Showing posts with label Perry Apapelbaum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Perry Apapelbaum. Show all posts

Thursday, July 9, 2020

A Special Message To The FBI - My Cyber Perp Walk Better Be Glorious

Documenting for the record.

I assist a severely mentally ill older male who was contacted via email to apply for a loan for his Michigan August 2020 peacefest business that he has not filed any paperwork for an LLC, INC, NGO or even has a name for his grandiose multimillion dollar operation of whatever he has conjured up in his very special world, with his friends John Lennon and Thomas Jefferson, tow very close friends he talks to on a regular basis.

Yes, Michigan is still socially shuttered, but he and friends, John and Tom, are unable to grasp this concept.

So, he lets me know, all of this today, as I type, out of excitement to finally prove me wrong, because I am always spot on predicting the outcome of all his previous business ventures, he sends me a pic of the check, which arrived FedEx, this afternoon, for $1,000 more than what he originally requested, just because, I guess, he is such a great business leader, or something.

The amount is $3,920.00.

The name of the lender..... First Tech Federal Credit Union.

https://www.firsttechfed.com/

He is not, nor ever has been a federal employee.

It seems this federal credit union got his contact information off an old Craig's List add from a few years ago.

He has no State of Michigan identification because it expired many years ago as he has a strong aversion to soap and water.

I am not able to call and curse him out so as not to cash the check because the phone signal is down.

Once he cashes the check, they will have access to his account, which will lead them right back to me.

This is the work of Cynthia Martin and her rogue ass crew trying to set me up for some kind of criminal action.

Watch, I am going to be arrested for some dumb crap, and it better be dramatic.

Mark my words, I want a glorious spectacle of a cyber perp walk.

Perhaps, these people were trying to find a way of depositing my back pay they stole from me, but, hey, what do I know?

I will post copy of the check once the internet is back on track.

#maytheheavensfall

Invest In You






















"A call to arms"....how quaint.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Monday, June 15, 2020

Prelude To Detroit: Another Chief Of Staff & Another Congressional #MeToo Ethics Investigation Transposable Model

Oh, those Chiefs of Staff!

John Paul Manuel, Chief of Staff for Michael F.Q. San Nicolas, Guam, was the one who accepted the unreported cash, which he then, turned around and used to book the hotel for the Member and his lover, who more than likely is a consensual woman over the age of 21 years.

More than likely, just because I am pretty sure who was the "Other" Chief of Staff, who probably reached out to John Paul, in some form and fashion, to install the fear of god in his heart and soul, that, if he did not follow through, he, too, would soon become a Former Chief of Staff, and be implicated as a co-conspirator, because #MeToo was an epic fail.

Considering the fact that we are dealing with campaign funds, I am just going to go out there on a limb and say that the Guam Delegate to Congress, more than likely had no idea that the hotel room was booked with undocumented cash as a campaign contribution, because he probably assumed it was his personal credit card or, in the purpose of business, his congressional office credit card, because he did end up hiring as a new staffer.

I will even go so far as to allege, just because I know how these people think, that the hotel room was set up with cameras, and there is probably a secret romantic tape, ready to be dropped, in hopes of distracting the masses with the thought of more congressional porn, so as not to be indicted for blackmail and other nefarious charges, when it comes to money laundering through the Member's congressional campaign, gifts of lucrative fake ass contracts, and, more than likely, the Congressional Credit Union.

Sometimes, these scandals are used as warning shots, to other individuals, to keep their mouths shut, or face a wrath of criminal charges, in full public specter, where the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) will sacrifice one of their own, to send that message to invoke fear and trepidation, to remain silent.

The only problem in this absolutely ingenious, transposable model is that there exists a significant distinction between a congressional tryst and an epic romance, whereby that difference is that the latter involves a Quantum Renaissance.

Can I get a #MeToo?

Grace Meng needs to recuse herself from this investigation, but, then again, upon a secondary reflection, she did come out University of Michigan.

