Cocktails & Popcorn: Webb Report - What Mueller Left Out - Chapter One - Page Two

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Will The U.S. Treasury Take Over The FEC?

"Only in Hamtramck.", said the FEC

The FEC was not structured as a weight based voting agency was so they both sides could agree to stealin'.

There is no swing vote.

There is no challenge to the vote because it is an administrative process which means they can pick and choose who gets due process.

I filed for an advisory opinion on the use of a foreign national symbol in a local election.

The FEC waited until long after that election to render the response of, "the election is over and you did not phrase the question properly."

Then, it must be taken into consideration that the FEC was run by #perkinscoiesucks.

So, now you know why the FEC was structured as an authority and does absolutely nothing.

Here, I can prove the FEC is a vehicle of stealin'.

I did not even get to the cryptocurrency, child welfare or fake identities issues.

I say the U.S. Treasury is on this.

Federal Election Commission is now out of commission — that's downright scary

Republican Matthew S. Petersen announced his resignation from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) this week. Ho hum news this is not. What it means is that the government agency charged with overseeing compliance with the federal campaign finance laws has been gutted. It now lacks the ability to meaningfully function in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election.

There are two primary takeaways here. The first is that this is not unwelcome news for conservatives — such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — who believe that government oversight of federal campaigns is bad in general. McConnell led the years-long charge to kill the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), a feat that was largely accomplished by the Supreme Court with its 2009 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. That case overruled on First Amendment grounds the statutory bans on soft or “issue-ad” money spent by corporations and unions close to presidential primaries and general elections.

With the FEC now out of commission, there is no longer a cop on the block to enforce the remaining rules-of-the-game aimed at enhancing fair and free elections in the United States. If no cop is around to pull over speed-demon drivers, the speed limits become meaningless. Translation? It’s the Wild West in federal-campaign-land, and individual voters are the ones who will suffer for it.

The second takeaway is that, once again, Congress is to blame for this travesty.

The reason Congress is to blame has to do with the way that the FEC is structured. Congress — not the Constitution — creates federal agencies by statute. Those statutes also give agencies their job descriptions. Because Congress lacks the political will and expertise to do lawmaking across-the-board, it gives agencies the power to make laws for it. This handoff of the legislative baton occurs by statute. When agencies make laws pursuant to their statutory power, we call those laws “regulations.”

That the FEC can’t make laws anymore isn’t the problem. The problem is with enforcement. The technical job of the executive branch is to execute — or enforce — the law. The president is the ultimate federal cop-on-the-block in this regard. He enforces laws through the attorney general and his various cabinet-level appointees — “secretaries” of large federal departments. The president has the constitutional authority to appoint and, by implication, fire those folks at will. That way, they remain accountable to the electorate. If the voters don’t like what an agency is doing, they can replace the agencies’ boss, the president.

In the 1930s, Congress thought it was a good idea to create some agencies that are quasi-insulated from the president. These are colloquially known as “independent agencies.” These agencies tend to have the word “commission” in their titles (think Federal Communications Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, and so on).

Independent agencies are headed by panels rather than single individuals. The panels are usually comprised of a statutorily-mandated number of commissioners from each side of the political aisle, that is, a set number of Democrats and a set number of Republicans. Unlike with Department heads, incoming presidents generally can’t appoint all of the commissioners at once. They instead serve five to seven-year staggered terms, so that only certain seats come up during a certain president’s term. Independent agencies also make decisions by majority vote, and the statute creating them usually requires a quorum to conduct business.

Here’s the kicker: The president cannot fire these people at will. They can only be fired “for cause” — and the statute creating the commission normally sets forth the conditions that must exist before the president can fire a commissioner.

This is precisely the model that led to the independent counsel law undergirding Kenneth W. Starr’s investigation of former President Clinton. Even though the president couldn’t fire that top law enforcement official (unlike, say a federal prosecutor or FBI agent), the Supreme Court has consistently upheld the constitutionality of statutory constraints on the president’s power to hire and fire executive branch officials that head independent agencies, including folks like Starr.

The notion behind independent agencies is, well, independence from the political process. If law enforcement officials are structurally immune from political influence, the theory goes, they will make better decisions for the overall public good. If they are instead subject to the political and ideological whims of their White House boss, they will execute their power in biased ways that could hurt the broader public.

The FEC was created by statute in 1974. It has six members — three from each political party — who are each supposed to serve a six-year term. Every two years, two seats come up for reappointment. A quorum of four is required for the FEC to act. With Petersen’s resignation, the FEC is down to three commissioners, which means it’s effectively out of business.

President Trump has shown no interest in changing that dynamic. By refusing to put more watchdogs on the campaign finance beat, the presidency has managed to shred the laws themselves.

Some might argue that this is not a big deal, because the FEC has long been notoriously feckless. It deadlocks 3-3 on purely political grounds anyway. If it enforces the laws against anyone, it targets the bit players — while the big fish swim away.

Still, the FEC managed to fine the 2008 Obama campaign $375,000 for violating laws requiring that it report certain information to the FEC. Broadly speaking, such laws are aimed at ensuring that the public is informed as to who is paying a campaign’s bill, so that voters can cast ballots accordingly.

Let’s not forget, too, the first part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s 448-page report detailing Russia’s systematic efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election — and his warning to Congress that those efforts are ongoing for the 2020 race. Even at its peak capacity, the FEC is hardly empowered to take on Putin’s democracy-crushing machinery. That’s Congress’s job — especially with a Putin-apologist in the White House. But Congress is not doing much on that front, either. Again, we have McConnell largely to thank for that roadblock.

If we are going to salvage a legitimate democracy for America, November 2020 is becoming increasingly urgent by the day. For now, one thing’s for sure: The FEC won’t be saving the day.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Eric Swalwell Is A Wise Man - He Drops Out The 2020 Democratic Presidential Race Because He Knows What Is About To Go Down In Detroit

Eric Swalwell sits on the U.S. House Judiciary Committee.

Eric does not want to be in Detroit when everyone is forced to #sayhisname.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: House Democrats Sue Treasury During A Treasury Investigation Of House Democrats - Welcome To Detroit

"Whatever you suggest for cocktails
is fine with me."

This is not going to end well for House Democrats.

We still have the outstanding issues with the DNC and DCCC servers, including all those referred Ethics investigations.

Heck, we have not even broached the Michigan Democratic Party, let alone the NAACP & co.

Oups... J'ai encore dit une bêtise!

