Showing posts with label quid pro quo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label quid pro quo. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 1, 2020

Prelude To Detroit: FBI Arrest Toledo City Council Members

Waiting for Detroit....

#mayheavensfall


Federal agents charge four Toledo city council members in bribery probe

The FBI has arrested multiple Toledo city council members accused of taking cash in exchange for votes during what is described in court records as a years-long, sweeping bribery scandal involving some of the city’s highest elected officials.

City council members Tyrone Riley, Yvonne Harper, Larry Sykes, and Gary Johnson are all charged in federal court with accepting bribe payments for official acts and extortion, according to criminal complaints filed Tuesday. Keith Mitchell, an attorney who is accused of funneling bribes to Ms. Harper, also faces bribery and extortion charges. Ms. Harper is charged as well with interstate communications with intent to extort.



There was no answer at the Grand Avenue home listed for Keith Mitchell, an attorney, in Toledo on Tuesday. The FBI has taken multiple city councilmen in custody in a bribery case.

Attorney facing charges has history of involvement in council issues
FBI Special Agent Eric Smith in a Tuesday afternoon news conference said the councilmen were arrested without incident earlier in the day, while authorities are “actively seeking the whereabouts of Keith Mitchell.”

He said the councilmen committed a “fundamental breach” of the oath they took upon taking office, and violated the public’s trust for their own personal gain. The maximum prison sentence for bribery is 10 years, while the maximum for the extortion charge is 20.

Ms. Harper could face an additional two years in prison for the additional charge.

Details in the complaint suggest up to $34,260 changed hands between business owners, the councilmen, and Mr. Mitchell during the course of the investigation.

“The residents of Toledo should know, as should every other resident of the Northern District of Ohio, that where there are allegations of public corruption and kickbacks, we and our federal partners will be there every time,” U.S. Attorney Justin Herdman said in a statement.

The four council members appeared before Magistrate Judge James Knepp II by video conference in U.S. District Court in Toledo on Tuesday afternoon.
Image Description
U.S. Assistant Attorney Michael Freeman said the government did not seek detention for any of the defendants. Each councilman was released on a $50,000 unsecured bond, meaning if they fail to appear in court, they owe the government that much money. Additionally, they were barred from out-of-state travel and from having contact with co-defendants, victims, and witnesses.

Toledo bribery scandal rocks Lucas County's long-dominant political party

“I don’t know anything; I don’t know how this came about,” Ms. Harper told The Blade as she left the courthouse Tuesday afternoon.

She would not address the accusations of soliciting bribes, nor would she say if she will step down from her post on council.

Her attorney, Jon Richardson, could not be reached for comment. Ronnie Wingate, an attorney representing Mr. Sykes, declined to comment.

Both Mr. Riley, himself an attorney, and Mr. Johnson did not yet have legal representation but are expected to hire lawyers.

Toledo Mayor Wade Kapszukiewicz said in a statement that he was “shocked and heartbroken by today’s arrests.”

“This is a terrible day for Toledo — and for everyone who believes in the good that can be accomplished through public service,” he said.

Matt Cherry, president of city council and a Democrat like his accused colleagues, said he and other councilmen are cooperating with the investigation.

“Corruption of any kind cannot be tolerated and has no place in the government of Toledo and Ohio,” he said in a statement.

Court records suggest that one council member — Mr. Riley — has been soliciting bribes since at least 2013. It was Mr. Riley’s actions that also seemed to initially draw the attention of the FBI.

The criminal probe appears to have started on March 5, 2018, when a federal agent interviewed an unnamed source who owns several commercial properties, primarily gas stations and convenience stores, within the city. That person, who was arrested in 2018 for being in the United States illegally, reported previously providing things of value to Mr. Riley in exchange for his vote on matters before council.

Investigators noted that they believe the source married a U.S. citizen in 2000 with the sole intent of obtaining immigration benefits, but was denied lawful permanent resident status based on the fraudulent marriage, which was denied. The source has remained in the United States without lawful immigration status and is still subject to criminal and immigration consequences, according the complaint.