Complaint filed on alleged illegal use of campaign funds, San Nicolas says it's baseless



#maytheheavensfall

Statement of the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on Ethics Regarding Delegate Michael F. Q. San Nicolas


Jun 12, 2020 Press Release

Pursuant to Committee Rule 7, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on Ethics (Committee) determined to release the following statement:

In accordance with House Rule XI, clause 3, and Committee Rules 10(a)(2) and 18, the Committee unanimously voted on March 11, 2020, to establish an Investigative Subcommittee.  Pursuant to the Committee’s action, the Investigative Subcommittee shall have jurisdiction to determine whether Delegate Michael F.Q. San Nicolas may have: engaged in a sexual relationship with an individual on his congressional staff; converted campaign funds to personal use; accepted improper and/or excessive campaign contributions; reported campaign disbursements that may not be legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures attributable to bona fide campaign or political purposes; omitted required information from or disclosed false information in reports filed with the Federal Election Commission; made false statements to government investigators or agencies; and/or improperly interfered or attempted to interfere in a government investigation of related allegations in violation of House Rules, law, regulations, or other standards of conduct.

The Honorable Grace Meng will serve as Chairwoman of the Investigative Subcommittee, and the Honorable Jackie Walorski will serve as the Ranking Member.  The other two members of the Investigative Subcommittee are the Honorable Darren Soto and the Honorable Vicky Hartzler.

The Committee has determined to take this action following receipt of a referral from the Office of Congressional Ethics regarding this matter.  The Committee notes that the mere fact of establishing an Investigative Subcommittee does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred.

No other public comment will be made on this matter except in accordance with Committee rules.  Pursuant to House Rule XI, clause 3(b)(8)(B)(iii), and Committee Rule 17A(f)(1), no documents will be released at this time.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

House ethics panel to probe Guam congressional delegate over sex with staffer, improper contributions allegations

WASHINGTON – The House Committee on Ethics announced Friday it was moving forward with an investigation into Guam's lone member of Congress over allegations he had sexual relations with a staff member and accepted improper political contributions.

The member, Del. Michael F.Q. San Nicolas, said he was ready to "disprove the allegations."

The bipartisan panel had been looking at the allegations against San Nicolas since last fall and decided in March to launch a full investigation. News of that unanimous vote to move forward was announced Friday by the committee in a news release.

The release said the panel would probe the freshman Democrat for engaging in a sexual relationship with a member of his congressional staff; converting campaign funds to personal use; accepting improper and/or excessive campaign contributions; and reporting campaign disbursements that may not be legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures.

U.S. Capitol Building
The panel will also probe whether San Nicolas omitted required information from – or disclosed false information in – reports filed with the Federal Election Commission; made false statements to government investigators or agencies; and/or improperly interfered or attempted to interfere in a government investigation of related allegations, according to the release.

The issue was referred to the committee by the Office of Congressional Ethics, a separate, non-partisan body of the House.

The release does not list the specific circumstances of the allegations.

'Baseless' claim:Complaint filed on alleged illegal use of campaign funds, San Nicolas says it's baseless

But in September, San Nicolas' former manager of his 2018 congressional campaign, John Paul L. Manuel, filed a compliant with the Guam Election Commission alleging the delegate received a $10,000 contribution from a Guam businessman – an amount above the legal campaign limit, according to the Pacific Daily News in Guam.

Manuel also alleged San Nicolas reimbursed himself from federal campaign funds after using money to carry on an extra-marital affair with a woman he later hired as a member of his congressional staff. He also alleged San Nicolas forged his own father's signature on campaign checks, the newspaper reported.

"This is just a part of the process that we are required to go through in order to disprove the allegations made against us," San Nicolas said in a statement released Friday to USA TODAY through his office. "We will continue to cooperate and thank the people for their patience and support during this time."

The House banned members from having sexual relations with their staff members in 2018 as part of sweeping ethics rules adopted after several lawmakers resigned over accusation of sexual harassment.

The probe will be led by two Democrats – Grace Meng of New York and Darren Soto of Florida – and two Republicans - Jackie Walorski of Indiana and Vicky Hartzler of Missouri.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

The Grooming Of Rashida Tlaib: Bitch Boy Got To Her - How To Impeach Trump & Not Get Tried For Treason

#sayhisname


Tlaib introduces resolution backing impeachment of Trump

Washington — Freshman U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib is forging ahead with her impeachment resolution, despite pushback from some members of her party.

