Showing posts with label Omarosa. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

DOJ v. Omarosa - Will She Finally Get Due Process?

Omarosa has a long history with Trump.

Unfortunately, that history has been bleachbitted from the annals of history....or has it?

I got my money on Omarosa and Trump.

SCOTUS Says No House Judiciary To Mueller Detroit Grand Jury Material

Omarosa Manigault Newman Loses a Round Against DOJ Over Civil Lawsuit

Omarosa Manigault Newman was dealt a blow by a federal judge on Thursday after her motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) against her last summer was denied.

In a minute order filed by U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon, the former White House Office of Public Liaison director of communications and, more famously, the serially reoccurring contestant on President Donald Trump’s reality television show The Apprentice, lost a bid to have the DOJ’s June 2019 complaint seeking a $50,000 civil fine against her tossed.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia did not elaborate on the reasons why her motion was dismissed in the brief order.

While Manigault Newman’s brief tenure at the White House was marked by controversy and her time post-federal employment has also seen its own fair share of scandal related to her relationship with Trump, the lawsuit was filed against her due to an alleged lack of paperwork.

Filed under the Ethics in Government Act of (EIGA), the lawsuit claims that Manigault Newman never submitted a required ethics disclosure form after being let go in late December 2017.

According to that lawsuit, “on or before December 19, 2017, Ms. Manigault Newman received a post-government employment briefing in which she was advised of her obligations under the EIGA to file a termination financial disclosure report by January 18, 2018.”

The lawsuit notes the statutory background:

The EIGA requires individuals who occupy covered positions to file a final public financial disclosure report on or before the thirtieth day after leaving their position, unless they have accepted another covered position. …

Section 104(a) of the EIGA authorizes the Attorney General to bring a civil action in federal district court against any individual “who knowingly and willfully fails to file or report any information that such individual is required to report” under the EIGA.

The complaint accused Maniguault Newman of being expressly aware of her obligations under the federal law and sought to prove her awareness by citing an exchange between the defendant and a White House ethics attorney.

“On December 29, 2017, an ethics attorney in the White House Counsel’s Office sent Ms. Manigault Newman an email reminding her of her obligation to file her termination financial disclosure report by January 18, 2018,” the filing alleges. “Although the email addressed used was the personal email address provided by Ms. Manigault Newman to the White House Counsel’s Office…she did not respond.”

Repeat attempts to contact Manigault Newman via email also went unanswered, according to the lawsuit–including a warning that she was likely to be assessed a $200 late filing fee if she filed after January 18, 2018. The date came and went, according to the complaint, and several additional emails were sent. The lawsuit claims that Manigault Newman finally responded to those multiple outreach efforts in late March 2018 “by calling the ethics attorney to discuss the overdue termination financial disclosure report.”

The lawsuit further alleges that Manigault Newman also responded to an email sent by then-Deputy Counsel to the President Stefan Passantino “but thereafter did not filed the overdue termination financial disclosure report.”

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. OMAROSA MANIGAULT NEWMAN, 1-2019-6-25-Complaint by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Thursday, October 31, 2019

JUDICIARY: Gerrymandering, Children's Trusts & Non Disclosure Agreements - What Was Not Discussed In The Hearing

U.S. President Benjamin Harrison
Coat of Arms
Sherman Antitrust Act

The following were situations ignored in this antitrust and economic opportunity in trafficking tiny humans:

Are States child welfare licenses transportable across state lines? (i.e. foster care, social worker, adoption specialist);
How come there is no competition in the States child welfare contracts?
How come there is no licensing revocation, sanctions, contractual debarment, prosecution and recovery in child welfare?
How come no one will talk about the Interstate Compact on the Placement of the Children, which is not a law, but a hot mess of a pseudo-policy for trafficking tiny humans?

Michigan Interstate Compact... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

Gerry's (sala)mander stealin' the children, land & votes map

In 1887, largely as a result of the Democratic gerrymandering of Indiana's legislative districts, Harrison was defeated in his bid for reelection.^[24]

Gerry's (sala)mander stealin' the children, land & votes
map of the Michigan13th Congressional District

In 2010, largely as a result of the Democratic gerrymandering of Michigan's legislative districts, Conyers was not defeated in his bid for reelection because the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed beared witness to the stealin' the children, land & votes by "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending).

The following is the history of gerrymandering:

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.

"First, we steal the children, the land, then
the votes!" said Gerry ordering his
Secret Society (now known as CPS)
for the next round of redistricting.

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: Search results for gerrymandering http://beverlytran.blogspot.com/search?q=gerrymandering#ixzz63wpAzeav
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare

On a lighter note, the Committee briefly discussed Non Disclosure Agreements, but failed to mention Omarosa.