The source in 2013 purchased a gas station and convenience store on Dorr Street. Shortly thereafter, another business wanted to open a competing store nearby, but needed city council to approve a special use permit.

When the source asked Mr. Riley to vote against the permit, the councilman asked for a political donation, according to a criminal complaint.

The source wrote a $300 check to Mr. Riley, the complaint states. Additionally, Mr. Riley asked the source if alcohol could be delivered to the source’s business for Mr. Riley’s upcoming fund-raiser.

"Source 1 opined Riley did so in order to avoid paying the requisite taxes on alcohol by having the alcohol delivered to a liquor license holder. Source 1 agreed to accept the delivery of alcohol," according to the complaint.

Mr. Riley also requested that the source pay the delivery fee of $300. The source agreed, as long as Mr. Riley didn’t cash the $300 check he/she just provided, court records state. Still, Mr. Riley cashed the $300 check, and the councilman did not reimburse the source for the delivery fee, in essence taking $600.

In May, 2018, the source filed paperwork with the city requesting a "curb cut ” — a small ramp built into the curb of a sidewalk — be placed near a Dorr Street gas station in order to increase traffic flow into the business. The business was in Mr. Riley's district and such a request required a special permit that needed approval from city council.

Prior to the vote on May 23, 2018, the source met with Mr. Riley for lunch to discuss the matter. Mr. Riley expressed his support for the project. After the meal, Mr. Riley never attempted to pay for his portion of the approximately $130 restaurant bill, according to court records.

“Mr. Riley then ordered a meal (prime rib and carrot cake) ‘to go,’ knowing source 1 would pay for it,” a complaint states.

During a conversation in the parking lot, Mr. Riley also told the source he wanted $2,000 to be delivered to a family member.

During a second lunch meeting on May 31, 2018, the source provided Mr. Riley with $2,000 and informed Mr. Riley that it was the money, “for his support,” according to court records. A second unnamed person, identified as ‘middleman 1’ in court documents, joined the source and councilman for lunch then added $1,000 for Mr. Riley to accept a total of $3,000.

The middleman was directed to take the $3,000 in lieu of Mr. Riley accepting the funds in a public setting, records show. The middleman then purchased four $500 money orders with the money, forging the source's name as the purchaser with the money orders payable to Mr. Riley.

Over several months, Mr. Riley deposited $1,500 worth of money orders in his “Riley for Council,” account and then deposited the other $500 money order in his “Smith Park Community Coalition” account. Mr. Riley hosts an annual family festival at Smith Park in his district, which includes a bicycle giveaway for kids.

On Dec. 10, 2018, an FBI agent approached the middleman, who admitted to paying bribes to Mr. Riley and acting as a conduit to funnel bribes to the councilman, according to the complaint. That person then agreed to cooperate with the FBI investigation, becoming identified as source 2 in court documents.

Source 2 does not have a criminal history, however his/her actions prior to cooperating are subject to criminal penalties. Internet cafe businesses, which source 2 operated, may be in violation of federal or state gaming laws, records show.

The next day, source 2 spoke to Mr. Riley about the curb cut and indicated the first source was willing to pay more money if necessary.

On Jan. 2, 2019, source 1 — the owner of the Dorr Street gas station — again met for lunch with Mr. Riley to discuss the May, 31, 2018 bribe payment.

The councilman reassured source 1 that he would take care of everything necessary to get the special permit approved, records show. He also asked the source to financially support a re-election event and again left without paying for his meal.

On April 30, Mr. Riley informed source 1 that he garnered enough votes for council to support the curb cut permit, but that he would have to abstain from voting, according to the complaint. He later told the source that his abstention was to make sure that was no “appearance of impropriety.” City council approved the special permit but source 1 was required to install a sprinkler system on the property.

The gas station owner then met with Mr. Riley for lunch on May 9, 2019, thanking the councilman for his assistance. Mr. Riley again left the restaurant without paying for his meal, and added a piece of carrot cake "to go," according to the complaint.

