Attorney General Boo Boo Barr Speaks On Success Of Operation Legend But Nothing On The Industry Of Trafficking Tiny Humans - Gerrymandering

Oh my!

Boo Boo Barr still refuses to speak upon all the tiny human goods being acquired by brute force under the arms of the U.S. for the purposes of maximizing revenues, a parental right of the foreign corporation, in the name of the tax exempt god?

Boo Boo Barr knows, well, that Operation Legend is about the welfare of the child, but is now focusing resources on El Chapo, where it sounds like Detroit was a major distribution center, but, hey, what do I know?

I know that this Operation Legend drug money had to have a network to launder the money which is probably why Boo Boo Barr is not talking about Foster Care, Adoption and all the Detroit Land Bank Authority fake ass mortgage fraud TARP schemes through children's trust funds to fund political campaigns because, if he ever did, he would have to...well....how shall I say this without making him exalt, even more, the virtues of his work....self-indict himself as a co-conspirator, for cloaking modern day human trafficking, the residuals of the peculiar institution.

*awkward*

Gerrymandering is not just the final results of redistricting, it is about the means and methods of the pattern of practice, which just so happens to be child welfare.

Before you are a man, you are a child.

Praise the lord and Boo Boo Barr.

There is another legend Boo Boo Barr has yet to speak upon.

#maytheheavensfall

Operation Legend: Update on Federal Charges

On July 8, 2020, Attorney General William P. Barr announced the launch of Operation Legend, a sustained, systematic and coordinated law enforcement initiative in which federal law enforcement agencies work in conjunction with state and local law enforcement officials to fight violent crime. The initiative is named in honor of four-year-old LeGend Taliferro, who was shot and killed while he slept early in the morning of June 29 in Kansas City. 

Launched first in Kansas City, MO., on July 8, 2020, the operation was expanded to Chicago and Albuquerque on July 22, 2020, to Cleveland, Detroit, and Milwaukee on July 29, 2020, to St. Louis and Memphis on August 6, 2020, and to Indianapolis on August 14, 2020.

Since the operation’s launch, through Monday, August 31, 2020, more than 2000 arrests – included 147 for homicide – have been made; more than 544 firearms have been seized; and more than seven kilos of fentanyl, 14 kilos of heroin, 12 kilos of cocaine, and 50 kilos of methamphetamine have been seized.

Of those individuals arrested, 476 have been charged with federal offenses. 249 of those defendants have been charged with firearms offenses, while 185 have been charged with drug-related crimes. The remaining defendants have been charged with various offenses. The breakdown of federal charges is below.

Kansas City, MO.

99 defendants have been charged with federal crimes outlined below.

• 28 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 60 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 11 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Chicago, Ill.

103 defendants have been charged with federal crimes outlined below.

• 27 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 72 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 4 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Albuquerque, NM.

35 defendants have been charged with federal crimes outlined below.

• 15 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 14 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 6 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Cleveland, OH.

54 defendants have been charged with federal crimes outlined below.

• 39 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 13 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 2 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Detroit, MI.

41 defendants have been charged with federal offenses outlined below.  

• 17 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 21 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 3 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Milwaukee, WI.

15 defendants have been charged with federal crimes outlined below.

• 2 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 12 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 1 defendant has been charged with other violent crimes.

St. Louis, MO.

89 defendants have been charged with federal crimes.

• 44 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 37 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 8 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Memphis, Tenn.

14 defendants have been charged with federal offenses.

• 3 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 8 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 3 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Indianapolis, Indiana

26 defendants have been charged with federal crimes outlined below.

• 10 defendants have been charged with narcotics-related offenses;
• 12 defendants have been charged with firearms-related offenses; and
• 4 defendants have been charged with other violent crimes.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Launches Another Gerrymandering Election Interference Scheme - Detroit Eviction Of "The Poors"

FUN FACT! IF YOU DO NOT LIVE THERE, YOU CANNOT VOTE THERE

ANOTHER FUN FACT! IF YOUR WATER IS SHUTOFF, YOUR VOTE IS TALLIED

ONE MORE FUN FACT! THIS IS CALLED GERRYMANDERING WHERE SCOTUS OPINED THAT THIS PRACTICE IS CONSTITUTIONAL

FINAL FUN FACT! IF YOU DO NOT RESIDE AT YOUR PLACE OF VOTING REGISTRATION 30 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION, YOUR VOTE IS DISQUALIFIED

ABSOLUTELY THE LAST FUN FACT! THERE IS NO STATE LAW ON MAIL IN VOTING QUALIFICATIONS FOR TALLY AND CERTIFICATION OF ELECTION

It seems October 4, 2020 is our deadline to see who will be qualified to vote the November 4, 2020 Presidential Election.