Tlaib, D-Detroit, on Wednesday introduced her resolution directing the House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether President Donald Trump has committed impeachable offenses.

"Resolved, that the Committee on the Judiciary shall inquire whether the House should impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America," the measure reads.

The resolution "creates a transparent process to ensure that the protection of our democracy, to ensure that we don't have a lawless society that results in irreparable harm to the American people," Tlaib said Wednesday in a floor speech.

"Doing nothing when we are seeing blatant disregard of the United States Constitution to our ethical norms is dangerous. No one, Madam Speaker, including the President of United States, is above the law."

Tlaib this week circulated a letter asking her Democratic colleagues to support her resolution. Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, signed on as a co-sponsor. 

"I urge your support in recommending that the House Committee on Judiciary begin hearings, take depositions and issue subpoenas to answer this question that is fundamental to the rule of law and the preservation of our democracy," Tlaib wrote.
Notably, House Democrats didn't seem so eager this week to dive into an impeachment debate after special counsel Robert Mueller cleared Trump of collusion with Russia, and the Justice Department dismissed questions about obstruction of justice.

Reacting to Tlaib's letter Tuesday, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, indicated that House Democratic leaders are done with the talk about impeachment.

“We didn’t run on impeachment. We didn’t win the House of Representatives on impeachment. We’re not focused on impeachment,” said Jeffries, who chairs the House Democratic Caucus.

>The “overwhelming majority” of his caucus wants to get back to its domestic agenda, he said.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, has also played down the possibility of impeachment, telling the Washington Post in recent weeks that she isn’t interested in the House majority pursuing it at this point, saying Trump is “just not worth it.”

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Lansing, noted the prospect of the Republican-controlled Senate removing Trump from office is unlikely. "That is not my focus," Stabenow said of impeachment. "Although I think it’s important to have accountability and transparency, and it's important to do hearings. It's important to bring people forward and so on. 

"She can do it in the majority in the House. That’s not something that’s going to happen here for us," Stabenow added.

She and other Democrats, however, are not done with the Mueller probe, calling for release of the full report.

Tlaib has said Democratic leaders including Pelosi have urged her to"represent my district," which Tlaib says is behind her impeachment push.

"I think a lot of folks in leadership come from a point of strategy. Where I come from is, is this the right thing to do for the American people? I know it sounds corny, but it's a clause in the Constitution," Tlaib told The Detroit News editorial board last week.

"I don't think it's that divisive of an issue. I think people want to have the hearings. ... No one (in Congress) has said, 'Rashida, stop.'"

The White House was dismissive of Tlaib's impeachment talk in January.

"You’re not going to impeach this president when he’s had two of the most successful years that any president has had in modern history," White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told CNN at the time.

"The only reason they want to come after this president is because they know they can’t beat him. They can’t beat him when it comes to a policy debate, and they’re not going to beat him when it comes to 2020." 

Tlaib's letter to her colleagues lays out what she wants investigated, including whether the actions of Trump and his businesses violate the emoluments clause of the Constitution — an anti-corruption provision that prohibits him from receiving gifts or payments from foreign or state governments.

Tlaib has previously raised the potential conflict of interest posed by foreign officials staying at or spending money at Trump's hotel in Washington, for example.

The Trump Organization has said it voluntarily reimburses the U.S. Treasury annually to compensate for profits from foreign officials at Trump hotels and properties.

Tlaib also has questions for the Judiciary Committee about obstruction of justice and whether Trump committed campaign finance crimes by his role in payments to two women who alleged Trump had affairs with them before he became president.

"We all swore to protect our nation, and that begins with making sure that no one, including the President of the United States, is acting above the law," she wrote.

Tlaib has long called for Trump's impeachment, including during last year's campaign for Congress.
Most memorably, a few hours after her swearing in, she declared at a Washington party that "we're going to impeach the mother (expletive)."

Tlaib said she had worked on the language of her resolution with Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-New York, whose committee is already investigating the three issues she wants pursued.

She acknowledged that Pelosi "is not going to move it if it’s not going to get through the Senate."