On Tuesday, Mr. Riley told The Blade while standing outside the federal courthouse that he did not accept any bribes, and he needed to review the charges to understand how the allegations came about.

Internet cafe votes

Before ever becoming an FBI informant, the ‘middleman’ from the gas station curb cut exchange had applied for his own rezoning request to open an internet cafe business on Holland-Sylvania Road in April, 2018, according to the complaint. In that matter, too, the source paid Mr. Riley $3,000 for his support, according to court records.

The cafe came up for a vote on Oct. 23, 2018, and an FBI agent present at that council meeting witnessed Mr. Riley give source 2 a "thumbs up," in council chambers.

The next day, the source sent an additional payment of $1,000, which Mr. Riley directed to go to the Smith Park Community Coalition.

Federal investigators contend bank records confirmed the source paid Mr. Riley a total of $2,000.

Internet cafes continued to play a role in the FBI probe as it unfolded.

In October, 2018, source 2 applied for a special use permit to open an internet cafe on Central Avenue, which was within Ms. Harper's district.

The source was not as familiar with Ms. Harper and reached out to a fellow Toledo business owner — unnamed in court records — who received a renewal of a liquor license in April 2016, despite strong opposition from neighboring businesses and Toledo police, court records show.

The fellow business owner told source 2 that he paid approximately $5,000 in bribes through a local attorney — Mr. Mitchell — which was “the only way to ensure her support,” according to court records. The business owner suggested source 2 do the same thing and set up a meeting between them and the councilman.

About two weeks before the permit vote, Ms. Harper called source 2 and said she needed him/her to sponsor two tables at an upcoming event totaling $640, the complaint states. Source 2 on Feb. 12, “provided the requested money orders totaling $640 to Harper’s assistant while inside Council chambers,” according to court records. “Moments later, Harper sat on the Planning Committee and advocated for” the special use permit to go through.

Authorities contend source 2 eventually bribed four city council members for supportive votes: Ms. Harper through Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Riley, and Mr. Sykes. Council unanimously passed the special use permit on Feb. 25, 2020.

Federal authorities point to other special use permit votes regarding internet cafes they contend were influenced by bribes, including two votes related to businesses owned by an acquaintance of source 2.

Ms. Harper, through Mr. Mitchell, is accused of accepting bribes from that acquaintance in exchange for an affirmative vote on July 23, 2019, for a Manhattan Boulevard internet cafe.

That acquaintance in December, 2019, filed another permit request to open an internet cafe, this time on Secor Road, but the Toledo City Plan Commission in February recommended council reject the request.

This time, federal officials allege, it was Mr. Johnson who accepted bribes in exchange for a “yes” vote. Even with the affirmative votes of other councilmen, including Ms. Harper, Mr. Riley, and Mr. Sykes, the permit request failed.

Source 2 reached out to Mr. Johnson to see if there was any way the acquaintance could appeal the decision. Source 2 gave Mr. Johnson $2,000 in cash toward his campaign for Lucas County sheriff, court records show.

The councilman then advised source 2 to call the plan commission staff because “you don’t want it to come through one of us (City Councilpersons), ‘cuz it’s gonna look like a quid-pro-quo,” court records show.

As Mr. Johnson left the federal courthouse Tuesday, he told The Blade he was confused by the whole situation and needed to hire an attorney.

Greg Gilchrist, professor at the University of Toledo’s College of Law, said that, in general, criminal cases involving bribery charges against public officials require evidence that the money or gift was provided in direct exchange for an official act, such as voting a certain way on a particular issue.

That can be difficult to prove, Mr. Gilchrist said, because politics is awash in money and public officials could argue that the funds were received as part of a campaign contribution, or that the person paying out the alleged bribe wasn’t trying to sway a vote but was simply buying goodwill.

“You see this all over politics in more sophisticated ways that never become criminal,” he said.