Just another transposable model in gerrymandering because TARP 5.0 is still in play, and thy name is reparations.

Duggan has a plan, too.

They got away with TARP when they ran the fake ass property tax and mortgage fraud schemes, which led to the Detroit Bankruptcy and subsequent redistricting.

I am not even going to mention the role of the Detroit Land Bank Authority because that would just ruin the ending of this tale.

Forfeited Property List with Interested Parties

Wayne County properties that have been subject to tax foreclosure:

http://www.legalnews.com/pdf/2020_Wayne_County_Delinquent_Tax_Liens.pdf

Search 2020 Wayne County Delinquent Tax Liens on the Detroit Legal News Website:

http://www.legalnews.com/detroit/tax-liens/

Protesters demand relief as Detroit's eviction ban ends

As Detroit's 36th District Court resumed hearing eviction cases Monday after the end of the city's ban, protesters gathered outside to demand aid for tenants struggling to pay their bills amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

The city's eviction ban expired a month after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's four-month moratorium was lifted, leading courts outside Detroit to accept cases from landlords seeking to oust tenants for nonpayment of rent.

Anna Elsbernd, 27, of Detroit holds her sign during the rally at the 36th District Court to protest evictions, Monday, August 17, 2020.
"There's confusion and people are not understanding and knowing where they can go and (they're) feeling like the government has let them down, the court has let them down," said Marie Sims, an organizer with Detroit Eviction Defense, which partnered with Detroit Renter City on Monday's protest.

Protesters rally in front of the 36th District Court to protest home evictions at 36th District Court, Monday, August 17, 2020.
About 60 marchers carrying signs formed a circle in front of the court on Madison Street and Brush and yelled out chants under the blazing sun.

Organizers passed out fliers with information on eviction assistance to people waiting in line to have their cases heard.

"We want to make sure that the people who stayed home because of this pandemic and they lost their jobs and weren't working for three or four months, we want to make sure they don't get evicted because they stayed home," said Jim Dwight, a 44-year-city resident who is an organizer with Detroit Eviction Defense.

Subscribe for full access to stories, galleries, videos and more
Already a subscriber? Sign in for access
Learn about the benefits of subscribing
Story idea? Contact the staff
In July, the state implemented a $50 million Eviction Diversion Program to help landlords receive payments for back rent and allow tenants to stay in their homes.

In exchange for allowing tenants to remain in their homes, landlords who participate in the program can receive a lump sum payment of up to 90% of owed rent. Participating landlords will have to forgive any late fees and dismiss up to 10% of the owed rent.

Eviction filings will be resolved by a conditional dismissal instead of a final judgment to protect a tenant's credit history. Tenants whose back rent is not covered fully by the program will be able to opt into "manageable payment plans."

Heather Mahoney of Ferndale, marches with a small group to protest home evictions at 36th District Court, Monday, August 17, 2020.
However, while the Eviction Diversion Program offers a middle ground for landlords and tenants, many landlords will not participate.

Katie Bach, a spokeswoman for the Michigan State Housing Development Authority, said last week that they wouldn't have data on the numbers of landlords who declined to participate for several weeks.

Jim Schaafsma, an attorney with the Michigan Poverty Law Program, said it's frustrating that the state didn't require landlords to comply with the diversion initiative. Other states have mandated a six-month repayment period or implemented longer eviction moratoriums, he said.

 "If you would have told most businesses who have been affected by the virus that you are going to get 90 cents on the dollar, they’d jump on it," he said. "It’s a voluntary program. It is good as it goes, but it’s not good enough."

Attorney Sidney Katz, who represents landlords, said some of his clients aren't participating because it gives residents 12 months to pay any owed rent that isn't covered by the program, and because landlords will have to forfeit 10% of the rent owed.

Protesters rally in front of the 36th District Court to protest home evictions at 36th District Court, Monday, August 17, 2020.
"Landlords have the ability to make choices and decisions as far as their property is concerned and I get it, everybody's losing money," said Sims. "But they're not alone, they're not the only ones losing money ... this is going to put so many people homeless and on the street."

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

The Tale Of Gerrymandering & SCOTUS: How To Cloak The Residuals Of The Peculiar Institution - Stealin' The Children, Land & Vote By Blasphemy

Origins of Gerrymandering - CPS

There is a blog SCOTUS clerks use as reference when it comes to making decisions about gerrymandering cases.

This particular article, below, is about gerrymandering, which just so happens to be false advisement, which is used as obviation in generating court opinions and the law of the land because it omits to tell the tale of Child Protective Services as the Gerry Secret Society, to become so affectionately called in the United States, gerrymandering.