But she said Nadler had her talk to someone about what happened leading up to the resignation of President Richard Nixon. She learned that many Republicans stuck with Nixon until release of the “smoking gun” tapes that proved he had ordered the Watergate cover-up.

"The American people need to see it. Or hear it," she said.

"In ideal world, having the hearing itself would make the president comply. If he complied, I would walk away."

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Friday, February 8, 2019

JUDICIARY: AAG Matt Whitaker Meets The "Legal Geniuses" Of The U.S. House Judiciary Committee - We Are Almost In Detroit

Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling
John Conyers, Jr. sees and hears everything!
For your historic pleasure, in the spirit of fuchsia, I have provided my "Colored" commentary, because I am quite sure there are going to be numerous media outlets, political scholars, and "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) out there who are going to claim they know everything about everything that has gone on in this hearing.

Here, is almost, but not quite, everything you want to know about Matt Whitaker.

Why are some of the members so contentious and way outside the scope of the hearing?

Well, it is because the U.S. House Judiciary Committee is under the purview of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Yes, boys and girls, that is correct.

Judiciary was mean to my Sweetie.

That was not very nice because it gave me Saddy face, right Perry?

But, have no fear, there is always the original plan...by the original source.

It is just a shame that the Members of the Committee did not take the time to address the items of the national agenda that Trump outlined in his State of the Union 2019 speech.

  • child trafficking;
  • child sex trafficking;
  • human trafficking;
  • women trafficking;
  • drug trafficking;
  • slavery;
  • civil rights;
  • jobs;
  • justice;
  • peace.

But, then again, when you are facing prosecution of war crimes, you tend to forget about the children.




The following is my "Colored" Commentary of the Oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice Hearing, where I have extracted my comments in conversation for a more pleasurable experience, via the castigation of the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed.

Yes, this is about Detroit.

Perry put this hearing together because I smell the fear.

Collins just put forth a motion to dismiss the hearing.

10 - 12 motion to adjourn does not pass.

Nadler is trying to find out if he is part of the Special Investigation!
Image may contain: 1 person, text

Matt just smashed Nadler when asked for the umpthenth time of what the special counsel investigation was about. He said "I believe your 5 minutes are up".

A bit of fun you can take with you. Look at the portraits in chambers on the wall. Who are they?

Lofgren asked if his views were based on conversations with the Trump Administration. Whitaker said his comments on the special investigations were made before, as a private citizen.

Chabot said "Conyers" and mentioned their work on the opioid crisis.

Whitaker is trolling Her Flatulent Boviness. CoS physically stood up behind her. They are terrified.

The Her Flatulent Boviness (Sheila Jackson Lee) tried to as Whitaker about his background in Voting Rights cases. Her time expired. She was trying to get into the Russian Interference. Instead, he said voting fraud, which is his investigation of Detroit.

Cohen is about to break down in tears trying to get Whitaker to say this is a russian investigation. This is so romantic.

If anyone runs across any articles or *youtubers/investigative jounalists* running their own analysis, please drop the links so I can put them on the list.

Deutch asked about the interview to become CoS. This is going to be relevant to other CoS.

Karen Bass asked about Whitaker's background with FACT. Collins challenged that it was outside the scope of the hearing. Nadler was forced to take a vote. They tabled the issue. Karen Bass is the head of the Foster Care Caucus. Need I say more? Bass is going after FACT because she is part of CREW. I told you, Melanie Sloane is coming back.

Nadler: "we taking a 5 minute recess for lunch". Whitaker: "only 5 minutes for lunch"? <=== I need a meme.

McClinton tried to compare the Stone raid and Medenez case arrest procedure. Whitaker said there are ongoing investigations. FBI will brief in closed session,

Cedric Richmond is throwing the Civil Rights Act creation of the DOJ. Yes, who was behind creating the DOJ. #sayhisname

Richmond is standing up for the "Colored" Revolution. He is throwing the race card. DUCK!

Lesko (cannot see her name she is new) is asking about coming together. She is asking about the new infantcide laws. DOJ is looking into it. She is talking about infant mortality.