Both the general public and corporations have the right to spend money, per the Supreme Court, in support of political issues. Lobbying, though, typically isn’t done with an explicit understanding that the money is paying for a direct action from a politician, Mr. Gilchrist said.

The line between legal financial contributions and criminal activity can be blurry, he said.

“I think we have a real problem with the state of the law here,” Mr. Gilchrist said.

He also noted that paying a bribe is illegal as well, but prosecutors often focus bribery investigations on any public officials involved rather than those seeking a favor. That’s because public officials’ misconduct would mean a violation of the public trust, Mr. Gilchrist said, though he advised citizens to withhold judgment until more of the facts are brought to light.

“Right now, all we have is a complaint,” he said.

Tuesday’s events are not the first time Toledo’s elected officials have been charged with accepting bribes.

Former Toledo Councilman Bob McCloskey served about 20 months in federal prison term after pleading no contest in Lucas County Common Pleas Court and guilty in federal court to unrelated bribery convictions in 2006.

The federal conviction stemmed from two FBI stings in which the former Democratic councilman accepted $5,000 from a businessman who wanted assistance from the city on development projects. The conviction in Common Pleas Court stemmed from a 2002 case in which McCloskey was accused of working for the defeat of a rezoning application because the applicants refused to set up a $100,000 prescription drug fund for Pilkington Plc retirees.

McCloskey, of East Toledo, was elected as a district councilman in 1993 and continuously re-elected until 2005 when he was elected to an at-large seat.

In the current case, Mr. Sykes is accused of accepting bribes tied to several votes related to internet cafes, including two owned by source 2 on Reynolds Road.

Source 2, according to the complaint, applied for the permits in September, 2019, and during that same time wanted councilmen to pass a moratorium on additional internet cafes to cut down on competition.

Court records suggest source 2 paid Mr. Sykes $1,000 in exchange for three votes in favor of the cafes and the moratorium legislation. Source 2 paid Mr. Riley $5,500 for those same favors, the complaint states.

Upon his exit from the courthouse, a reporter asked Mr. Sykes if he intends to step down from his elected position:

“For what?” he said.



Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, May 20, 2020

OBAMAGATE: Leaked Calls - Obama, Biden & Poroshenko

First, the Obama call was leaked...


Then, the Biden call was leaked...


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, May 13, 2020

SCOTUS: Stealin' The Vote - Bribery & The Electoral College - Removal From Office - Quid Pro Quo In Nullification

The question is whether an elected official can be removed from office for bribery in changing the electoral college vote in a presidential election.


Yes, there are "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) vociferously defending state elected officials in changing their votes based upon being bribed or blackmailed in the electoral college vote and whether these electors can be removed from office.

This is also called quid pro quo.

You can remove an elected official from office for bearing false witness through the vote in corrupting the public record.

You can also remove an elected official from office if they are unduly elected, with a fake ass certification of the oath of office.

It is called nullification.

I could never figure out why these lawyers use pre-Emancipation Proclamation court opinions to support post-Emancipation Proclamation arguments.

The real query should be to ask where did that bribery money come from.

I am going to say stealin' the children, land & vote.

When you take an oath of office to not breach the public trust, them, get bribed and/or blackmail, then, is this not called rule by fear, which means there is no consent?

But, in the situation of the Democratic National Committee, which is a private corporation, funded through stealin'  with foreign money which was stolen from the posterity of the state, how come we cannot just dissolve the incorporation under the laws of the States?

Wait a minute...

It seems the Michigan Democratic Party has been defrocked from its right to engage in any act of commerce, or political activities, like elections.

Image may contain: text

The purpose or purposes for which the corporation is organized are: To lawfully form a political party called the Democratic Party. To find and run people with compatible political philosophy for public office and appointments. To raise campaign funds and operating expenses as a non-profit political corporation within the laws of the state under the government and the laws of the United States of America. To make and hold all politicians accountable for any violations of our constitutions. To seek out candidates for public office that will ensure that the government of these United States and this state remain forever within the bounds of our respective constitutions. To seek the lawful means to publicly execute any public office holder for betraying their oath of office and our constitutions. To seek severe and public punishments for office holders that engage graft, greed and corruption while in office such as bribery, trading in influence, patronage, nepotism and cronyism, electoral fraud, embezzlement, kickbacks, unholy alliances, or involvement in organized crime.