House Democrats sue Treasury to turn over Trump tax returns

The House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday filed its long-expected lawsuit over the Trump administration's refusal to turn over the president's tax returns, kicking off what could be a lengthy legal battle.

The committee, chaired by Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), filed a complaint against the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service in federal court in Washington, asking the court to order the defendants to comply with Neal's subpoenas and a section of the federal tax code.

While the president has sued to prevent lawmakers from getting their hands on documents detailing his personal finances, this is the first time House Democrats have gone to court themselves to obtain such records.

Democrats have viewed obtaining President Trump’s tax returns as one of their top oversight priorities. Trump is the first president in decades who hasn’t made any of his tax returns public, citing a years-long audit. However, the IRS has said that nothing prevents people from releasing their own tax information.

In April, Neal sent a request to the IRS seeking Trump’s personal and business tax returns from 2013 to 2018, saying that the Ways and Means Committee is conducting oversight and is interested in legislative proposals relating to how the IRS audits presidents. Neal made the request under section 6103(f) of the federal tax code, which states that the Treasury secretary “shall furnish” tax returns requested by the chairmen of Congress’s tax committees.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin rejected Neal’s request in May, saying that it lacked a legitimate legislative purpose. Neal then issued subpoenas to Treasury and the IRS for Trump’s tax returns, which Mnuchin also rejected.

“Due to that noncompliance, the Committee is now pursuing this matter in the federal courts,” Neal said in a statement.

The complaint asks the court to declare that Treasury and the IRS are legally obligated to produce the documents subpoenaed. It also asks the court to declare that the administration’s failure to comply with section 6103(f) violates the Administrative Procedure Act.

The lawmakers argue in the lawsuit that the administration, “for what the committee believes is the first time ever” is denying their request “in order to shield President Trump’s tax return information from congressional scrutiny.”

“In refusing to comply with the statute, Defendants have mounted an extraordinary attack on the authority of Congress to obtain information needed to conduct oversight of Treasury, the IRS, and the tax laws on behalf of the American people who participate in the nation’s voluntary tax system,” the lawsuit states.

And they point to the administration’s refusal to comply with congressional subpoenas issued for the tax returns as effectively forcing the committee to go to court.

The House Democrats further argue that they need the returns to determine whether Trump has been compliant with federal tax law, and whether “the IRS’s self-imposed policy of annually auditing the returns of sitting presidents is working properly, even though it has not been updated in decades.”

“The Committee has been unable to evaluate President Trump’s claims about the audit program or investigate its other concerns because the President has declined to follow the practice of every elected President since Richard Nixon of voluntarily disclosing their tax returns,” the court filing reads.

“Without reviewing the requested return materials, the committee cannot ensure that the IRS’s audit process is functioning fairly and effectively, understand how provisions of the tax code are implicated by President Trump’s returns, or exercise its legislative judgment to determine whether changes to the code may be warranted.”

The Trump administration is expected to fight the lawsuit.

The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel last month issued a memo backing up Treasury’s decision to reject Neal’s request for Trump’s tax returns. In the memo, DOJ said that Neal’s stated purpose for wanting Trump’s tax returns is pretextual and that his real reason for seeking the documents is to make them public.

Democrats’ lawsuit said that DOJ, Treasury and the IRS “gravely misunderstand the operative law.”

“The Committee’s power to conduct oversight and investigations is firmly rooted in Congress’s Article I legislative authority,” the complaint stated. “And courts have long recognized that Congress’s ‘power of inquiry — with process to enforce it — is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.’”

The top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Kevin Brady (Texas), criticized the fact that the lawsuit was authorized by the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, a majority-Democratic group of senior House leaders, rather than by a vote of the House.

“This is a dangerous course of action,” Brady said. “For this reason, I am introducing a resolution to preserve the integrity of the People’s House from the attacks of the elite few and restore the voice of every American.”

Neal had long expected that the tax-return matter would end up in court, which prompted him to take a careful approach in issuing his request and filing the complaint.

The lawsuit details actions that the Ways and Means Committee took after Treasury and the IRS rejected Neal’s subpoenas and before the complaint was filed, which had not previously been reported. These included that a bipartisan group of committee staff members met with Treasury and IRS officials to discuss the presidential audit program, and that committee staff then sent Treasury and the IRS a list of nearly 300 follow-up questions.

Last Friday, Neal sent Mnuchin and IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig a letter notifying them that the briefing reinforced the Ways and Means Committee’s need to see Trump’s tax returns as part of its oversight responsibilities.

Some progressive groups have been frustrated at times with the pace at which Neal was moving, and many praised the filing of the complaint on Tuesday.

“We commend Chairman Neal for taking this necessary action to finally get answers on behalf of the American people about what Donald Trump is hiding—and who he may be beholden to,” Stand Up America spokesman Ryan Thomas said in a statement.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) called the lawsuit “long overdue.”

“It should not take a court order to affirm that ‘shall’ means ‘shall,’” he said. “But Trump will do what it takes to delay the inevitable, hiding his tax returns as long as he can.”

The lawsuit cites other instances where the committee has invoked the statute on obtaining tax return information in the course of their investigations, including that of non-profits who were allegedly facing higher levels of scrutiny in their pursuit of a tax-exempt status allegedly due to their political affiliations.

And it points to past statements made by Trump, first as a candidate and then as president, in which he claimed he was being “unfairly” audited, as further reason to see the tax returns and review the audit process.

It also alleges that by not handing over the documents, the administration is committing a “grave” injury on the committee and “undermines the House’s unique role in the separation of powers structure that is fundamental to our system of constitutional governance.”

“Courts have recognized that the House’s power to obtain the production of papers and testimony from witnesses through compulsory process is integral to its constitutional mandate to legislate and to oversee the Executive,” the lawsuit reads.

“Permitting Defendants to impede the House’s subpoena power would imperil the separation of powers essential to the Constitution’s structure of lawful governance.”

Democrats have repeatedly pointed their court-backed right to conduct oversight in other lawsuits involving the president, including Trump’s attempts to block banks and other financial institutions to comply with congressional subpoenas for his records.

That argument has held up so far, with judges in D.C. and New York both siding with lawmakers in those lawsuits. Both of those cases are now working their way through the appeals process.

The subpoenas for Trump’s records have been issued as part of House Democrats’ exhaustive investigations into the president, his family, private businesses and administration.

Trump has promised to fight “all” the subpoenas, ensuring this attempt to get his tax returns will result in a lengthy court battle.