Jefferies tried to rip Whitaker about responding to a statement and a question. Now Jefferies is throwing out numbers on indictments, pleas, sentencing. He is bringing up Wikileaks, Stone, Manafort, Flynn, Cohen.

Cicilline is asking about Presidential privilege. They keep harping on if Whitaker talked to Trump or his legal team about the Mueller investigation. If Cicilline was part of this group, or just read my cases, or signed up for my blog, he would know.

Reschenthaler raised good questions in the scope of the hearing, appropriate questions.

Swawell asked if Mueller was honest and conflicted because Trump said he was running a witchhunt. He wants Whitaker to repeat his "terms and words" to the president. That was a cute set up for a violation of law.

Armstrong is asking about the First Step Act. He asked commended the pretrial release program and asked to work with DOJ for a Second Step Act.

Armstrong asked about universal understanding of "gross negligence" even under the Espionage Act.

You do know, there is a strong possibility that when they take a break, walking into the back office, they are on the phone, calling #perkinscoiesucks . There is also a distinct possibility that, due to the investigation on Judiciary, that everything has been wired up.

Raskin. Oooo, he read Whitaker's wikipedia page!

Raskin is getting fiesty! Smells like fear. Israel?

Jayapal is lying. She keeps talking about the leaked draft immigration family separation policy memo. That is a lie. The States take over. Bethany Christian. Michigan. Where is Betsy DeVos. She is using a fake memo to attack Whitaker.

The States hand out the contracts to private corporations. Jayapal has said absolutely nothing about foster care and adoption. They do not even track in the U.S.

Demmings asked about private conversations with Trump about Cohen or, District of Virginia and SDNY personel.

She is getting on him about drugs coming in from the border or ports of entry.

Correa is on white supremist out numbering islamic extremist attacks.

Scanlon is getting hard on undocumented immigrants but he cannot comment due to ongoing litigation. She is clarifying. Garcia is asking about Zero Tolerance policy. Whitaker said Sessions implemented it. These people refuse to say foster care and adoption. The states take those kids. Michigan has the national contract. No one is even mentioning termination of parental…See More

She asked about dropping the ACA litigation. Why? He cannot discuss that. That is the decision of the president.

Neguse is asking about medical cannibis research. Whitaker said there are international treaty challenges.

He asked about confidential communications with the president. He is asking about RR being next in line to be appointed. Sessions resigned. Sessions was not fired.

https://beverlytran.blogspot.com/search?q=jeff+sessions+ballad&fbclid=IwAR2pQAQ8BtQf1YfLKFQ6NLF72cEa4SkaMoZ6ObcRIOLwbTIsgFXTk50HGJY#axzz5egWbwTZU

McBath is asking about the Voting Rights Act, voter suppression, and evidence. The 2016 election had a VRA complaint filed before the election. Grand Juries were called before the election, in Detroit, which threw the state, which threw the entire general election.

Stanton asked about the Religious Liberty Task Force. Sessions set it up. Whitaker has said he would follow up.

Stanton brought up foster care and discriminating against a jewish adopter by a contracted agency.

Dean is asking about his private life statements on the Mueller investigation.

The Committee is setting up for impeachment hearings, from both sides of the aisle.

Mucarsal-Powell must be new because she is not very versed on 501c3s. I am calling it out now. They are prohibiting 501c3s from engaging in political activities. They are going to file charges. This is #perkinscoiesucks set up because the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) are behind the development of line of questioning.

They are going to throw Mucarsel-Powell under the bus. She is reading "their" questions under the guise that she is going to rise as a power star. I can spot grooming a thousand miles away.

Escobar is trying very nicely to tell Whitaker how to answer. She is not his legal counsel. She is new and was set up to get thrown under the bus. She dropped dead kids. Yes, she brought up the 2 kids who died at the border but refuses to speak upon the fact that congress makes law, not DOJ.

Only Congress makes law, not the Attorney General.

You would think the members of House Judiciary would know this by now.
 Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

Sheila Jackson Lee Owns A CBC #MeToo Moment & Another Of Treason

Image result for congressional black caucus foundation
https://www.cbcfinc.org/
Before we begin, I thought it wise to introduce the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation since all of this history is omitted from the school books and is in the process of being rewritten.