Michigan LARA
ID Number: 800930810      
Summary for:  DEMOCRATIC PARTY           
The name of the DOMESTIC NONPROFIT CORPORATION:   DEMOCRATIC PARTY
     
The name was changed from: THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY on 09-29-2011
     
Entity type:   DOMESTIC NONPROFIT CORPORATION
Identification Number: 800930810 Old ID Number: 7102U
 
Date of Incorporation in Michigan:   08/16/2011

Purpose: Stealin' the children, land & vote.

Date of Dissolved: 12/01/2015 Term: Perpetual  <=============Look!!!!
 
Most Recent Annual Report: 2012 Most Recent Annual Report with Officers & Directors:   2012
         
The name and address of the Resident Agent:
Resident Agent Name: DEAN S HAZEL
Street Address: 1028 N MONROE ST
Apt/Suite/Other:
City: MONROE State: MI Zip Code: 48162
Registered Office Mailing address:
P.O. Box or Street Address:
Apt/Suite/Other:
City: State: Zip Code:
   
Act Formed Under:   162-1982 Nonprofit Corporation Act
   
The corporation is formed on a Directorship basis.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We should definitely ask Grace Meng if she can be removed from office.

Grace Meng, ’97
New York, New York

Grace Meng headshot
Grace Meng, top honcho of the GO BLUE
Corporate Shape Shifting
Democratic National Committee &
New York Congresswoman
Is serving her second term in the U.S. House of Representatives, representing the Sixth Congressional District of New York, encompassing the borough of Queens. Ms. Meng also serves as a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee and as the Vice Chair and Committee Director of the DNC, which is inactive because the parent corporation is dissolved.

Full Bio

Ms. Meng is the first Asian-American member of Congress from New York State and the only Congress member of Asian descent in the entire Northeast. She is also the first female member of Congress from Queens since former vice presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro. She also serves as a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee.

Ms. Meng is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and its Subcommittees on the Middle East and North Africa, and Asia. She also serves on the House Small Business Committee where she is the ranking member of the Agriculture, Energy and Trade Subcommittee.

Congresswoman Meng is also an assistant whip in the House and a founder and co-chair of the Kids’ Safety Caucus, the first bipartisan coalition in the House that promotes child-safety issues. She helped create and serves as co-chair of the Quiet Skies Caucus, which works to mitigate excessive aircraft noise that adversely affects communities. During her first term in the House, Ms. Meng scored several legislative victories, a significant accomplishment for a new member of Congress. In fact, she was one of just 12 Democrats – out of all 207 – who passed three or more bills, placing her in the top six percent.

Born in Elmhurst, Queens, and raised in the Bayside section of the borough, Ms. Meng attended local schools, and graduated from Stuyvesant High School, and the University of Michigan. She then earned a law degree from Yeshiva University, Benjamin Cardozo School of Law.

Prior to serving in Congress, Ms. Meng was a member of the New York State Assembly. Before entering public service, she worked as a public-interest lawyer. She resides in Queens with her husband, Wayne, and two sons, Tyler and Brandon, and her dog, Bounce.


ID Number: 800930811      
Summary for:  YET TO BE NAMED PARTY           
The name of the DOMESTIC NONPROFIT CORPORATION:   YET TO BE NAMED PARTY
     
The name was changed from: REPUBLICAN PARTY on 09-26-2013
The name was changed from: THE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 09-19-2011
     
Entity type:   DOMESTIC NONPROFIT CORPORATION
Identification Number: 800930811 Old ID Number: 71029T
 
Date of Incorporation in Michigan:   08/16/2011

Purpose:

Date of Dissolved: 12/01/2015 Term: Perpetual  <=============Look!!!
 