Omaros deserves due process, too.

Where is Omarosa?

Witnesses

Panel One:

The Honorable Noah Phillips
Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission

Ms. Doha Mekki
Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General, United States Department of Justice

Doha Mekki Statement

Mr. Rahul Rao
Assistant Attorney General, Washington State Office of the Attorney General

Panel Two:

Ms. Sanjukta Paul
Assistant Professor of Law, Wayne State University

Dr. Ioana Marinescu
Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania School of Social Policy and Practice

Dr. Evan Starr
Assistant Professor of Management and Organizations, University of Maryland Robert H. Smith School of Business

Mr. Richard Masters
Special Counsel, National Center for Interstate Compacts

Dr. Kate Bahn
Director of Labor and Market Policy and Economist, Washington Center for Equitable Growth

Dr. Robert Topel
Isidore & Gladys Brown Distinguished Service Professor of Economics, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business

Documents

116th Congress

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Sunday, May 5, 2019

Cocktails & Popcorn: Omarosa Is Back

Image result for omarosa and trump detroit

"Foxtrot-Uniform-Charlie-Kilo....
Tango-Hotel-Echo-Mike...
Uniform-Papa"

Sheeee's baaaaack......

Omarosa Accuses Trump Administration Of Destroying Boxes Of Evidence For Mueller

The ex-Trump aide says upon her firing, she was told to leave boxes of documents that should’ve been given to the special counsel.

Omarosa Manigault Newman, former senior White House official and frequent thorn in President Donald Trump’s side, has accused the administration of destroying several boxes of evidence that she said should have been turned over to special counsel Robert Mueller and his team of investigators.

Speaking to Rev. Al Sharpton on MSNBC on Saturday, Manigault Newman said she was told to leave boxes of documents pertaining to Trump’s campaign and his transition into office when she was fired in December 2017 by John Kelly, the then-White House chief of staff.

The order, she said, was despite a “clear directive” that she and other White House staff had received to preserve all documents potentially related to Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and the Trump campaign’s ties to Russian officials.

“I think it’s important to realize that very early on in the administration, we got letters directing us to preserve all information related to the Mueller investigation ― all investigations, any information, any emails, any correspondence,” Manigault Newman said.

“So I thought it was very interesting that after my discussion with ... Kelly in the [White House] Situation Room when I went to take my things, I was instructed that I had to leave seven boxes of documents that came from the campaign, the inauguration, the transition, and they would not allow me to get them,” she continued.

@omarosa talks about how 7 boxes of her documents are being held by the Trump administration. #PoliticsNation pic.twitter.com/KziISc9Zg0
— Reverend Al Sharpton (@TheRevAl) May 4, 2019

Manigault Newman said she has not seen these boxes again and believed the Trump administration had not handed them over to the special counsel, as her legal team would’ve had to be informed if they had been.

The former contestant of “The Apprentice” added that, based on emails she’d received from administration officials about the documents, it appeared that at least five of the seven boxes had been destroyed.

“What’s very curious to me is that, as I stated, it was seven boxes of documents, and in my emails, they only referenced two, which leads me to believe that they’ve destroyed the other five,” Manigault Newman said.

She added that she believes she’s “not the only one who’s been subjected to this type of treatment, and I believe that there are more documents that have been destroyed by this administration.”

Former WH Trump staffer @omarosa talks about Trump’s investigations and how there may be an attempt to stop her from speaking out about her experience under the Trump Administration. #PoliticsNation pic.twitter.com/ERGsS9bPoY
— Reverend Al Sharpton (@TheRevAl) May 4, 2019

In an April interview with MSNBC’s Craig Melvin about the Mueller probe, Manigault Newman referenced the two boxes of documents that she said the White House had refused to hand over to the investigators.

“We should really not just focus on what [Trump] is telling people to do or say, but how he’s asked people to destroy documents, to destroy e-mails ― in my case, two boxes of campaign-related materials the White House still has in their possession that they claim they don’t have or don’t know what happened to it,” Manigault Newman said at that time.

When asked by Melvin whether the Trump administration had directed her to destroy evidence, Manigault Newman explained that while she had not been told directly to do so, “they were very clear about not wanting us to share those things.”

“Right after the campaign, the day after, they took our e-mails down and told us we had no access to it ... They were certainly working to try to hide the things we now know are involved with this investigation,” she alleged.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Monday, March 4, 2019

Cocktails & Popcorn: Jolly Jerry Of Judiciary Just Jumped - The Releases Of The Mueller & IG Reports Are Coming

I have your home made butter pound cake.
Oups, j'ai dit une bétise!

Yes, it is that time in history where the cycle comes to full circle, but it has nothing to do with impeachment proceedings.