The Foundation is an off-shoot of the Congressional Black Caucus that ended up being something it was never intended to be because it was highjacked by special interests individuals who needed extra money for frequent hair and nail salon visits.

Every year, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation puts on its Legislative Conference, where, for the right price, people and groups from across the country will attend to network.

Unfortunately, some of the networking is in the realms of rather nefarious trafficking tiny human and weapons operations, but hey, what do I know?

I know Her Flatulent Boviness is going to need a good attorney to get her affairs in order because there is no legal defense for what she has done.

https://beverlytran.blogspot.com/search?q=Sheila+Jackson+Lee

U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee accused in lawsuit of retaliation against staffer

The Houston congresswoman is accused of firing an employee after the employee sued the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation over an alleged 2015 rape.

WASHINGTON — A new lawsuit has a Houston congresswoman in hot water.

A former staffer for U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Houston Democrat, identified as "Jane Doe" says in the suit that she was fired as retaliation for suing the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation over an alleged 2015 rape. Buzzfeed first reported on the matter on Wednesday evening.

Doe alleged that while she was an intern for another member of Congress in 2015, she took part in the foundation's internship program and was raped by the intern coordinator, Damien Jones.

Three years later, she was then employed in Jackson Lee's office. The congresswoman at the time was — and still is — the chairwoman of the foundation's board of directors. In March 2018, Doe informed the congresswoman's chief of staff, Glenn Rushing, of her intent to pursue litigation against the foundation. Several weeks later, Rushing and Jackson Lee fired Doe, citing budgetary reasons, the lawsuit says.

Doe is now suing Jackson Lee's office and the foundation for $75,000.

"We are deeply concerned about the welfare of all our interns and fellows, including ‘Jane Doe’, the former CBCF intern who recently filed suit,” the foundation said in a statement on Thursday. “It is CBCF's position that the Foundation did not have the purview to terminate Ms. Doe from a staff position in a congressional office, and therefore, did not take such action. We have and will remain supportive of Ms. Doe, and will fully cooperate with all legal proceedings.”

Jones, the man who Doe alleged raped her, did not respond to Buzzfeed's request for comment.
On Thursday morning, Jackson Lee declined to comment to The Texas Tribune while near the U.S. House floor. She referred to a statement from her office, which was released Thursday afternoon.
"The Office adamantly denies the allegations that it retaliated against, or otherwise improperly treated, the plaintiff. It is against office policy to discuss specific details about internal personnel matters," the statement said.

It went on to point out that a piece of legislation Jackson Lee backed in 1995, known as the Congress Accountability Act, made Doe's legal pursuit possible."The plaintiff chose federal court and she has every right to utilize this process and pursue a claim through the CAA," said the statement. "Although the Congresswoman is eager to respond substantively, she will do so only at the appropriate time, as the court docket dictates. The Congresswoman is confident that, once all of the facts come to light, her Office will be exonerated of any retaliatory or otherwise improper conduct and this matter will be put to rest."

The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation is a nonprofit offshoot of the powerful Congressional Black Caucus. The foundation issues reports and offers fellowships and scholarships to develop political leadership talent among young African-Americans.

Jones went on to work for the U.S. Senate campaign of former U.S. Rep. Beto O'Rourke. O'Rourke's spokesman issued a statement to Buzzfeed on the matter: "“The Beto for Texas campaign was absolutely not aware of these allegations until today and no longer has a relationship with Damien Jones.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Monday, January 21, 2019

Whitewater: Just My #MeToo Notes - 2-5-1998

What Do Whitewater, Ken Starr, Monica Lewinsky & Detroit Have In Common?

