation of Trump being the Archtreasury, or, as I prefer, the keeper of the children's trust.
Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.....unless the president was not duly elected and is illegitimate because there are no valid certifications throughout the entire electoral process, making any appointments and executive orders such as this, nullified.
The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.
Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.
Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors....for falsely advising the President, because Chief Justice of SCOTUS John Roberts condoned the bad faith of the policy in his own breach of his oath of office, in failing to uphold the public policy of insurance to protect and serve the people in justice, which means not to procure and purvey tiny humans as lab rats, in Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare, by promulgating the residuals of the peculiar institution, by allowing Trump to continue to be falsely advised.
Trump was falsely advised in the christian invasion of the United States through Religious Freedom Restoration Act, where the church is supposed to be the authority over the oaths of offices to protect the posterity of the nation, rather the best interests of the child, whereby the Vice President and all civil officers shall fall from the heavens, under the Second Amendment, which is why I am pacified.
See, how that all works out?
The USCCB is supposed to be the watchers over the oaths of office for the people, hence, the doctrine of separation, except when it comes to the Thirteenth Exception, strictly for the purposes of maximizing revenues, because it is illegal for a not for profit office holder to generate profit from the selling of tiny humans.
This Executive Order is entered into the public record, for the purposes of obviation of the congress, as a fraud, because the data cited in this are false, or rather, fake, fake, fake.
#maytheheavensfall
Executive Order on Strengthening the Child Welfare System for America’s Children
LAW & JUSTICE
Issued on: June 24, 2020
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Purpose. Every child deserves a family. Our States and communities have both a legal obligation, and the privilege, to care for our Nation’s most vulnerable children.
The best foster care system is one that is not needed in the first place. My Administration has been focused on prevention strategies that keep children safe while strengthening families so that children do not enter foster care unnecessarily. Last year, and for only the second time since 2011, the number of children in the foster care system declined, and for the third year in a row, the number of children entering foster care has declined.
We no longer "sell" children because the Great Thirteenth Exception affords, through federal funding, that, we, the holders of not-for-profit and for-profit corporate offices, to "procure and purvey" tiny humans through human asset management databases in the name of the tax exempt god.
But challenges remain. Too many young people who are in our foster care system wait years before finding the permanency of family. More than 400,000 children are currently in foster care. Of those, more than 124,000 children are waiting for adoption, with nearly 6 out of 10 (58.4 percent) having already become legally eligible for adoption.
More than 50 percent of the children waiting for adoption have been in foster care — without the security and constancy of a permanent family — for 2 years or more. The need for stability and timely permanency is particularly acute for children 9 years and older, children in sibling groups, and those with intellectual or physical disabilities.
Even worse, too many young men and women age out of foster care having never found a permanent, stable family. In recent years, approximately 20,000 young people have aged out of foster care each year in the United States. Research has shown that young people who age out of the foster care system are likely to experience significant, and significantly increased, life challenges — 40 percent of such young people studied experienced homelessness; 50 percent were unemployed at age 24; 25 percent experienced post-traumatic stress disorder; and 71 percent became pregnant by age 21. These are unacceptable outcomes.
Several factors have contributed to the number of children who wait in foster care for extended periods. First, State and local child welfare agencies often do not have robust partnerships with private community organizations, including faith-based organizations. Second, those who step up to be resource families for children in foster care — including kin, guardians, foster parents, and adoptive parents — may lack adequate support. Third, too often the processes and systems meant to help children and families in crisis have instead created bureaucratic barriers that make it more difficult for these children and families to get the help they need.
It is the goal of the United States to promote a child welfare system that reduces the need to place children into foster care; achieves safe permanency for those children who must come into foster care, and does so more quickly and more effectively; places appropriate focus on children who are waiting for adoption, especially those who are 9 years and older, are in sibling groups, or have disabilities; and decreases the proportion of young adults who age out of the foster care system.
Always remember, DACA is a policy, not a law! Only congress makes law, not the executive branch, unless there is an exception for an unduly elected president to elucidate gerrymanding, but, hey, what do I know?
Children from all backgrounds have the potential to become successful and thriving adults. Yet without a committed, loving family that can provide encouragement, stability, and a lifelong connection, some children may never receive the support needed to realize that potential.
This order will help to empower families who answer the call to open their hearts and homes to children who need them. My Administration is committed to helping give as many children as possible the stability and support that family provides by dramatically improving our child welfare system.