Most Recent Annual Report: 2012 Most Recent Annual Report with Officers & Directors:   2012
         
The name and address of the Resident Agent:
Resident Agent Name: DEAN S HAZEL
Street Address: 1028 N MONROE ST
Apt/Suite/Other:
City: MONROE State: MI Zip Code: 48162
Registered Office Mailing address:
P.O. Box or Street Address:
Apt/Suite/Other:
City: State: Zip Code:
 
     
Act Formed Under:   162-1982 Nonprofit Corporation Act
   
The corporation is formed on a Directorship basis.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No photo description available.
https://www.sos.state.co.us/biz/BusinessEntityDetail.do?quitButtonDestination=BusinessEntityResults&nameTyp=ENT&masterFileId=20161316586&entityId2=20161316586&fileId=20161316586&srchTyp=ENTITY
How can one swear a superseding oath of fealty to a foreign corporation, under the laws of a foreign nation when you have to swear an oath of fealty to the United States as a domestic office holder of the children's trusts?

Now, the question for SCOTUS is, "Which foreign nation?"

There is no certificate of dissolution, which means that it was placed in a legal suspended animation.

When, we have no idea but I am going with December 1, 2015.

Who did it?

I am going with Auntie, the Co-Parentor of the Children, as my final answer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DEMOCRATIC PARTY NONPROFIT
Company Number
800930810
Previous Company Numbers
71028U
Status
Dissolved <======================= Look!!!
Incorporation Date
16 August 2011 (over 8 years ago)
Dissolution Date
1 December 2015
Company Type
DOMESTIC NONPROFIT CORPORATION
Jurisdiction
Michigan (US)
Registered Address
1028 N MONROE ST MONROE MI 48162
United States
Previous Names
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Alternative Names
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (trading name, 2012-07-26 - 2015-12-01)
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (trading name, 2011-09-09 - 2011-09-29)
DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF MICHIGAN (trading name, 2011-08-22 - 2015-12-01)
DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF MICHIGAN STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE (trading name, 2011-09-09 - 2015-12-01)
MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY (trading name, 2011-08-17 - 2015-12-01)
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY (trading name, 2011-09-29 - 2015-12-01)
THE MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY (trading name, 2011-08-17 - 2015-12-01)
Agent Name
DEAN S HAZEL
Inactive Directors / Officers
DEAN S HAZEL, agent
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

With this new information presented to SCOTUS, it seems the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) failed to execute a simple search on the legal standing of their respective parties they are supposedly representing, which makes everything they just entered into the formal record to be an act of bearing false witness, meaning all that work on their arguments are now moot.

Idiots.

So, for my closing arguments, I am going to say, as I always do, how is it you can prosecute a ham sandwich, or rather, how can you prosecute something which does not exist?

DUH!

Where is Mueller?

This means everyone was unduly elected, grounds for nullification.

I shall also presume all the Michigan Governor Executive Orders are unconstitutional, too!

#sealsmatter

#matheheavensfall


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Friday, December 6, 2019

DOJ Busts Illegal Political Campaign Contributions But What About The Co-Conspirator Candidates?

Illegal political campaign contributions are also know as quid pro quo, but, praytell, who are candidate beneficiaries and what laws and policies have they promulgated?

I bet they got contracts.

Keep on impeaching!

#amytheheavensfall

Texas Businessman Convicted of Making Illegal Campaign Contributions to Political Candidates