Learn more: BEVERLY TRAN: What Do Whitewater, Ken Starr, Monica Lewinsky & Detroit Have In Common? http://beverlytran.blogspot.com/2018/02/what-do-whitewater-ken-starr-monica.html#ixzz5dGXS63mE
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare 

 

Sources: Lewinsky Won't Say Clinton Told Her To Lie

Clinton denies 'legal charges' as Podesta testifies before grand jury

starr
WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, Feb. 5) -- Former White House intern Monica Lewinsky, even if granted immunity, is not prepared to testify that either President Bill Clinton or his friend Vernon Jordan ever told her flatly to lie under oath about her alleged affair with the president, CNN has learned.
Sources say Lewinsky is prepared to say the president and Jordan urged her to be "evasive," which legal experts say may not meet the test for encouraging perjury and obstructing justice.
Also in this story:


The sources say Lewinsky's offer is not good enough for Starr, because, on secretly-recorded conversations with onetime friend Linda Tripp, Lewinsky is heard alleging Clinton and Jordan told her to lie.

This was described as the main reason Starr backed away Wednesday from an immunity agreement reached with Lewinsky's lawyer Monday night.

These same sources, close to the investigation, say Lewinsky is prepared to say she had oral sex with Clinton, though not intercourse.

Clinton has vehemently denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky, or telling anyone to lie.

During an Oval Office appearance Thursday with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Clinton three times refused to say what kind of relationship he had with Lewinsky.

"I have already denied the legal charges, strongly, and I do so again," Clinton said. "But there is an ongoing investigation. Under those circumstances, the right thing for me to do is to go back and do the job the American people hired me to do, and that's what I am doing."


Sources say Starr's staff is now asking that Lewinsky submit to a formal interview before any immunity is granted, though he will not discuss particulars.

Starr says inquiry is 'moving very quickly'

lewinsky
In Little Rock, Ark., Starr brushed aside questions Thursday about the status of immunity talks with Lewinsky, but said his investigation into the sex-and-perjury allegations involving Clinton is making progress.

Starr, in Arkansas for a pre-trial hearing in former Gov. Jim Guy Tucker's second trial, said the investigation into the Lewinsky matter is "moving very quickly and we've made very significant progress."

"We are going by the book," Starr said when asked about the immunity discussions with Lewinsky. "We want the truth. We want all the truth. We want it completely, accurately and we will satisfy ourselves that we're getting the truth."

Starr's office is looking into allegations that Clinton had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky, and then urged her to lie about it under oath.

Starr noted that Attorney General Janet Reno gave his office jurisdiction over "very serious allegations" involving the president.

"Those allegations are possible obstruction of justice, intimidation of witnesses and subornation of perjury," Starr said. "That is an extraordinary set of circumstances. We're investigating those as promptly, as quickly as we can."

Starr also declined to comment on a report in Thursday's Washington Post that he has given Lewinsky's lawyers until the end of the week to make the former intern available for questioning, or let her face possible prosecution.

Clinton calls executive privilege 'a hypothetical question'

clinton
In his photo ops with Blair, Clinton was asked about whether his aides might assert executive privilege to limit their grand jury testimony, called that "a hypothetical question."

"First let me make it clear that for four years we have been cooperating -- exhaustively," Clinton said. "And that's a hypothetical question as far as I know. Should it arise, I will await a recommendation from the White House counsel about the institutional responsibilities of the presidency, and then when I get it I will make a decision."

Executive privilege is a president's right to withhold specific information, usually deliberations with top aides, from Congress or the courts.
In Little Rock, Starr said the purpose for invoking executive privilege would be to prevent the grand jury from "getting specific information," and he would have to assess his options if the White House goes that route.

Ginsburg not surprised at immunity rejection

ginsburg
Meanwhile, Lewinsky's attorney, William Ginsburg, says he was not surprised that Starr rejected a written statement seeking her immunity from prosecution.

Ginsburg told CNN late Wednesday that he had not spoken to Starr and does not anticipate talking to him anytime soon. "Frankly, I don't want to really deal with him anymore," Ginsburg said.

Ginsburg said he was busy preparing a defense for Lewinsky and he was "hell-bent on telling the truth."

Ginsburg said he was not going to be "intimidated by a man with a mission," saying he had a young woman to defend. He is convinced he will have to defend his client, saying, "That is what I am going to do ... no more games."

"If Judge Starr's object of this whole investigation is to net Monica Lewinsky in a conviction and jail time, then we have to look at how our tax dollars are being spent," Ginsburg told reporters.