Sec. 2. Encouraging Robust Partnerships Between State Agencies and Public, Private, Faith-based, and Community Organizations. (a) In order to facilitate close partnerships between State agencies and nongovernmental organizations, including public, private, faith-based, and community groups, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) shall provide increased public access to accurate, up-to-date information relevant to strengthening the child welfare system, including by:
(i) Publishing data to aid in the recruitment of community support. Within 1 year of the date of this order and each year thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, a report that provides information about typical patterns of entry, recent available counts of children in foster care, and counts of children waiting for adoption. To the extent appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including all privacy laws, this data will be disaggregated by county or other sub-State level, child age, placement type, and prior time in care.
(ii) Collecting needed data to preserve sibling connections.
(A) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall collect information from appropriate State and local agencies on the number of children in foster care who have siblings in foster care and who are not currently placed with their siblings.
(B) Within 3 years of the date of this order, to support the goal of keeping siblings together (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(31)(A)), the Secretary shall develop data analysis methods to report on the experience of children entering care in sibling groups, and the extent to which they are placed together. The Secretary’s analysis shall also assess the extent to which siblings who are legally eligible for adoption achieve permanency together.
(iii) Expanding the number of homes for children and youth.
(A) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall develop a more rigorous and systematic approach to collecting State administrative data as part of the Child and Family Services Review required by section 1123A of the Social Security Act (the “Act”) (42 U.S.C. 1320a–2a). Data collected shall include:
(1) demographic information for children in foster care and waiting for adoption;
(2) the number of currently available foster families and their demographic information;
(3) the average foster parent retention rate and average length of time foster parents remain certified;
(4) a target number of foster homes needed to meet the needs of children in foster care; and
(5) the average length of time it takes to complete foster and adoptive home certification.
(B) The Secretary shall ensure, to the extent consistent with applicable law, that States report to the Secretary regarding strategies for coordinating with nongovernmental organizations, including faith-based and community organizations, to recruit and support foster and adoptive families.
(b) Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Secretary shall issue guidance to Federal, State, and local agencies on partnering with nongovernmental organizations. This guidance shall include best practices for information sharing, providing needed services to families to support prevention of children entering foster care, family preservation, foster and adoptive home recruitment and retention, respite care, post-placement family support, and support for older youth. This guidance shall also make clear that faith-based organizations are eligible for partnerships under title IV-E of the Act (42 U.S.C. 670 et seq.), on an equal basis, consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Sec. 3. Improving Access to Adequate Resources for Caregivers and Youth. While many public, private, faith based, and community resources and other sources of support exist, many American caregivers still lack connection with and access to adequate resources. Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Secretary shall equip caregivers and those in care to meet their unique challenges, by:
(a) Expanding educational options. To the extent practicable, the Secretary shall use all existing technical assistance resources to promote dissemination and State implementation of the National Training and Development Curriculum, including, when appropriate, in non-classroom environments.
(b) Increasing the availability of trauma-informed training. The Secretary shall provide an enhanced, web-based, learning-management platform to house the information generated by the National Adoption Competency Mental Health Training Initiative. Access to this web-based training material will be provided free of charge for all child welfare and mental health practitioners.
(c) Supporting guardianship. The Secretary shall provide information to States regarding the importance and availability of funds to increase guardianship through the title IV-E Guardianship Assistance Program (42 U.S.C. 673), which provides Federal reimbursement for payments to guardians and for associated administrative costs. This information shall include which States have already opted into the program.
(d) Enhancing support for kinship care and youth exiting foster care. The Secretary shall establish a plan to address barriers to accessing existing Federal assistance and benefits for eligible individuals.
Sec. 4. Ensuring Equality of Treatment and Access for all Families. The Howard M. Metzenbaum Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 (the “Multiethnic Placement Act”) (Public Law 103-382), as amended, prohibits agencies from denying to any person the opportunity to become an adoptive or a foster parent on the basis of race, color, or national origin (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(18)(A)); prohibits agencies from delaying or denying the placement of a child for adoption or into foster care on the basis of race, color, or national origin (id. 671(a)(18)(B)); and requires agencies to diligently recruit a diverse base of foster and adoptive parents to better reflect the racial and ethnic makeup of children in out-of-home care (id. 662(b)(7)). To further the goals of the Multiethnic Placement Act, the Secretary shall:
(a) within 6 months of the date of this order, initiate a study regarding the implementation of these requirements nationwide;
(b) within 1 year of the date of this order, update guidance, as necessary, regarding implementation of the Multiethnic Placement Act; and
(c) within 1 year of the date of this order, publish guidance regarding the rights of parents, prospective parents, and children with disabilities (including intellectual, developmental, or physical disabilities).