Congressional Committee’s R... by on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Meet Ellen Weintraub - The Perkins Coie Sucks Legal Genius Who Is Chair For The Federal Election Commission - Has One Seen Marc Elias? #perkinscoiesucks

Just when you think #perkinscoiesucks could not suck any more than it already sucks, I present to you, my dearies, just one more reason why #perkinscoiesucks.

Just in case you have forgotten how much #perkinscoiesucks, I thought I would kindly remind the entire living universe that #perkinscoiesucks with that fun link.

I should make a #perkinscoiesucks app just to pleasure those who are intrigued by my passion to vociferously share, with all of humanity the reasons why #perkinscoiesucks.

#perkinscoiesucks

FEC Chair Who Scolded Trump For Saying He MIGHT Take Oppo Research From a Foreigner Used to Work For Deep State Law Firm Perkins Coie

Ellen Weintraud, Perkins Coie Sucks,
FEC Chair

Democrat Weintraub was appointed by George W. Bush during a recess appointment.

One more fun fact about Weintraub — she worked for the DNC-Hillary Clinton-Deep State law firm Perkins Coie prior to being elected to FEC chair.

Per the FEC:

Commissioner Weintraub took office on December 9, 2002, after receiving a recess appointment; she was renominated and confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on March 18, 2003. Commissioner Petersen was nominated and confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on June 24, 2008. 

Prior to her appointment to the Commission, Ms. Weintraub was Of Counsel to Perkins Coie LLP and a member of its Political Law Group. Before joining Perkins Coie, Ms. Weintraub was Counsel to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct for the U.S. House of Representatives (the House Ethics Committee). Ms. Weintraub received her B.A., cum laude, from Yale College and her J.D. from Harvard Law School.

Is this why Weintraub said nothing when Hillary Clinton paid for a junk Russian dossier and hid the payments by funneling the money through her law firm PERKINS COIE, worked with Ukrainians to obtain dirt on Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort and reportedly had foreign intelligence agencies spy on the Trump campaign?

I would not have thought that I needed to say this. pic.twitter.com/T743CsXq79

— Ellen L Weintraub (@EllenLWeintraub) June 13, 2019

In October of 2017, the Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed an FEC complaint alleging the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign committee violated campaign finance law because they failed to disclose the purpose and recipient of payments for the phony Steele dossier.

Is this also why the FEC is ignoring Hillary Clinton’s $84 million campaign finance scandal?

“One year and two months. That’s how long it’s been since a formal complaint was filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), alleging Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign orchestrated an $84 million campaign finance scandal — the largest in U.S. history,” said attorney Dan Backer in February of this year.

“Yet the FEC has done nothing to hold the Clinton campaign, dozens of Democratic officials, and hundreds of six-figure Democratic mega-donors accountable for breaking the law,” Backer added.

Why is Ellen Weintraub still at the FEC?? She’s ignoring obvious crimes committed by Hillary Clinton and the DNC yet warned President Trump over a hypothetical scenario.

Read attorney Dan Backer’s entire report about Hillary Clinton’s money laundering scam and the formal complaint he filed with the FEC here.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Speaker Pelosi holds a press conference - She Did Not #sayhisname - Will She Report Her Foreign Campaign Finance & ITs Fraud Schemes?

Nancy had a press conference.

Nancy turned off comments, again.

Nancy did not #sayhisname, again.

Tell us about the Philippines Land Bank, Nancy.

Tell us about Detroit, DNC, DCCC, ActBlue and Backpage, Nancy.

Tell Trump to stop obstructing justice and pull that IG Report, burning a hole in his back pocket.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Julian Epstein Looks Disheveled On The Special Counsel Statute - Roger Stone Grooming Tip For Being Indicted

Julian, my dear, you should really look in the mirror before you enter your words into the annals of history.

You should really get more sun the next time you come to Detroit, too.

How is Melanie Sloan doing these days?

I thought Roger Stone could assist with a few grooming tips.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Nancy Was On Jimmy Kimmel - She Did Not #sayhisname

The reason Nancy Pelosi does not want to impeach Trump is because she has to #sayhisname.

#maytheheavensfall

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: May 7th, 2019. Live From Navy Yard DNC Office - NATO Weapons Diversion? - Oh No, Not SIPRnet!

Please tell me they did not have SIPRnet at the house.

That is so ghetto.

https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/2019/04/29/more-evidence-that-guccifer-2-planted-his-russian-breadcrumbs/

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: April 30th,2019. Another Blackwater Coup For Black Water - May The Heavens Fall

Almost there.....

Nancy is talking about child welfare.

They are preparing for war.

May the heavens fall.

#sayhisname

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Saikat Chakrabarti, FEC & Bollywood Civil Rights "Colored" Revolution - Flashbacks To The Old School Civil Rights Legal Dogs

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seems to have put the FEC in a precarious situation.

It seems her political campaign was a Bollywood production.

I am going to remain unbiased and focus on what the Meanies did to my Sweetie, as a point of departure in examining the relevance of this alleged FEC violation, one of hundreds, in political campaigns, originating in the form of child welfare fraud campaigns.

Yes, these political campaigns have become mini-Bollywood productions because we have a global audience and it is only proper to have this new crop of livestream, real life superstars reflect their audience, which is the entire world.

In this Oversight Hearing, AOC clearly lets everyone know, that they are now co-conspirators in the campaign fraud scheme she lays out, which seems to be her own.

Now, she is being promoted in the cyberverse as a "really bad guy" in engaging in the campaign finance practices she laid out in the Oversight Hearing.

Hmmmmmm.......that is what you call a LARP.

Yes, the United States is being humiliated through foreign operations of promoting its "Colored" Revolution LARP.

Racial classifications are considered comedy around the world because it is based upon arcane heuristics implemented through these glorious propaganda campaigns, going all the way back to the crusades, a residual of the peculiar institution, and are used as the "Colored Revolution", or what I like to call, the U.S. Minstrel Show, Bollywood-style.

Yes, U.S. race stories in the media are hilarious outside the U.S. as the theatre absurd.

During the Vietnam War, the magic of television broadcasted for the first time in history how the U.S. treated people who hail from the darker persuasion which, very few people understand, is part of Civil Rights history, but that segment has been omitted from our textbooks.

Now, we have android phones and social media, where foreign interests are putting on full scale political campaign productions for profit through #cyberwars.

Rashida pulled that "I am a woman of color" crap in a congressional hearing, almost making a fellow member cry, when, if she actually knew what she was talking about, according to OMB Directive 15, she is not a woman of color, but hey, what do I know?

I know that she has no clue about the SCOTUS case on that very same question, if she is a woman of color, under the question of citizenship on the census.