It has to do with Omarosa!

Where is Omarosa?

I bet she has a few things to say.

I bet Conyers has a few things to say, too.

Did anyone ask Jolly Jerry of Judiciary if he is going to look into the current and former official Members and Staff on his Committee, who have engaged in abuses of power, corruption, obstruction of justice and some really rogue ass other stuff?

Oh, wait, someone already put in that request.

T'would it not be more, legally, economic to wait for the IG Report and Mueller's Findings Report or are we setting up for some serious protracted litigation with "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending)?

I am thinking of ordering one of those mouth-watering, Detroit home made, butter pound cakes from around the corner, serving it with a really dry champagne and cut fruit.

#perkinscoiesucks

House impeachment panel asking 60 Trump officials for documents

Washington – Declaring it’s “very clear” President Donald Trump obstructed justice, the chairman of the House committee in charge of impeachment says the panel is requesting documents Monday from more than 60 people from Trump’s administration, family and business as part of a rapidly expanding Russia investigation.

â€œItâ€™s very clear that the president obstructed justice,â€ said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.

"Jollie" Jerry Nadler

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the House Judiciary Committee wants to review documents from the Justice Department, the president’s son Donald Trump Jr. and Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg. Former White House chief of staff John Kelly and former White House counsel Don McGahn also are likely targets, he said.

“We are going to initiate investigations into abuses of power, into corruption and into obstruction of justice,” Nadler said. “We will do everything we can to get that evidence.”

Asked if he believed Trump obstructed justice, Nadler said, “Yes, I do.”

Nadler isn’t calling the inquiry an impeachment investigation but said House Democrats, now in the majority, are simply doing “our job to protect the rule of law” after Republicans during the first two years of Trump’s term were “shielding the president from any proper accountability.”

“We’re far from making decisions” about impeachment, he said.

In a tweet on Sunday, Trump blasted anew the Russia investigation, calling it a partisan probe unfairly aimed at discrediting his win in the 2016 presidential election. “I am an innocent man being persecuted by some very bad, conflicted & corrupt people in a Witch Hunt that is illegal & should never have been allowed to start - And only because I won the Election!” he wrote.

Nadler’s comments follow a bad political week for Trump. He emerged empty-handed from a high-profile summit with North Korea leader Kim Jong Un on denuclearization and Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, in three days of congressional testimony, publicly characterized the president as a “con man” and “cheat.”

Newly empowered House Democrats are flexing their strength with blossoming investigations. A half-dozen House committees are now probing alleged coordination between Trump associates and Russia’s efforts to sway the 2016 election, Trump’s tax returns and possible conflicts of interest involving the Trump family business and policy-making. The House oversight committee, for instance, has set a Monday deadline for the White House to turn over documents related to security clearances after The New York Times reported that the president ordered officials to grant his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s clearance over the objections of national security officials.

Nadler’s added lines of inquiry also come as special counsel Robert Mueller is believed to be wrapping up his work into possible questions of Trump campaign collusion and obstruction in the Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election. In his testimony, Cohen acknowledged he did not witness or know directly of collusion between Trump aides and Russia but had his “suspicions.”

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., on Sunday accused House Democrats of prejudging Trump as part of a query based purely on partisan politics.

“I think Congressman Nadler decided to impeach the president the day the president won the election,” McCarthy said. “Listen to exactly what he said. He talks about impeachment before he even became chairman and then he says, ‘you’ve got to persuade people to get there.’ There’s nothing that the president did wrong.”

“Show me where the president did anything to be impeached. ... Nadler is setting the framework now that the Democrats are not to believe the Mueller report,” he said.

Nadler said Sunday his committee will seek to review the Mueller report but stressed the investigation “goes far beyond collusion.”

He pointed to what he considered several instances of obstruction of justice by the president, including the “1,100 times he referred to the Mueller investigation as a ‘witch hunt’” as well Trump’s abrupt firing of FBI director James Comey in 2017. According to Comey, Trump had encouraged the then-FBI director to drop an investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Trump has denied he told Comey to end the Flynn probe.

“It’s very clear that the president obstructed justice,” Nadler said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has kept calls for impeachment at bay by insisting that Mueller first must be allowed to finish his work, and present his findings publicly – though it’s unclear whether the White House will allow its full release.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who chairs the House intelligence committee, on Sunday also stressed that it’s too early to make judgments about impeachment.

“That is something that we will have to await Bob Mueller’s report and the underlying evidence to determine. We will also have to look at the whole body of improper and criminal actions by the president including those campaign finance crimes to determine whether they rise to the level of removal from office,” Schiff said.

Nadler and McCarthy spoke on ABC’s “This Week,” and Schiff appeared on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

BEVERLY TRAN ®

Pages