A Houston, Texas, businessman has pleaded guilty to making illegal political contributions in the names of others to campaign committees for U.S. Senate and House of Representatives in 2017, announced Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick of the Southern District of Texas.
James D. Dannenbaum, 80, pleaded guilty today to violating the Federal Election Campaign Act. 
On Nov. 22, Dannenbaum Engineering Corporation (DEC) and its parent company, Engineering Holding Corporation, entered into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) and agreed to pay a $1.6 million criminal fine for its involvement in a multi-year conduit contribution scheme. Dannenbaum is DEC’s former CEO.
As part of the plea, Dannenbaum admitted that from 2015 through 2017, he and DEC made $323,300 in illegal conduit contributions through various employees and their family members to federal candidates and their committees. DEC corporate funds were used to advance or reimburse employee monies for these contributions. Dannenbaum did not reveal to any of the federal candidates that the corporation was the true source of the contributions. The object of the scheme was for DEC, Dannenbaum and a former employee to gain access to, and potentially influence, various candidates for federal office, including candidates for the presidency as well as the Senate and House of Representatives.
U.S. District Judge Sim Lake of the Southern District of Texas accepted the plea and set sentencing for March 5, 2019.
The FBI conducted the investigation. Trial Attorney Jessica C. Harvey of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Carolyn Ferko and John Pearson of the Southern District of Texas are prosecuting the case.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Thursday, November 21, 2019

IMPEACHMENT: Fiona Hill, Trump's former top Russia adviser and David Holmes, Political Counselor, U.S Embassy – Kiev, Ukraine

The fifth public impeachment hearing will feature testimonies from Fiona Hill, Trump's former top Russia adviser and David Holmes, Political Counselor, U.S Embassy – Kiev, Ukraine.



See Fiona lie.

Lie, Fiona, lie.

#perkinscoiesucks

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

IMPEACHMENT: Gordon Sondland U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Day 4

The fourth day of the public impeachment proceedings will take place in two parts. Gordon Sondland, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union, will testify at the public hearing before the House Intelligence Committee at 9am.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

IMPEACHMENT: Day 2 & 3 With Colored Commentary By il1usiveman - Testimony of Kurt Volker, Alexander Vindman, Tim Morrison, Jennifer Williams & Gordon Sondland



Public testimony from Volker, Vindman, Williams & Morrison



Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, is scheduled to testify Wednesday before the House Intelligence Committee.



Ukraine widens probe against Burisma founder to embezzlement of state funds

ZlochevskiyN.jpg
Mykola Vladislavovich Zlochevsky 
KIEV (Reuters) - Ukraine has widened its investigation into the founder of energy company Burisma to include suspicion of embezzling state funds, Prosecutor General Ruslan Ryaboshapka said on Wednesday.

FILE PHOTO: Ukrainian Prosecutor General Ruslan Ryaboshapka speaks during a news conference in Kiev, Ukraine, October 4, 2019. REUTERS/Valentyn Ogirenko/File Photo
Allegations of wrongdoing at Burisma go to the heart of a U.S. impeachment inquiry into whether President Donald Trump improperly pressured Ukraine’s leadership to investigate his main rival in the 2020 presidential race.

Trump wants Ukraine to launch an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, who was a board member at Burisma from 2014-2019.

The prosecutor who has investigated Burisma is Kostiantyn Kulyk, who previously met Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to discuss accusations against the Bidens.

After he took office in late August, Ryaboshapka launched a wide-ranging audit of criminal cases to see whether they had been conducted properly. Thirteen of them relate to Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky, Ryaboshapka told reporters at a briefing on Wednesday.

Burisma did not respond to a request for comment.

Ryaboshapka’s predecessors oversaw a series of investigations into Zlochevsky, a multimillionaire former minister of ecology and natural resources. The allegations concern tax violations, money-laundering and licences given to Burisma during the period where Zlochevsky was a minister.

Ryaboshapka said Zlochevsky was now suspected of the “theft of government funds on an especially large scale,” but did not provide evidence or details.

Ryaboshapka was speaking after being asked about a document from the general prosecutor’s office that was leaked at a separate press conference by three lawmakers earlier on Wednesday.

The document, only part of which was visible, showed Kulyk suspected Zlochevsky of offences including using his official position to embezzle 800 million hryvnias ($33 million) of money belonging to the central bank.

The investigation is effectively on hold, however, because the Ukrainian authorities cannot determine Zlochevsky’s whereabouts.

The central bank did not respond to a request for comment.