That case is going to be fun because all the other DACA/DAPA cases that did not make it, are going to be pulled in under the question of the personae, or rather the children's trusts, which is why I do not understand why SCOTUS would not enjoin them.

It is all going to come out.

Unfortunately, I believe there is a possibility that a few of these political actors are just really good in executing acts of moral turpitude.

This is a transposable model because I know a few other Chiefs of Staff who were doing waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy more scandalous stuff than what Trump has in his backpocket.

If AOC and her crew is found to have engaged in illegal activities, well, guess what!

That means everyone else who has done the exact same thing that she has done, has done it at an expedited level, would have to be held to the exact same standards starting with the Clinton Foundation, Hillary for America, DNC, DCCC, Center for American Progress, etc...

But wait!

We still have the GOP, NRA, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, etc.....

Oh, this is going to be glorious.

These are also FARA violations and I do not believe there is a statute of limitations.

I smell the work of some Old School Civil Rights Legal Dogs and I shall call this the Bollywood Dance of the Corporate Shape Shifters (a political campaign production) because this is the same exact fraud scheme that was done in Detroit, stealin' the children, the land and the vote.

The best part is that she, and her buddies could come out as whistleblowers showing how they infiltrated, but hey, what do I know?

I know the exact same FEC situation going on in Detroit.

I know I like orchata and yucca frittas.

#perkinscoiesucks

Ocasio-Cortez, chief of staff illegally moved $885G in campaign contributions, FEC complaint says

(FOX NEWS) - New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Saikat Chakrabarti, the progressive firebrand's multimillionaire chief of staff, apparently violated campaign finance law by funneling nearly $1 million in contributions from political action committees Chakrabarti established to private companies that he also controlled, according to an explosive complaint filed Monday with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and obtained by Fox News.

Amid the allegations, a former FEC commissioner late Monday suggested in an interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation that Ocasio-Cortez and her team could separately be facing major fines and potentially even jail time if they were knowingly and willfully violating the law by hiding their control of the Justice Democrats political action committee (PAC).

Such an arrangement could have allowed Ocasio-Cortez's campaign to receive donations in excess of the normal limit, by pooling contributions to both the PAC and the campaign itself.

 The FEC complaint asserts that Chakrabarti established two PACs, the Brand New Congress PAC and Justice Democrats PAC, and then systematically transferred more than $885,000 in contributions received by those PACs to the Brand New Campaign LLC and the Brand New Congress LLC -- companies that, unlike PACs, are exempt from reporting all of their significant expenditures.

The PACs claimed the payments were for "strategic consulting." Although large financial transfers from PACs to LLCs are not necessarily improper, the complaint argues that the goal of the "extensive" scheme was seemingly to illegally dodge detailed legal reporting requirements of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which are designed to track campaign expenditures.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: U.S. v. Russia, et al In SCOTUS For Detroit 2016 & 2018 Elections Fraud?

It seems there is chatter on the Hill about Andrew Weissmann and the possibility SCOTUS filings of the United States v. Russia, et al., with the "et al." being Trump and all the other "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) who enjoyed jacking up voting rights with absentee ballots for the 2016 & 2018 elections in Detroit, Michigan.

Oh, yes, Ohio and Indiana are in the mix, too.

But, hey, what do I know?

Hoisted By Her Own Petard: How Hillary Clinton Really Lost Michigan


DOJ: Justice Department Continues to Protect the Right to Vote and Prosecute Ballot Fraud - In Detroit

Cocktails & Popcorn: Brenda Jones, DOJ & The 13th Congressional Seat of Michigan

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Obama in Detroit: Vote because 'character of our country is on ballot'

Detroit — Former President Barack Obama rallied thousands of Michigan Democrats here Friday night, channeling his past calls for hope and change as he urged voters to get to the polls Nov. 6 for what "might be the most important election of our lifetime."

Speaking to an enthusiastic overflow crowd at Cass Tech High School, Obama warned supporters that the failure to vote in the mid-term election could have "dangerous and profound" impacts for a country now led by President Donald Trump and a Republican-led Congress.

"The character of our country is on the ballot," he said.

While he rarely addressed Trump by name, Obama repeatedly criticized his bombastic successor while lamenting what he called a "cynical" politics of division.

"You can reject that kind of politics," the former president said. "The good news is, Michigan, you can choose a more hopeful, more generous vision of America. But to get there, you have to vote."

Fans packed the roughly 5,000-seat gymnasium, where the high school marching band punctuated Obama's punch lines with drum fills and cymbal crashes. Supporters cycled between "Yes we can" and "Obama" chants.

His visit came 11 days before a mid-term election in which turnout could be a critical factor for Democratic candidates like gubernatorial nominee Gretchen Whitmer and U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow. Vice President Mike Pence is expected to rally with Republicans on Monday.

Michigan Democrats traditionally struggle to turn out voters in non-presidential election years, particularly in urban areas like Detroit. Beyond Whitmer's running mate Garlin Gilchrist II, Democrats are offering a predominately white statewide ticket to voters in the majority African-American city.

Obama, the nation's first black president, pumped his fist to the crowd as he took the stage before hugging Stabenow and Whitmer, whom he praised during his speech.

He also gave shout-outs to congressional candidates, including 11th Congressional District hopeful Haley Stevens, who worked on his auto task force and was "a critical part of my team that helped the auto industry come roaring back" after near collapse. Pence's wife Karen rallied early Friday evening with Stevens' Republican opponent Lena Epstein in Commerce Township.

Two years after an election that Trump and other Republicans won on a promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, Obama touted his signature health care law and its popular protections for pre-existing conditions.

Voters can trust Stabenow to defend those protections "because she was there" fighting for them in the first place, Obama said, questioning Republican challenger John James' claim he supports Trump "2000 percent."

Whitmer helped expand Medicaid access when she served in the state Legislature, he said, "and few people fought against it harder than her opponent," Republican Attorney General Bill Schuette, who now says the Healthy Michigan program is "the law of the land" and not going away.

While the national and state economy have improved since cratering during the Great Recession that peaked Obama's first year in office, critics say sluggish growth under his watch has improved under Trump and federal tax cuts. Michigan's unemployment rate in January 2017 when Obama left office was 5 percent, while the jobless rate in September was 4 percent.

Republicans called it "insulting" for Obama to rally with Democrats who "will work to systematically dismantle the policies generating all of this progress," said Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Joyce. "Michiganders have high hopes for a bright and prosperous future, and voters know that no matter what Obama says, Michigan Democrats do not share that vision.” 