Sec. 5. Improving Processes to Prevent Unnecessary Removal and Secure Permanency for Children. (a) Federal Review of Reasonable Effort Determinations and Timeliness Requirements.
(i) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall require that both the title IV-E reviews conducted pursuant to 45 CFR 1356.71 and the Child and Family Services Reviews conducted pursuant to 45 CFR 1355.31–1355.36 specifically and adequately assess the following requirements:
(A) reasonable efforts to prevent removal;
(B) filing a petition for Termination of Parental Rights within established statutory timelines and court processing of such petition, unless statutory exemptions apply;
(C) reasonable efforts to finalize permanency plans; and
(D) completion of relevant required family search and notifications and how such efforts are reviewed by courts.
(ii) In cases in which it is determined that statutorily required timelines and efforts have not been satisfied, the Secretary shall make use of existing authority in making eligibility determinations and disallowances consistent with section 1123A(b)(3)(4) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-2a(b)(3)(4)).
(iii) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall develop metrics to track permanency outcomes in each State and measure State performance over time.
(iv) Within 6 months of the date of this order, the Secretary shall provide guidance to States regarding flexibility in the use of Federal funds to support and encourage high-quality legal representation for parents and children, including pre-petition representation, in their efforts to prevent the removal of children from their families, safely reunify children and parents, finalize permanency, and ensure that their voices are heard and their rights are protected. The Secretary shall also ensure collection of data regarding State use of Federal funds for this purpose.
(b) Risk and Safety Assessments.
(i) Within 18 months of the date of this order, the Secretary shall collect States’ individual standards for conducting risk and safety assessments required under section 106(b)(2)(B)(iv) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106(b)(2)(B)(iv)).
(ii) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall outline reasonable best practice standards for risk and safety assessments, including how to address domestic violence and substance abuse.
Sec. 6. Indian Child Welfare Act. Nothing in this order shall alter the implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act or replace the tribal consultation process.
Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
So, now, you have, not just the U.S. Attorney General looking into the constitutional violations of Gretch the Gov, but you also have the issue of the seals.
See, it goes like this...
U.S. AG instructs MIED District Attorney to check out the legitimacy of Michigan Governor; where, Schiender is going to find out that the Michigan Governor is not duly elected, because he already knows, which automatically makes her executive orders unconstitutional, in many instances, where one may start with a quick review of the fake ass seal of certification to her oath of office, which means the U.S. AG will find out that the same will be found in Trump's fake ass seal of certification of his oath of office, which makes The U.S. AG illegitimate, being unduly appointed, which means the MIED District Attorney is left open to take other actions, like referring the matter to sealed grand juries in Detroit, which means we will be experiencing another layer of messies.
I bet that will suck, but, hey, what do I know?
I know Gretch the Gov is not duly elected, hence, illegitimate.
I did not even get into the Emergency Powers in Government Act being a residual of the peculiar institution of gerrymandering.
Stay tuned, because Paul Maloney may actually know what I know about JonesDay.
A federal judge wants the Michigan Supreme Court to clarify some of the authority the governor has under emergency powers she has used during the COVID-19 pandemic.
On Thursday, the same day Gov. Gretchen Whitmer extended Michigan's state of emergency, Judge Paul Maloney out of the Western District asked the state's highest court to answer questions pertaining to if the governor's powers.
The request for clarification is connected to a lawsuit filed by a medical provider out of Grand Rapids after Whitmer banned non-essential procedures. However, the questions that Maloney is asking fall in line with several other lawsuits that citizens from Michigan have filed against Whitmer, including one sent by Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey (R-Clarklake).
After a Court of Claims judge ruled in favor of the governor, Shirkey and other parties requested the case go directly to the Michigan Supreme Court, bypassing the Court of Claims. The Supreme Court rejected the request.