This is fraud because gerrymandering is the act of stealin' the children, land & vote, the residuals of the peculiar institution, whereby, SCOTUS has ruled is constitutional; hence, slavery was never abolished, due to the "Exception Clause" of the Thirteenth Amendment.

SCOTUS Realizes Gerrymandering Is Constitutional Stealin' The Children, Land & Votes Under The Thirteenth Amendment Exception Clause

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The Allodial Title Holder of the Children's Trust Bonds

The following is the meaning of a bond and its many legal machinations of bondage, for children are immoveable chattels, attached to the allodial title of land, because children cannot be emancipated until the juridic age of 15 years.

https://beverlytran.blogspot.com/search?q=bonds

15 U.S. Code SUBCHAPTER III—TRUST INDENTURES

The following is the factual, recorded, origins, found in multiple attestation, of Gerrymandering, and the Gerry Secret Society, the response to Emancipation Proclamation: the creation of - 

Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children

CHILDREN'S HOUSE, INC. NONPROFIT

Company Number

16120

Status

Inactive Merged Out

Incorporation Date

1 December 1920 (over 99 years ago)

Dissolution Date

18 April 2000

Company Type

DOMESTIC NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION

Jurisdiction

New York (US)

Registered Address

• 100 EAST OLD COUNTRY RD, BOX 510, MINEOLA, NEW YORK, 11501
• United States

Previous Names

• CHILDREN'S HOUSE, INC.
• NASSAU CHILDREN'S HOUSE, INC.
• NASSAU CHILDREN'S SHELTER, INC.
• SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO CHILDREN, NASSAU COUNTY, INC.

The Response 1874-1875

SPCC Founding 1874
Henry Bergh and Elbridge Gerry, aware that the hour for children had finally come, recruited respected philanthropist John D. Wright and formally pledged themselves to the establishment of organized child protection.
Children's Protective Society
The undersigned, desirous of rescuing the unprotected children
of this city and State
from the cruelty and demoralization which
neglect and abandonment engender'
hereby engage to aid, with their sympathy and support,
the organization and working of a Children's Protective Society,
having in view the realization of so important a purpose.
On December 15, 1874, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children was founded and organized. Gerry annunciated its unique purpose:
"to rescue little children from the cruelty and demoralization which neglect, abandonment and improper treatment engender; to aid by all lawful means in the enforcement of the laws intended for their protection and benefit; to secure by like means the prompt conviction and punishment of all persons violating such laws and especially such persons as cruelly ill treat and shamefully neglect such little children of whom they claim the care, custody or control."
NYSPCC Incorporation 1875
On Tuesday, April 27, 1875, the SPCC was incorporated as The New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, the first child protection agency in the world. John D. Wright became its first president, Gerry and Bergh vice-presidents.

But this is what they were really doing:

Humanitarian reformers had expressed concern for children before the 1870s, organizing efforts to end the corporal punishment of school children, creating institutions to care for ORPHANS, and even sending orphans by train to foster families in the West. But reformers were reluctant to interfere in families, which had a recognized right to privacy. By the 1870s, the relative weights of the concern for children and the concern for family privacy had shifted. Mary Ellen's residence with foster parents (her biological parents were dead) may have eased her protectors' willingness to cross that boundary. Differences in class and culture also facilitated the creation of the SPCCs. The organizations were directed by wealthy, conservative, Protestant white men, whereas their clientele were mostly poor, Catholic immigrant families or poor black families. These were powerful distinctions during the late nineteenth century.
Their founders conceived of the SPCCs as law enforcement agencies. Agents were to find abused children–on the street or through tips made by concerned neighbors, relatives, and even the abused children themselves–investigate their families, and prosecute abusers. Many states gave the societies police powers, such as the right to issue warrants, or allowed the police to aid them. Most importantly, "the cruelty" (as SPCC agents were sometimes known in poor neighborhoods) could remove children from their homes.

Learn more: BEVERLY TRAN: SCOTUS Realizes Gerrymandering Is Constitutional Stealin' The Children, Land & Votes Under The Thirteenth Amendment Exception Clause http://beverlytran.blogspot.com/2019/10/scotus-realizes-gerrymandering-is.html#ixzz6PJ8lR5AB
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare

The following is false information, intentionally manufactured to manipulate the public record, to control justice, in favor of the publishing blasphemer, because I just demonstrated that Jennifer Davis could have told the truth, if only she knew how to do a internet basic search, but, then again, blame could be attributed to Google, simply for the fact that they lied in testimony to U.S. House Judiciary Committee claiming they do not suppress searches, which obviouly they do, because the world is just finding out about the truth of the history of gerrymandering being the response to the Thirteenth Amendment:

#maytheheavensfall

Elbridge Gerry and the Monstrous Gerrymander

February 10, 2017

 by Jennifer Davis <==== blasphemer

Gerrymander the Blasphemer

The first “gerrymander” was drawn on a map and signed into law on February 11, 1812. Elbridge Gerry, then governor of Massachusetts, signed into law a redistricting plan designed to keep his political party in power in the upcoming election. Upset that the Federalist Party was critical of James Madison’s foreign policy, Gerry signed the reapportioning plan that heavily favored his Republican party. Gerry, a man who staunchly followed his principles even against the popular actions of his colleagues, was hesitant to sign the law. The Republican legislators sponsoring and forcing through the bill redrew “voting lines so that the Federalist vote was concentrated in a few districts, while the Republican vote was spread over many. ” The redistricting authorized by Gerry won 29 seats for the his Republican party, whereas the Federalists won a puny 11 seats.* Gerry’s district of Essex was a particularly odd shape, long on one side and curved along the north end.

“The Gerrymander: a New Species of Monster” Boston Gazette, March 26, 1812, page 2, Library of Congress Newspaper, Serials and Government Publications Division. 

When the law passed, reportedly the editor of the Boston Gazette posted the map with the newly drawn districts on his office wall, and in talking to a fellow editor, compared the shape of Gerry’s district to a salamander. The editor said, “Salamander! Call it a Gerrymander” — the portmanteau of Gerry + salamander. Gerry’s name, incidentally, is pronounced with a hard “g” as in “gary,” but over time the word “gerrymander” came to be pronounced with the soft “g” as in “jerry,” the pronunciation we use today. In any case, the picture of the cartoon gerrymander map was published in the Boston Gazette on March 26, 1812, with the caption: “The horrid Monster of which this drawing is a correct representation, appeared in the County of Essex, during the last session of the Legislature.” The word has since entered into national and international political language.

Gerrymandering is a current political topic today; as always, it is usually initiated by the incumbents to retain or increase their power. When gerrymandering is taught in U.S. history classes, it is likely students will be shown a picture of the original political cartoon drawn by Elkanah Tisdale for the Gazette and held here at the Library of Congress. Gerry did not win the 1812 election for his home district despite the reapportionment. He did, however, go on to become James Madison’s second vice president later in 1812. He was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a member of the House of Representatives, twice governor of Massachusetts, and (full disclosure) he proposed the founding of the Library of Congress; he’d probably be dismayed to find this idea is how his name is remembered. Nevertheless, Gerry is forever tied to an important concept in American legal history.

If you’re interested in learning more about modern gerrymandering and the law, here is a shortlist of some of our recent holdings, and a map of Essex County:

KF4905.B85 2010 Bullock, Charles S., 1942-  Redistricting: the most political activity in America.

KF4930.H37 2014 Hasen, Richard L. Legislation, statutory interpretation, and election law : examples and explanations.

KF4905 .M29 2016 McGann, Anthony J. Gerrymandering in America: the House of Representatives, the Supreme Court, and the future of popular sovereignty.

KF4905 .R39 2010 The realist’s guide to redistricting: avoiding the legal pitfalls. 2^nd ed.

KF4891.S74 2004 Stephenson, D. Grier. The right to vote: rights and liberties under the law.

KF4557 .S74 2014 Stevens, John Paul,  1920-  Six amendments: how and why we should change the Constitution.

KF4886 .T65 2013 Tokaji, Daniel P. Election law in a nutshell.

G3763.E7F7 1812 .E8 Essex County; Worcester County.

*source: Selesky, Harold E. Encyclopedia of the American Revolution: Library of Military History, 2006

The following is the history of gerrymandering by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children:

https://nyspcc.org/wp-content/uploads/booklet.pdf

The following is a video on the U.S. history of Gerrymandering.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Prelude To Detroit: Noel Francisco & His Battle To Cover Up Gerrymandering

Remember when I told you Noel Francisco sucked?

Do you remember how I went into ad nausuem detail of how Noel is a co-conspirator in the  Michigan Emergency Manager Law, Detroit Bankruptcy, Detroit Grand Bargain, Detroit Land Bank Authority, TARP, election interference, campaign fraud, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Parental Rights, Catholic Charities, trafficking tiny humans in foster care and adoption?

No?

Well, I guess you will just have to wait for the tale of stealin' the children, land & vote , otherwise known as gerrymandering, where he argued that it was a legal act for redistricting, to be told, again, because we are in Detroit and I have preserved the history.

#maytheheavensfall 

Solicitor General Noel Francisco Expected to Step Down

WASHINGTON — Solicitor General Noel J. Francisco, the Justice Department official responsible for defending the Trump administration before the Supreme Court, has told the department that he plans to leave, a person familiar with his decision said late Wednesday.