Obama criticized tax cuts he said will balloon the deficit and primarily benefit the wealthy and corporations.

He accused Republicans of trying to distract voters from critical issues. Instead of talking about Flint water, infrastructure or health care, Trump is trying to fire up his base by talking about "impoverished refugees 1,000 miles away," he said, referencing the Honduran migrant caravan the Republican president has bemoaned.

And Obama repeatedly criticized "lies" coming out of Washington, D.C., arguing that telling the truth should be something that Democrats and Republicans should agree on.

“When words stop meaning anything, when truth doesn’t matter, when people can just make up facts, then democracy, it doesn’t work," Obama said. "There’s no accountability”.

Whitmer and other Democrats contrasted Obama's presidency with Trump.

“Anyone miss the days when we had a president we could be proud of?" Whitmer said. "A president who told the truth? A president who protects the Great Lakes and the auto industry? A president who made it possible for us to expand Medicaid here in Michigan and get 680,000 people covered?”

Stabenow praised Obama for continuing and expanding the auto bailout that helped save jobs at General Motors and Chrysler.

"No thanks to the current Vice President Mike Pence, who voted against us when he was a congressman," she said. 'And by the way, he'll be here Monday stumping for my opponent."

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who served under Obama, spent significant time touting Michigan Proposal 2, which would create a citizen redistricting commission to draw new political boundaries each decade instead of politicians.

“This is one of the most gerrymandered states in the country,” said Holder, who chairs the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. “I’ve been all around, and you’ve got it bad in Michigan. You’ve got to do something about it.”

Holder also urged Democrats to vote Nov. 6 even if they are “disappointed or feeling despair” after election loses in 2016.

“Think about Martin Luther King Jr. and John Lewis and how they must’ve felt tired at some points of the civil rights struggle,” he said. “People died so that people would have the right to vote. People suffered so that people would have the right to vote.”

U.S. Rep. Brenda Lawrence, D-Southfield, rallied female voters before introducing 11th Congressional District candidate Haley Stevens and 8th Congressional District candidate Elissa Slotkin, women Lawrence said she wanted with her on the “front lines” in Congress.

Thousands of supporters lined up outside Cass Tech earlier Friday to hear Obama speak, some who waited from 10 a.m. until the doors opened at 5 p.m. At the front of the line, a diverse group of women were sharing food and stories.

“It’s amazing the decency that we’ve all demonstrated toward each other,” said Fazila Siddiqui, a 45-year-old Pakistani immigrant and nurse practitioner student from West Bloomfield.

The former president “helped keep the country together, and I feel like that’s something we’ve gotten away from,” said Siddiqui, who plans to vote for Whitmer in the governor’s race.

Renee Hill of Detroit, a 56-year-old legal department worker, said she started her day by texting as many people as possible to tell them to vote on Nov. 6. She’s borrowing her daughter’s phone and didn’t even know most of the people she was messaging.

“I don’t care if you’re a Democrat or Republican, if you don’t vote, you take away from your voice,” she said. “You can’t complain about nothing because you didn’t get off or your behind and go do your civic duty.”

Just 31 percent of Detroit voters cast ballots in 2014, compared with 43 percent statewide, when Republican Gov. Rick Snyder won re-election over Democratic challenger Mark Schauer by roughly four percentage points.

About 48.6 percent of Detroit voters cast ballots in 2016, when statewide turnout topped 64 percent and Republican President Donald Trump  beat Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton by less than one point.

Detroit elections officials are projecting that 41 percent to 46 percent of the city's 470,000 registered voters will cast ballots on Election Day based on the primary turnout in the city and statewide. In 2016, City Clerk Janice Winfrey expected a voter turnout of 45 percent to 50 percent.

James, who is challenging Stabenow, on Friday launched a new a commercial that argued black voters shouldn't be captives of the Democratic Party.

"So Joe Biden has said that he believes that Republicans don't want black people to vote. Well, I'm a Republican. I want black people to vote. In fact, I want everyone to vote who is eligible to vote," James says in the one-minute ad.

"...The Democratic Party leadership cares more about the black vote than the black people, and it's time to wake up. It doesn't have to be this way. We can have a seat at both tables, and we can elevate our people together."

Pence is expected to campaign 8th Congressional District candidate Mike Pence and 11th District candidate Lena Epstein on Monday before attending a Kent County GOP dinner with Schuette, James and other Republicans.

The Michigan Republican Party on Friday bashed Democrats ahead of the visit by Obama, arguing his eight years as president "were an unmitigated disaster."

"Obama’s policies of high taxes, more regulation and fewer jobs were the perfect book end to Jennifer Granholm’s Lost Decade," said Michigan GOP spokeswoman Sarah Anderson. "Republicans have the momentum, and just like in 2016, last minute fly-ins will not slow that momentum down.”

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2018/10/26/obama-whitmer-democrats-detroit-rally/1764712002/

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Cenk Uyger Is Back And Successfully Failed To Mention That Perkins Coie Sucks

Cenk Uyger & John Conyers, Jr. waiting for something
other than cocktails & popcorn.

Cenk Uyger of The Young Turks is back and failed to mention that Perkins Coie Sucks.

Now, why would Cenk neglect to identify the funding keyman, Perkins Coie, having dropped all those big attorney names, to increase his youtube hits, who are clients?

Hmmmmm......

How come Cenk does not talk about Bob Bauer and Marc Elias, "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending)?

Hmmmm......

Hmmmm.......

How come Cenk did not mention Jeffrey Katzenberg or even Bob Bauer, two primary individuals behind their decision to "organize" with TYT?

Maybe because no one has figured out if the "organizing" was with Perkins Coie, or one of its clients like the DNC, DCCC, Hillary for America, or a number of other Super PACs, or even clients like Dreamworks.

Perhaps, Cenk forgot about the upcoming Senate Judiciary Hearings on why Perkins Coie Sucks?

Did TYT social media staff ignore the #perkinscoiesucks or any other form of the hash tag for Perkins Coie, intentionally, and if so, why?

Did TYT engage in any "financial" transactions on behalf of any political campaign activities of the DNC, DCCC, or Hillary for America, (sssshhhhh....it is all the same Corporate Shape Shifter.)?

I am going to ask Cenk if this is one of those "Attorney-Client Privilege" issues.

Former White House Counsel Bob Bauer Exits Perkins Coie

Bauer will devote more time to teaching at New York University School of Law. He will split his time between New York City and Washington, D.C.