The questions at play are:
Whether the governor has the authority to continue renewing executive orders under the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act
If the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act violates the Separate of Powers as written in the Michigan constitution
Republican leaders in the House and Senate declined to extend Gov. Whitmer's emergency declaration beyond April 30 after she made a request to do so, arguing some of the executive orders she has issued infringed on the liberties of residents. Whitmer decided to issue another extension anyways. GOP lawmakers later sued the governor on May 6.
While oral arguments for the Court of Appeals case are scheduled for August, the Michigan Supreme Court doesn't have to wait that long to answer questions posed by Maloney.
The state's highest court is welcome to respond to the questions but doesn't have to.
While many of the restrictions the governor put in place no longer pertain to the state's efforts to slow COVID-19 in Michigan, there are several rules regarding safety procedures and business operations that are still in place.
Good morning, everyone. Thank you for being here today. It is a privilege to announce the establishment of the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice.
I want to start by recognizing the hard work and vision of many here today in the law enforcement community, including Pat Yoes and Jim Pasco (FOP) as well as Chief Casstevens, Chief Cell, Vince Talucci, and Terry Cunningham (IACP). I particularly want to recognize the work of the IACP, which for over 20 years has made the establishment of a Commission a national priority. Without its commitment, we would not be here today. We look forward to working with the IACP and, indeed, all law enforcement organizations to make this effort a success. Thank you also to Ben Tucker, First Deputy Commissioner of the NYPD, and Kathy O’Toole, retired Commissioner of the Boston Police Department, for being here with us today.
President Trump is an unwavering supporter of our men and women in blue, and he recognized that this Commission is much needed to support law enforcement. It is, to be sure, long overdue. The last time there was a National Commission on law enforcement was in 1965.
Much about our world has changed in the decades since President Johnson’s Commission. The incredible pace of technological change has meant the rapid evolution of new ways to commit and conceal crimes. All of you, because you’re on the front lines, see this everyday – from the proliferation of synthetic opioids to the use of warrant-proof encryption and the dark web to sexually exploit the most vulnerable members of society.
This Commission is critical, not only because it is timely, but also because few callings are more essential to the strength and prosperity of our nation than that of law enforcement. It is the rule of law that is fundamental to ensuring both freedom and security, and it is our more than 900,000 women and men on the beat who, every single day, uphold the rule of law. I have said it before: There is no calling in America more noble than serving as a police officer.
At the same time, law enforcement faces more and greater challenges than ever before. If the new obstacles presented by technology weren’t enough, in many communities, our officers must confront a wave of social problems, such as homelessness, drug addiction, and mental illness – problems that demand solutions beyond their authority and expertise.
Further, there has been, especially as of late, a disturbing pattern of cynicism and disrespect shown toward law enforcement. All Americans should agree that nobody wins when trust breaks down between the police and the community they serve. We need to address the divide.
As a result of the significant challenges faced by law enforcement officials today, many departments are reporting declines in hiring and morale. It’s particularly alarming that, last year, more officers died by suicide than any year previously recorded. In fact, more officers died by suicide than in the line of duty last year.
These are just a few of the reasons why President Trump directed me to establish this Commission. We must not only study crime to forge strategies for reducing it, but examine ways for promoting the profession of law enforcement in order to uplift those who answer the call to public service and to help them earn the trust of the communities they protect.
Accordingly, the Commission will comprehensively assess the most pressing issues confronting law enforcement today. It will seek to provide substantive and actionable answers to, among other questions, the following:
How do certain social ills, such as mental illness, substance abuse, and homelessness affect the ability of law enforcement to carry out its duties?
How can we improve the relationship between the police and the communities they serve?
How can officer recruitment, training, and retention be improved?
What are the major issues affecting the physical safety and mental health of officers?
What unique issues and criminal threats have resulted from new technologies?
What is the cause of the apparent diminished respect for police officials and the laws they enforce, and how is public safety affected?
How can we integrate education, employment, social services, and public-health services to reduce crime and ease the burden on law enforcement?
The Commission will principally conduct its study through hearings, panel presentations, field visits, and other public meetings. At these engagements, the Commission will receive valuable insights, counsel, and recommendations from a diverse range of voices: subject matter experts, public officials, private citizens, academia, community organizations, civil-liberties groups, civic leadership, bar associations, and victims’ rights organizations.
While I am proud to announce the formation of this Commission, I’m also pleased by the distinguished individuals who will serve as Commissioners. The Department of Justice was required to assemble a small group from a large pool of highly-qualified candidates who expressed interest in participating.