Mr. Francisco’s top deputy, Jeff Wall, will most likely step in as acting solicitor general as the White House searches for a replacement.

While it is not unusual for solicitors general to leave as the Supreme Court winds down its term, Mr. Francisco would be the second high-ranking official to depart in the coming months.

On Monday, Brian A. Benczkowski, the head of the department’s criminal division, announced that he would leave in July. While at the department, he has worked to stem the nation’s opioid crisis and handled the politically charged referral of a whistle-blower complaint about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.

The person who spoke of Mr. Francisco’s planned departure did so on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the news media. The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment early Thursday. CNN first reported Mr. Francisco’s decision to leave.

Since Mr. Francisco, 50, was confirmed as solicitor general in September 2017, he has gone before the Supreme Court to argue some of the most controversial positions taken by the Trump administration, most notably Mr. Trump’s decision in his first week in office to ban people from several predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States.

The travel ban set off a firestorm in the Justice Department when Sally Q. Yates, then the acting attorney general, refused to comply and was fired. The Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that Mr. Trump had the authority to impose the ban.

The solicitor general got his start in high-level Republican politics when he joined the legal team of George W. Bush, then a presidential candidate, during the 2000 Florida election recount. Mr. Francisco served in Mr. Bush’s administration until leaving in 2005 for Jones Day, the white-shoe law firm that has produced several Trump administration legal hires, including Donald F. McGahn II, the former White House counsel.

Much of Mr. Francisco’s tenure at the Justice Department was overshadowed by the investigation of the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who was looking into Russian interference in the 2016 election, any ties between Russia and the Trump campaign, and whether Mr. Trump tried to obstruct the inquiry.

The investigation, which lasted nearly two years, so enraged the president over that time that department officials worried he would fire the special counsel or the top officials overseeing it.

The attorney general at the start of the Mueller inquiry, Jeff Sessions, had recused himself from Russia matters, and the associate attorney general, Rachel L. Brand, resigned in early 2018. That placed Mr. Francisco squarely in the line of succession to oversee the Russia investigation should Mr. Trump fire Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, who had appointed and oversaw Mr. Mueller.

This May, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked Congress from seeing redacted portions of the special counsel’s report that contained grand jury information. Democrats had argued that they needed the materials as part of their impeachment proceedings against the president. Mr. Francisco had argued that the materials should not be released because Congress did not have the right to obtain grand jury materials as part of an impeachment proceeding.

Most recently, Mr. Francisco wrote a brief asking an appeals panel to force Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to grant the Justice Department’s motion to withdraw its case against Michael T. Flynn, Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser.

Mr. Francisco essentially argued that the courts did not have the authority to reject prosecutorial decisions made by the executive branch.

After the Justice Department said it wished to withdraw its case against Mr. Flynn, who had twice pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I., Judge Sullivan tapped John Gleeson, a former mob prosecutor and federal judge, to argue against the government’s position.

Mr. Gleeson said on Wednesday that the government’s motion should not be granted and that the decision to withdraw the Flynn case was a “gross abuse of prosecutorial power” and a political act meant to help an ally of the president’s.

But if the appeals panel agrees with Mr. Francisco and forces Judge Sullivan to grant the motion to withdraw, Mr. Gleeson’s argument could be moot.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Private Redistricting Teleconference Featuring Detroit Land Bank Authority Legal Genius Michael Brady - 2-27-2020

Oh, lookie!

Michael Brady is on the redistricting team.

Michael has alot of experience in gerrymandering through fake ass private organizations.

Jocelyn Benson has alot of experience when it comes to making up her own rules, with advice and consent of fake ass private organizations, too.

I would go, but I am not credentialed media, which is a good thing because I would just publish their own words coming from their mouths, including the audience comments, and use it against them.

I bet they are going to produce a fancy video with cute memes and hashtags about all their redistricting efforts, but will forget the history, because they are bleachbitting legacy, which is why I do what I do.