By Ryan Lovelace |
May 17, 2018 at 01:11 PM

Bob Bauer, The Original "Legal Genius" (trademark pending)

Robert Bauer, the Democratic Party legal stalwart who served as White House counsel to President Barack Obama, is leaving Perkins Coie after nearly four decades at the firm.

The firm said Bauer will continue to represent several of his existing clients on an individual basis and will serve as co-counsel with Perkins Coie on some of those matters. Bauer will also devote more time to teaching at New York University School of Law.

Bauer was not immediately available to comment, but in a statement he expressed gratitude for his time at Perkins Coie and said he was eager to continue working with colleagues at the firm as a former partner.

“When I came out of law school in 1976, the country was just beginning to regulate the political process in a way that hadn’t been true before,” Bauer said. “At Perkins Coie, we built a practice and defined the field in a way that you just do not find at other law firms. I’m proud of the work we have accomplished, the team we have built and the clients we continue to serve.”

Bauer started at Perkins Coie in 1980, founding the firm’s political law practice. In the ensuing 38 years, he stepped away only twice—to serve as counsel to the Senate minority leader during former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial of 1999, and when working as Obama’s White House counsel from 2010 through July 2011.

After leaving the firm, Perkins Coie said, Bauer will continue to write and split his time between New York City and Washington, D.C. He will also remain as personal counsel to Obama and continue working with The Obama Foundation and The Biden Foundation as clients.

Though Perkins Coie is headquartered in Seattle, it has an outsize presence in D.C. thanks to its leading political law practice. The group, known for its longtime work for the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic groups and politicians, has been chaired since 2009 by Marc Elias, who was counsel of record for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Perkins Coie has also attracted attention in recent months based on reports that the firm played a role in funding research by Fusion GPS that led to the “Steele dossier” proffering ties between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Kremlin.

Bauer has not been shy about commenting on controversies surrounding the Trump administration, including writing in support of former FBI director James Comey and arguing that Congress should enact legislation requiring special counsel Robert Mueller to issue a report to legislators if Mueller is fired by the president.

The following is from Wikileaks showing concerns with that "Attorney-Client Privilege".

Attorney Client Communication -- Superpac follow up

From:MElias@perkinscoie.com To: robbymook2015@gmail.com, d.cheng@me.com, john.podesta@gmail.com, Charlie.Baker@deweysquare.com, jesse@jesseferguson.com  CC: JBerkon@perkinscoie.com  Date: 2015-04-07 23:48 Subject: Attorney Client Communication -- Superpac follow up

Team – Per our conversation on Sunday, we have attached two draft policies dealing with the agency issue. The first would be the campaign’s. It sets forth HFA’s policy not to confer fundraising authority on any paid employee or consultant of a Super PAC that makes substantial expenditures in the presidential race. This would cover Priorities, Bridge, and WOMEN VOTE!, but would exclude Super PACs that occasionally dabble in the presidential race and social welfare orgs. The draft policy also spells out when an agent’s grant of agency terminates, in an effort to reduce the total number of fundraising agents floating out there at any given time. Finally, it codifies Charlie’s idea that the finance committee (as Dennis has currently explained it) is more of a recognition of work than a grant of additional authority. We’re still safer if we can avoid giving campaign fundraising titles to folks who are raising soft money for a Super PAC. But if that’s not possible with everyone, staking out this position now will be helpful. The second would be the Super PAC’s policy. Because the campaign cannot sanction the soliciting of soft money, the PAC needs to be the one spelling out the rules for individuals wearing “two hats” who want to raise soft money. However, we would condition any support we offer superpac on them adopting this policy. The goal is to create a uniform set of guidelines that, if followed, would help demonstrate to a regulator that the individual was raising soft money in a capacity other than the campaign’s agent. As we discussed, we may decide that some of our fundraising agents are too risky – either because we don’t trust them to follow these guidelines or because we do not think it is credible that they are raising in a capacity other than as a campaign agent – and tell Priorities that they cannot use them to raise. But this would be the uniform set of guidelines that we would insist everyone wearing “two hats” would follow. Lastly, we are still working on proposals to address the question of the role we can play re additional supporter/leadership for superpacs. We will be back shortly on that. -- Marc E. Elias Perkins Coie LLP 700 13th St, NW Washington, DC 20005 202-434-1609 (ph) 202-654-9126 (fax) melias@perkinscoie.com<mailto:melias@perkinscoie.com> ________________________________ NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you.

The following is the policy brief attached to the email.

HILLARY FOR AMERICA POLICY ON FUNDRAISING AGENTS

Federal campaign law defines an “agent” as an individual who has been conferred actual authority by a candidate or campaign committee to solicit funds on its behalf (hereinafter, “fundraising authority”).  Hillary for America (“HFA”) may choose to confer such authority on certain individuals who are not employees.  The list of campaign fundraising agents could include individuals who agree to host sanctioned fundraising events on HFA’s behalf; individuals who offer to raise funds on HFA’s behalf and whose offer is accepted by HFA; and individuals whom HFA asks to raise funds on its behalf and who accept HFA’s offer.  Individuals who raise funds for HFA without the approval of HFA staff or individuals who raise funds for HFA in contravention of an instruction not to do so will not be considered agents of HFA, notwithstanding their representations to prospective donors or how those representations are understood.
The following rules will govern the campaign’s fundraising agents.  These are in addition to any policies conveyed by HFA to its agents in other documents or materials.
1.     HFA will not confer fundraising authority on any individual who is compensated (whether as an employee or a consultant) by a Super PAC that makes substantial expenditures to influence the presidential election.  Such individuals are not authorized to raise funds on HFA’s behalf.
2.     An individual’s fundraising authority expires on the earlier of the following: (1) when the fundraising agent informs HFA that s/he is terminating her/his fundraising agency; (2) when HFA informs the individual that it is terminating the individual’s fundraising agency; or (3) when the individual’s contemplated fundraising activity for HFA ends.  For example, when an individual has been conferred fundraising authority for a specific event, that authority terminates immediately after the event.  As another example, when an individual has been conferred authority to raise a specific amount of funds, that authority terminates immediately as soon as those funds are raised.
3.     HFA will have employees who are fundraisers.  At this time, HFA does not intend to retain consultants to raise funds nor does it intend to have volunteer fundraising positions (e.g. “National Finance Chair” or “Regional Finance Chair”). 
4.     HFA will recognize individuals who raise a certain amount of funds by placing them in honorary groups (e.g. “Finance Committee”).  Placement in these honorary groups does not suggest that the individual has any additional fundraising authority.  Moreover, there may be some individuals that remain in these honorary groups notwithstanding the fact that their fundraising agency has been terminated.