Giuliani has previously told Reuters he met Kulyk in Paris. He said at that meeting Kulyk echoed allegations that in 2016 Joe Biden as Vice President had tried to have Ukraine’s then-chief prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, fired to stop him investigating Burisma. Biden has accused Giuliani of peddling “false, debunked conspiracy theories” for repeating these allegations.

Kulyk told Reuters in October that he had been investigating Zlochevsky for around two years.

Reuters could not independently verify the extent of Kulyk’s involvement, but a source close to the energy company saw a spike in activity by Kulyk in regards to Burisma after Giuliani’s interest in the company and the Bidens had been conveyed to Kulyk’s then superior, Yuriy Lutsenko.

In late January, Kulyk sent Zlochevsky the first of several summons for questioning, documents seen by Reuters showed.

Zlochevsky has not commented on the summons or an announcement by Ryaboshapka in October that his office was reviewing a series of investigations linked to Zlochevsky.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, June 26, 2019

OVERSIGHT: Hearing on Hatch Act violations - Kellyanne Conway Does Not Show Up - Quid Pro Quo Campaign Personal Inurement Conundrum - Where Is The U.S. Treasury?


The Latin phrase quid pro quo originally implied that something had been substituted, as in this instead of that. Early usage by English speakers followed the original Latin meaning, with occurrences in the 1530s where the term referred to either intentionally or unintentionally substituting one medicine from another. This may also have extended to a fraudulent substitution of useful medicines for an ingenuine article. By the end of the same century, quid pro quo evolved into a more current use to describe equivalent exchanges.
In 1654, the expression quid pro quo was used to generally refer to something done for personal gain or with the expectation of reciprocity in the text The Reign of King Charles: An History Disposed into Annalls, with a somewhat positive connotation. It refers to the covenant with Christ as something "that prove not a nudum pactum, a naked contract, without quid pro quo." Believers in Christ have to do their part in return, namely "foresake the devil and all his works".
The "foresaken" part is in reference to circumvention of the laws of the land, the U.S., to adhere to the laws of the heavens, or rather ecclesiastic law, more intuitively recognized as private law of the Vatican, a jurisdictional issue.

The Covenant with Christ is now recognized as the UCC, the children's trust funds.

TRANSLATION: If I give you lots of money while you are in office, to your campaign, through corporate layered NGOs and PACs, where I was only able to make this large sum political campaign contribution by procuring a federal government contract, with the help of your Chief of Staff, who then changes your congressional votes for more money deposited into their credit union account, monthly, to make sure Bills are put on committee hearing agendas, so I do not get busted doing what I am doing, like stealin', is this considered a violation of the Hatch Act if I run my ops through a foreign corporation with a children's trust?

Yes, the members of the U.S. House of Representatives have voting rights, well, some, until Nancy Edmunds started stripping their right to vote.

What if I gave you money to your political campaign by donating to an arm of the Vatican, like Bethany Christian, and you did some congressional, or even executive or judicial stuff for me like launch the Christian Children's Crusade of Faith Based Funding, Medicaid Expansion and Title I chattel re-interpretations, to "save the savages" at the border by funding child welfare propaganda operations, is that an Hatch Act violation or would that be an act of insurrection?

Better yet, what is the proper jurisdiction to address the act of a staffer, and or public official, who has not just taken money, but foreign money, to participate in the construction and continuance of money laundering operations in overseas economic development of infrastructure for the private inurement of a privateering UCC?

So, did Kellyanne make any money running ops from her office, and if she did, where is the U.S. Treasury and is stealin' from the U.S. Treasury an act of treason?

I guess the only way to find out is to initiate impeachment proceedings.

Dilly dilly!

On a side note, Raskin's new hairstyle is rather complimentary to him.


Jim Jordan asked the most important question to OSC: "Who filed the complaint?"

I know who filed the complaint.

Do you know who filed the complaint?

Probably not, but I do see a transposable model.

Jim identified CREW as one of the groups that filed the complaint.

Cummings is asking OSC to name the other groups.

Kelly is questioning OSC social media rules and the correlation of donations and media activities.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©