MEDIA ADVISORY Note: This event is for credentialed media only Feb. 26, 2020 Contact: Mike Doyle DoyleM@Michigan.gov

Press teleconference with updates on Michigan's Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission State officials will announce Michigan has already processed more than 3,000 applications, far more than minimum required by constitution WHEN: Thursday, Feb. 27, 2 p.m. [Opening remarks 2-2:15 p.m.; Media Q&A to follow until or before 2:45 p.m. as necessary] WHO:             Michigan Assistant Secretary of State Heaster Wheeler Sally Marsh, director of special projects for the Michigan Department of State and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson Michael J. Brady, chief legal director for the Michigan Department of State and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson Jake Rollow, director of communications & external affairs for the Michigan Department of State and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson LOCATION: Via conference call – Please RSVP to Mike Doyle of the Michigan Department of State at DoyleM@Michigan.gov or 517-335-3264 to receive the conference call number. WHAT: Press teleconference to discuss applicant demographics and selection methodology for Michigan’s Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission. More than 3,000 applications – nearly half of the more than 6,000 received to date – for the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission have been processed. This total, as measured through Feb. 26, means Michigan has already received far more applications than the minimum required by the constitution. A profile of Michigan’s pool of applicants whose applications have already been processed will be available at RedistrictingMichigan.org. The data will be updated regularly as more applications are processed. In addition, the public comment period is open through March 27 for the weighted selection methodology proposed to identify the 200 semifinalists from whom the commission’s 13 members will ultimately be randomly selected – four affiliated with the Republican Party, four affiliated with the Democratic Party and five who do not affiliate with either major party. During the teleconference, state officials will discuss how the random selection process for the 200 semifinalist applicants will “mirror, as closely as possible, the geographic and demographic makeup of the state” as required by the Michigan Constitution. Officials will emphasize that Michigan voters can continue to apply through the June 1, 2020, deadline. Michigan voters amended the state constitution in 2018 to give the responsibility for drawing state and congressional electoral districts to a randomly selected, independent commission of citizens. The Michigan Department of State launched the application process for the commission in October 2019. It will conclude on June 1. The constitution designates the secretary of state as administrator of the application and selection process for the commission, as well as “secretary without a vote” providing administrative support to the commission once formed. More information on the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission is available at RedistrictingMichigan.org.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Fails To Explain Foreign Corporate Parental Rights & The Residuals Of The Peculiar Institution Of Gerrymandering In Human Asset Management Private Prisons

How can Michigan construct proposed legislation to end prison gerrymandering when it does not even legally define what gerrymandering is?

SCOTUS Realizes Gerrymandering Is Constitutional Stealin' The Children, Land & Votes Under The Thirteenth Amendment Exception Clause

Now, that I have provided the legal origins of the entire doctrine of gerrymandering, we shall move into the next phase, by identifying the cui bono, or rather the national origins of the financial benefactors in the passage of this Bill.

SENATE BILL NO. 759
January 28, 2020, Introduced by Senator SANTANA and referred to the Committee on Elections.
A bill to require that the pre-incarceration address of incarcerated individuals be reported when providing information for voting district population counts; and to provide for the powers and duties of certain state officers and entities.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
Sec. 1. As used in this act:
(a) "Department" means the department of corrections.
(b) "Pre-incarceration address" means the address at which an incarcerated individual resided before the individual's current incarceration.
Sec. 2. For purposes of reporting the residency of an individual who is incarcerated in a correctional institution operated by the department, as that information relates to a population count that is used for the establishment of a voting district, the department shall report the individual's pre-incarceration address.

Found in this Bill, we have a term, that is arbitrarily and capriciously defined as "pre-incarceration address".

'Your Body Being Used': Where Prisoners Who Can't Vote Fill Voting Districts

When an individual is duly order by the court of law to be placed under the auspices of the State, there is a transfer of the grant of parental right of the chattel, meaning, the prison, being a private prison in most cases, becomes the corporate parent.

The corporate parent has the legal right, by proxy, to execute the right to vote, which is done through absentee ballots.

The term which has been traditionally used to describe this prison gerrymandering is called vote packing, which I watched bloom in Detroit.

So, if voting is based upon residency, and not domicile, how come no one has raised this issue of law?

I am going to go out there and just say that we are dealing with the application of private commercial law over the management of human capital assets, such as the right to vote.

The majority of individuals who go to prison, are sentenced under the moral turpitude laws of poverty, meaning, they committed crimes because they were tired of being hungry, or, what I call as being victims of "Whoops" human socioeconomic human lab rat experimental programs gone horribly wrong.

Either way, someone needs to explain to me why gerrymandering is even considered legal, because it is just another fancy way of saying stealin' the children, land and vote.

Gerrymandering was named after Elbridge Gerry, former Vice President and grand father of Eldridge Gerry founded the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, where what we know today as Child Protective Services was known as the Gerry Society.

Michigan bill aims to end 'prison gerrymandering' before 2020 census

Proposed legislation would change how Michigan's prisoners are counted in legislative and congressional districts, a move that researchers say could shift political power away from rural areas that claim a significant number of incarcerated people as constituents.

Senate Bill 759 aims to end the practice of counting prisoners as residents in the districts where they're currently incarcerated, which critics call "prison gerrymandering."