We appointed these Commissioners based on a variety of criteria, seeking a range of different perspectives. We specifically sought out candidates who have had significant experience formulating law-enforcement policy and leading police departments and other law enforcement organizations.
As you see here today, these Commissioners come from across the country, with diverse backgrounds, from all levels of government, and they have directly confronted, in many contexts, the issues that will be studied.
The Commissioners are police chiefs from big cities and smaller ones, state prosecutors, county sheriffs, members of rural and tribal law enforcement, state public safety officials, federal agents, U.S. Attorneys, and a state attorney general. They have traveled from all over the country to participate in this historic moment.
I say to each of you serving as a Commissioner: You have the mandate to examine the entirety of how we carry out law enforcement in our country.
My charge to you is this:
Think creatively and boldly.
Test new ideas.
Plan for our future.
Consider diverse opinions and approaches.
Challenge each other and the Department of Justice.
Your work is important to our success.
Our nation is ready for you to begin this critical enterprise. Your efforts may well influence generations.
On behalf of the President and the entire Department of Justice, thank you in advance for your service to the country.
Now, I will ask the Commissioners-designate to come to the stage to take the Oath of Office.
To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit uniformed law enforcement officers to carry agency-issued firearms in certain Federal facilities, and for other purposes.
Well, it seems we have new developments in our continuing series of Cocktails & Popcorn.
Raskins asked Goodlatte to enter into the record the financial records of Michael Cohen seized from his home which produced three instances of indication that there are missing SAR mandated reports of suspicious financial activities that have, I guess, magically disappeared in FinCEN databases dealing with Essential Consultants.
I decided to save the Committee some time and just tell them that the difference is privatization because there are no civil rights; just use the child welfare system as your working model of comparison, which is probably how Essential Consultants were busy, busy, busy.
Most States do not execute any oaths of office for Child Protective Service workers or its privatized contractual services and you can see how that is working out.
Oh, and they talked about holding a hearing about the difference between a sworn officer and a civil officer, like "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) doing private consulting for a federal law enforcement agency by hiring more "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) who then hire someone to throw under the bus when they get busted as being a civil officer through privatization.
Then, the immunity of "attorney-client" privilege becomes the enigma wrapped in the conundrum of
the corporate shape shifting of privatization.
Just consider myself as the original source when it comes to the subject matter of sworn officers v. civilian law enforcement officers.
Here is a really great piece of privatized predictive propaganda to hand out to "The Elected Ones" who will do anything for another re-election dollar, so they can make sure everyone continues to keep their Byrne private policing contracts.
Michigan tried to arm a civilian policy enforcement officers for the purposes of suspected welfare fraud in Department of Health & Human Services Offices.
My apologies for not finding the introduced Bill, but when I questioned the Senator who supported it on the sworn v. civil policy enforcement officers being armed, I was met with silence, but it took a few years to learn why I was ignored.
To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit uniformed law enforcement officers to carry agency-issued firearms in certain Federal facilities, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
May 19, 2017
Mr. Hollingsworth (for himself and Mr. Reichert) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit uniformed law enforcement officers to carry agency-issued firearms in certain Federal facilities, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1.SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Protecting Officers of the Law In Civilian Establishments Act of 2017” or as the “POLICE Act of 2017”.
SEC. 2. PERMITTING UNIFORMED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO CARRY AGENCY-ISSUED FIREARMS.
Section 930 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—
(1) in subsection (d)—
(A) in paragraph (2), by striking “or” at the end;
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
“(4) the lawful carrying of agency-issued firearms and other dangerous weapons in Facility Security Level I and II Federal civilian public access facilities by a uniformed officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law.”; and
(2) in subsection (g), by adding at the end the following:
“(4) The term ‘Facility Security Level’ means a security risk assessment level assigned to a Federal facility by the facility’s security agency in accordance with the biannually issued Interagency Security Committee Standard.
“(5) The term ‘civilian public access facility’ means a facility open to the general public.
As the Dean of the U.S. House of Representatives, I had an opportunity to swear in House Speaker Paul Ryan for the 115th Congress. I thank the people of Southeast Michigan for entrusting me with this great honor to serve them in Congress. Our fight for jobs, justice and peace is far from over.
Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
You can watch the entire vote for the 115th Congress House Speaker here.