SUPER PAC POLICY ON FUNDRAISING AGENTS

Super PAC recognizes that it may designate an individual as a fundraising agent who is currently serving as a fundraising agent for a federal officeholder or candidate.  Federal law provides that an individual serving as a fundraising agent for a federal officeholder or candidate may legally raise funds outside of federal source restrictions and contribution limits, as long as the fundraising is not undertaken in that individual’s capacity as an agent for the federal officeholder or candidate.
The guidelines below govern fundraising activity by such individuals.  It does not apply to anyone other than these individuals.  It does not apply to individuals who were fundraising agents for a federal officeholder or candidate in the past, but have terminated that agency.  Such individuals would not be considered fundraising agents for a federal candidate or officeholder under federal law.  Super PAC encourages, though does not require, individuals who have ceased their fundraising activities for a federal officeholder or candidate to formally terminate their agency relationship with the officeholder or candidate prior to raising funds for the Super PAC.
1.     The individual may not use campaign resources (e.g. staff, facilities, donor lists, or campaign materials) while raising funds for the Super PAC. 
2.     The individual should not identify herself as being associated with the campaign while raising funds for the Super PAC.  For instance, if the individual has a fundraising title with the campaign or serves on an honorary committee, that should not be referenced while raising funds for the Super PAC. 
3.     The individual may not tell the prospective donor that s/he is soliciting funds on behalf of or at the request, suggestion, or direction of the candidate, a campaign staffer, or any campaign agent.  Nor should the individual suggest this through phrases such as, “It would mean a lot to Candidate for you to give to the Super PAC” or “I know that Candidate would appreciate it if you gave to the Super PAC.”
4.     When soliciting funds for the Super PAC, the individual must be clear that he or she is doing so on behalf of the Super PAC and not the campaign.  If the Super PAC has bestowed a fundraising title on the individual, he or she must use that title when soliciting for the Super PAC.  Likewise, if letters are sent to prospective Super PAC donors, they must be on Super PAC letterhead (or the donor’s personal letterhead); if emails are sent to prospective Super PAC donors, they must be from a Super PAC e-mail address (or a personal email address). 
5.     The individual may not solicit funds for the campaign and the Super PAC at the same time (e.g. in the same letter, phone call, e-mail, meeting, or event).
 The individual may not explicitly earmark funds specifically for use in the candidate’s race, though it is permissible for the individual to discuss the PAC’s support for the candidate as part of

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Three Members of Notorious International Cybercrime Group “Fin7” In Custody for Role in Attacking Over 100 U.S. companies

You know, I have always wondered if they set up automatic, reoccurring deductions to political campaigns.

Just a thought, I thought I would share, for others to think about.

Victim Companies in 47 U.S. States; Used Front Company ‘Combi Security’ to Recruit Hackers to Criminal Enterprise

Three high-ranking members of a sophisticated international cybercrime group operating out of Eastern Europe have been arrested and are currently in custody facing charges filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, announced Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Annette L. Hayes for the Western District of Washington and Special Agent in Charge Jay S. Tabb Jr. of the FBI Seattle Field Office.

According to three federal indictments unsealed today, Ukrainian nationals Dmytro Fedorov, 44, Fedir Hladyr, 33, and Andrii Kolpakov, 30, are members of a prolific hacking group widely known as FIN7 (also referred to as the Carbanak Group and the Navigator Group, among other names).  Since at least 2015, FIN7 members engaged in a highly sophisticated malware campaign targeting more than 100 U.S. companies, predominantly in the restaurant, gaming, and hospitality industries.  As set forth in indictments, FIN7 hacked into thousands of computer systems and stole millions of customer credit and debit card numbers, which the group used or sold for profit. 

In the United States alone, FIN7 successfully breached the computer networks of companies in 47 states and the District of Columbia, stealing more than 15 million customer card records from over 6,500 individual point-of-sale terminals at more than 3,600 separate business locations.  Additional intrusions occurred abroad, including in the United Kingdom, Australia, and France.  Companies that have publicly disclosed hacks attributable to FIN7 include such familiar chains as Chipotle Mexican Grill, Chili’s, Arby’s, Red Robin and Jason’s Deli.  Additionally in Western Washington, FIN7 targeted other local businesses. 

“The three Ukrainian nationals indicted today allegedly were part of a prolific hacking group that targeted American companies and citizens by stealing valuable consumer data, including personal credit card information, that they then sold on the Darknet,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.  “Because hackers are committed to finding new ways to harm the American public and our economy, the Department of Justice remains steadfast in its commitment to working with our law enforcement partners to identify, interdict, and prosecute those responsible for these threats.”

“Protecting consumers and companies who use the internet to conduct business – both large chains and small ‘mom and pop’ stores -- is a top priority for all of us in the Department of Justice,” said U.S. Attorney Hayes.  “Cyber criminals who believe that they can hide in faraway countries and operate from behind keyboards without getting caught are just plain wrong.  We will continue our longstanding work with partners around the world to ensure cyber criminals are identified and held to account for the harm that they do – both to our pocketbooks and our ability to rely on the cyber networks we use.”

“The naming of these FIN7 leaders marks a major step towards dismantling this sophisticated criminal enterprise,” said Special Agent in Charge Tabb.  “As the lead federal agency for cyber-attack investigations, the FBI will continue to work with its law enforcement partners worldwide to pursue the members of this devious group, and hold them accountable for stealing from American businesses and individuals.”

Each of the three FIN7 conspirators is charged with 26 felony counts alleging conspiracy, wire fraud, computer hacking, access device fraud, and aggravated identity theft. 

In January 2018, at the request of U.S. officials, foreign authorities separately arrested Ukrainian Fedir Hladyr and a second FIN7 member, Dmytro Fedorov.  Hladyr was arrested in Dresden, Germany, and is currently detained in Seattle pending trial.  Hladyr allegedly served as FIN7’s systems administrator who, among other things, maintained servers and communication channels used by the organization and held a managerial role by delegating tasks and by providing instruction to other members of the scheme.  Hladyr’s trial is currently scheduled for Oct. 22.

Fedorov, a high-level hacker and manager who allegedly supervised other hackers tasked with breaching the security of victims’ computer systems, was arrested in Bielsko-Biala, Poland.  Fedorov remains detained in Poland pending his extradition to the United States.