The bill, introduced by Sen. Sylvia Santana, D-Detroit, would require that prisoners' last-known addresses be used when establishing voting districts. Santana said the change is necessary to draw districts "of equal and fair proportions."

“Prisoners are people, too, and they should be counted in their home communities if we are to build a truly representative democracy," she said.

Like prisoners in all states except Maine and Vermont, the roughly 38,000 people serving time in Michigan Department of Corrections facilities cannot vote.

Advocates argue that counting prisoners in the districts where they're incarcerated, even though they're not part of surrounding community and cannot vote, unfairly boosts the populations of those areas.

"Communities with prisons have their political power inflated because their populations are inflated because of people who are in prison, and other communities see their votes sort of diluted," said Cara Brumfield, senior policy analyst for the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality’s Economic Security and Opportunity Initiative.

More: Analysis: Detroit will be toughest US city to count population for 2020 Census

More: Michigan population increases for 8th straight year, but remains under 10 million

Political districts are redrawn every 10 years after the census.Santana hopes to change the law by April 1, designated as Census Day, when the U.S. Census Bureau says every home should have received an invitation to participate in the census.

Santana's legislation stands to have the greatest effect on state House districts that claim a high percentage of prisoners as constituents, said Aleks Kajstura, legal director of the Prison Policy Initiative, a nonprofit advocating to count incarcerated people as residents of their home addresses.

"There would be less representational power concentrated in these few districts that have these huge incarcerated populations," she said. "There wouldn't be anywhere in the state that would gain the same amount of power that these districts lost."

There were three House districts drawn after the 2010 census that claimed prisoners as more than 5% of their population, Kajstura said.

Just more than 7% of people in District 70 were incarcerated when the mid-Michigan district was drawn after the 2010 census, according to Kajstura. That district is represented by Rep. Jim Lower, R-Greenville, who said Thursday that he didn't have enough information to form an opinion on Santana's bill. He added that voter turnout in his district, which includes three prisons in Montcalm and Gratiot counties, is low compared to surrounding areas.

It's unlikely that the proposal would have a significant effect on congressional districts. It wouldn't affect elections at the municipal or county levels because state law excludes state prisoners from being counted for representation purposes.

Advocates have been fighting for years for the U.S. Census Bureau to change its longstanding practice of counting prisoners as residents of the district where they're incarcerated.

The bureau hasn't altered its policy, but seven states have passed legislation similar to Santana's bill. After the census count, those states will adjust the data to reallocate incarcerated people for redistricting. Similar legislation is pending in eight other states, Kajstura said.

A state-level change to where Michigan's prisoners are counted would have no bearing on the distribution of federal funds for services and infrastructure because funding formulas don't use redistricting data, Kajstura said.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Happy New Year To DHS & Commerce Department -What Is The Citizenship Of The Foster Kid?

Happy New Year to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Census!

Now, what is the citizenship of the foster kid?

So, if a child is a citizen of Guatemala crosses the Mexican-U.S. Border, to be taken into U.S. custody and placed under a privatized, state contracted child placing agency like Bethany Christian, a Michigan licensed business entity, which is under the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, a foreign corporation, where that child is processed through the policy, not law, like DACA & DAPA, of the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children under the legal aegis of the contracting state Child Placing Agency, qualifying the child for Targeted Case Management billing reimbursement of Medicaid for the purposes of concurrent case planning to fast track Termination of Parental Rights for adoption, which includes a new identity and an issued Social Security Number, what is the citizenship of that child and what happens with the original identity?

Who owns the foster kid?

Who has parental rights?

How were parental rights terminated?

Did the parents have due process and if not, why?

How many times was the foster kid adopted and were the newly issued birth certificates counted as new identitites?

Boy, oh, boy, I cannot wait to see how they are going to answer.

Better yet, I cannot wait to see them try to explain the process of parental rights, but that would be due process, which could only happen upon the citizenship establishment of the foster kid.

To Produce Citizenship Data, Homeland Security To Share Records With Census

The Department of Homeland Security has agreed to share certain government records from its databases to help the Census Bureau produce data about the U.S. citizenship status of every person living in the country.

DHS quietly announced the data-sharing agreement in a regulatory document posted on its website on Dec. 27. It marks the latest development in the Trump administration's ongoing effort to carry out the executive order President Trump issued in July after courts blocked the administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

Two weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year to keep the citizenship question off, President Trump said in the executive order that releasing citizenship data based on existing records would allow states to redraw voting districts using the number of eligible voters rather than all residents in an area — a method of redistricting that a prominent GOP strategist concluded would politically benefit Republicans and non-Hispanic white people.

According to the DHS document, which was first reported by Federal Computer Week, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is sharing personal information about naturalized U.S. citizens and green card holders from records going back to as early as 1973.