In late June 2018, foreign authorities arrested a third FIN7 member, Ukrainian Andrii Kolpakov in Lepe, Spain.  Kolpakov, also alleged to be a supervisor of a group of hackers, remains detained in Spain pending the United States’ request for extradition.

According to the indictments, FIN7, through its dozens of members, launched numerous waves of malicious cyberattacks on numerous businesses operating in the United States and abroad.  FIN7 carefully crafted email messages that would appear legitimate to a business’ employee, and accompanied emails with telephone calls intended to further legitimize the email. Once an attached file was opened and activated, FIN7 would use an adapted version of the notorious Carbanak malware in addition to an arsenal of other tools to ultimately access and steal payment card data for the business’ customers. Since 2015, FIN7 sold the data in online underground marketplaces. (Supplemental document “How FIN7 Attacked and Stole Data” explains the scheme in greater detail.)

FIN7 used a front company, Combi Security, purportedly headquartered in Russia and Israel, to provide a guise of legitimacy and to recruit hackers to join the criminal enterprise.  Combi Security’s website indicated that it provided a number of security services such as penetration testing.  Ironically, the sham company’s website listed multiple U.S. victims among its purported clients. 

The charges in the indictments are merely allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

The indictments are the result of an investigation conducted by the Seattle Cyber Task Force of the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Washington, with the assistance of the Justice Department’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and Office of International Affairs, the National Cyber-Forensics and Training Alliance, numerous computer security firms and financial institutions, FBI offices across the nation and globe, as well as numerous international agencies. Arrests overseas were executed in Poland by the “Shadow Hunters” from CBŚP (Polish Central Bureau of Investigation); in Germany by the LKA Sachsen - Dezernat 33, (German State Criminal Police Office) and the Polizeidirektion Dresden (Dresden Police); and in Spain the Grupo de Seguridad Logica within the Unidad de Investigación Technologica of the Cuerpo Nacional de Policía (Spanish National Police)..

This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Francis Franze-Nakamura and Steven Masada of the Western District of Washington with assistance from Trial Attorney Anthony Teelucksingh of the Justice Department’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: FEC & Perkins Coie Say John Conyers, Jr. Is Campaigning & Fundraising

"The cocktails are on the way." 

See, it just goes to show you, you do not have to be on the ballot to campaign & fundraise.

Heck, according to the FEC, you do not even have to let the candidate know!

July 19, 2018 was the last day to file in the State of Michigan nomination petitions to run for U.S. Congressional Office as an independent.

Filing requirements for “no party affiliation” candidates: A candidate without political party affiliation (i.e., a “no party affiliation” candidate) who wishes to seek the office of U.S. Representative in Congress must file an Affidavit of Identity and a qualifying petition bearing a minimum of 3,000 valid signatures no later than 4:00 p.m. on July 19, 2018. Up to 6,000 signatures can be filed to cover the minimum signature requirement. A filing fee option is not available. (The Affidavit of Identity filing requirement is explained in greater detail below.) (MCL 168.590c; 544f) All signatures submitted on a qualifying petition must have been collected within the preceding 180-day period; signatures which are dated more than 180 days prior to the date the petition is filed are invalid. (MCL 168.590b(3)) Such candidates will appear on the November 6, 2018 general election ballot. Withdrawal: The deadline for withdrawing a no party affiliation candidate filing is 4:00 p.m. on July 23, 2018. The withdrawal must be in writing and must be filed with the appropriate filing official.

I just checked, but it seems John Conyers, III did not make the deadline in filing to run as an independent candidate for congress.

Well, I bet that is quite an inconvenience considering the fact that it seems we have an issue that needs to be addressed.

The Federal Election Commission, says John Conyers, Jr. is running for office, as seen in the filings, below, despite the fact that State of Michigan and the County of Wayne have no records of this.

But, then again, these filings are heavily marked with the stains of "Legal Geniuses" (trademrk pending) Perkins Coie.

Why is Perkins Coie billing $15,000 when they suck?

Why is Keiloch Consulting billing for campaign fundraising when there is no campaign (as if there ever was)?

Bruce, you continue to disappoint me; you are still really mean to my Sweetie. I am so forlorn, I must go to my #Superfans seeking comfort.

Why is the Treasurer for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Janica Kyriacopoulos using her company, Political Compliance Management Services, LLC to bill a nonexistent federal campaign for campaign compliance services?

Why are Indian Tribes contributing?

Perhaps, this is all but another reason why Perkins Coie Sucks.

I am going to ask my #Superfans, again, why Perkins Coie Sucks.

#perkinscoiesucks

2018 COMMITTEE INFORMATION C00409797 Name: CONYERS FOR CONGRESS Address: PO BOX 65322, WASHINGTON, DC 20035 Treasurer Name: CONYERS, MONICA Type: H - HOUSE Designation: P - PRINCIPAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE OF A CANDIDATE Party: DEMOCRATIC PARTY CANDIDATE INFORMATION CONYERS, JOHN JR. ID: H6MI01028 Office: H - House State: MI,  District: 13 FINANCIAL SUMMARY - CONYERS FOR CONGRESS From: 01/01/2017     To: 06/30/2018   ? I. RECEIPTS Itemized Individual Contributions $36,534 Unitemized Individual Contributions $13,198 Total Individual Contributions $49,733 Party Committees Contributions $0 Other Committees Contributions $128,600 Candidate Contributions $0 TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS $178,333 Transfers from Authorized Committees $0 Candidate Loans $0 Other Loans $0 TOTAL LOANS $0 Offsets to Operating Expenditures $364 Other Receipts $0 TOTAL RECEIPTS $178,697 II. DISBURSEMENTS Operating Expenditures $148,018 Transfers To Authorized Committees $0 Candidate Loan Repayments $0 Other Loan Repayments $0 TOTAL LOAN REPAYMENTS $0 Individual Refunds $1,300 Political Party Refunds $0 Other Committee Refunds $10,000 TOTAL CONTRIBUTION REFUNDS $11,300 Other Disbursements $11,150 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $170,468 III. CASH SUMMARY Beginning Cash On Hand $13,477 Ending Cash On Hand $21,707 Net Contributions $167,033 Net Operating Expenditures $147,653 Debts/Loans Owed By $42,612 Debts/Loans Owed To $0 Receipts Task money Itemized Individual Contributions $36,534 Offsets to Operating Expenditures $364 Unitemized Individual Contributions $13,198 Other Committees Contributions $128,600 Disbursements Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Conyers for Congress FEC Report of Receipts and Disbursements - Perkins Coie 7-14-2018 by Beverly Tran on Scribd