More recent records dating to 2013 from Customs and Border Protection, as well as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, will provide the Census Bureau with data such as noncitizens' full names, birth dates, addresses, Social Security numbers and alien registration numbers. CBP is also sharing the travel histories of visitors to the U.S., including those who have overstayed their visas.

Federal law restricts the release of immigration records about survivors of human trafficking and of certain other crimes who have applied for special visas, as well as survivors of domestic abuse who have applied for immigration benefits under the Violence Against Women Act. Still, USCIS has asked for permission to release to the Census Bureau data about refugees and asylum-seekers, whose records generally cannot be shared without their consent or a waiver signed by the Homeland Security secretary.

Trump Wants Citizenship Data Released But States Haven't Asked Census For That
The bureau plans to use the data it does receive to try to match the DHS records with those from other agencies about the same person. Each individual's records would then be used in a statistical model designed to produce anonymized estimates of U.S. citizens and noncitizens living in the country.

It is unclear, however, whether this process will be able to accurately determine the citizenship status of individuals. "No one source of citizenship information is complete and up-to-date," the DHS document — known as a privacy impact assessment — warns, while noting that misidentified individuals would receive "no adverse impact" because the efforts are only for "statistical purposes."

Still, Latinx community groups represented by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and Asian Americans Advancing Justice - AAJC are currently suing the administration, arguing that its data efforts are part of a conspiracy to stop Latinx communities, noncitizens and other immigrants from receiving fair political representation.

Meanwhile, the administration has spent months trying to amass citizenship records from other federal agencies, including the State Department and the Social Security Administration, plus states. In November, Nebraska became the first state to agree to share its driver's license records with the Census Bureau.

The data DHS provides "will not be used to make programmatic or administrative enforcement decisions," according to the document the department released last week.

Nebraska Is 1st State To Share Driver's License Records With Census Bureau
Instead, the document says DHS is providing the records as required by Trump's executive order to help determine numbers of three specific groups: "citizens, lawfully present non-citizens, and unauthorized immigrants in the United States during the decennial census."

While Trump's order does reference a need for a "more reliable" count of unauthorized immigrants to better inform public policy about immigration and eligibility for public benefits, the Census Bureau has not publicly acknowledged any plans to create such an estimate.

During public meetings in September, the Census Bureau's chief scientist, John Abowd, confirmed that the executive order — along with a filing to the White House's Office of Management and Budget, which reviews all federal government efforts to collect information — "commit" the bureau to releasing citizenship data by the end of March 2021, in time for the next round of redistricting.

The bureau's public information office has not responded to NPR's questions about whether it's planning to produce a count of unauthorized immigrants in response to the executive order.

The bureau is currently fighting off a lawsuit by the state of Alabama and Rep. Mo Brooks, a Republican from that state, which is arguing in court to get unauthorized immigrants excluded from census numbers used to determine the distribution of congressional seats among the states.

Both the bureau and the Department of Homeland Security's office of public affairs have also not responded to NPR's questions about when the new data-sharing agreement was signed and if any data have been transferred yet.

Plans for DHS to share data with the bureau through this agreement have been in negotiations since early 2018, when the bureau officials began scrambling to respond to the Trump administration's last-minute request to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

Latinx Advocacy Groups Sue To Block Citizenship Data Release By Trump Officials
Census Bureau officials have long advocated for the administration to rely on existing government records as a way to produce citizenship information that the bureau's researchers say is more accurate and less expensive than collecting self-reported responses to a census question. In 2018, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who oversees the Census Bureau, approved both adding the question to census forms and directed the bureau to request records from other agencies and state governments.

Still, the DHS document lays out a number of risks involved with sharing data with the bureau, including a concern that doing so is "not compatible with the original purpose" of DHS agencies collecting the information. It also flags the risk that the people whose information DHS is sharing with the Census Bureau may not want that to occur.

The document says, however, these risks "cannot be mitigated" and that Trump's executive order requires DHS to comply with the bureau's data requests.

Do Trump Officials Plan To Break Centuries Of Precedent In Divvying Up Congress?
Some privacy advocates have raised their own concerns about the potential misuse of data, especially at a time of increased immigration enforcement. Using the information to try to identify noncitizens "implicates fundamental due process rights and will impact both citizens and non-citizens," wrote Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, in a July letter to leaders of the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

On top of those concerns, it's not clear exactly how accurate the data produced using the existing records will be. The DHS document acknowledges it is "notoriously difficult" to use data to determine a person's current immigration status because "individuals can have multiple immigration statuses through their lifetime."

"Because DHS is providing information at a point in time," the document says, "it is reasonable to believe that eventually data accuracy issues may arise."

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©