When asked about the future, Ginsburg said, "The presidency will be preserved, the American public will have restored confidence in the system, the Congress will have reviewed the office of the Independent Counsel in terms of the legislation that enabled it, and once again we will have some restoration of confidence in government.

"In terms of my client, my client hopefully will be old news, and she will have a job somewhere and building a career," Ginsburg added. "I will be back to the normal practice of country law and no longer in the Beltway. With any luck at all, my next tour will be of New York, not of Washington."
Ginsburg said he expects to return to Washington sometime next week, probably Tuesday or Wednesday.

Word broke Wednesday that Starr had rejected the written statement by Lewinsky's lawyers.

More details emerge about negotiations

Sources familiar with the investigation told CNN that lawyers for Starr and Lewinsky had actually signed an immunity agreement Monday evening, an agreement that Starr has now backed away from.
podesta
The sources say Starr's lawyers want to re-open talks, even though Lewinsky and her attorneys, Ginsburg and Nathaniel Speights, signed the agreement on Starr's Office of Independent Counsel stationery.

A well-placed source familiar with the investigation says that Lewinsky's attorneys gave Starr's office a written proffer, or statement, outlining what she would be prepared to say if granted immunity.

But prosecutors apparently concluded that Lewinsky's statement of what she knew was not clear enough. The Washington Post reported today that its source said Lewinsky acknowledged having a sexual relationship with Clinton in the statement, but gave a muddled account of whether she was urged to lie about the relationship when she spoke to lawyers in the Paula Jones case.

Jones, a former Arkansas state employee, has filed a lawsuit against Clinton, alleging that he asked her for oral sex while he was governor, and that after she rebuffed him, she suffered a hostile work environment. That case is due to go to trial in May.

Podesta testifies before grand jury

coleman
Meanwhile, the Whitewater grand jury continued to hear testimony in the case. White House Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta testified and is expected to return to answer more questions Friday.

"I did answer all of the questions put to me today," Podesta told waiting reporters afterward. "Nothing in my testimony in any way contradicted the strong denials that the president has made to these allegations, and since I have been asked to return and answer some additional questions, I think that it's best that I not answer any questions out here and reserve that to the grand jury."

Earlier in the day, the grand jury heard from another former White House intern.

Justin Coleman, a 21-year-old former intern at the White House, testified and then told reporters he had no knowledge of a relationship -- "proper or improper" -- between Lewinsky and Clinton.
"I at no time had knowledge of any relationship -- proper or improper -- between the president and Miss Lewinsky," Coleman said. "I support President Clinton and am grateful for the opportunity to have served him and his administration. I leave now to return to Brown University."

Coleman, from Chapel Hill, N.C., said he worked in the White House from August 1997 through January 1998.

A case of mistaken identity?

In West Palm Beach, Fla., Starr has subpoenaed videotapes of Clinton's trip to south Florida last year.
A White House source told CNN that Lewinsky was not on the March 1997 visit to golfer Greg Norman's house.

The subpoena, delivered to WPEC-TV Thursday afternoon, asked the West Palm Beach station to "produce the video tape or video tapes depicting President William Jefferson Clinton with Miss Monica Lewinsky on a trip President Clinton made to Florida during which he visited Greg Norman."
It was on that trip that Clinton tore a tendon in his right knee when he lost his footing on a step at Norman's home.

The management at WPEC told CNN that it has scanned most of the tapes of its coverage of Clinton's visit to south Florida and has found no pictures of Lewinsky.

A White House source said Starr may have confused Lewinsky with a female National Security Council (NSC) staffer who was assigned to the trip.

The source said a West Palm Beach newspaper reporter has shown the White House a videotape from the Clinton visit which pictures the president and the NSC employee exiting a limousine.

A WPEC reporter told CNN that over a week ago editors did find a segment of video showing the president and a dark-haired woman in a limousine, but, when they checked her identity, it was determined she was an NSC employee.

WPEC management said it had not decided as of Thursday afternoon if it would hand over the tapes or challenge the subpoena in court. The subpoena gives the station until Feb. 10 to respond.
CNN's Wolf Blitzer contributed to this report.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Friday, July 20, 2018

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

Image result for popcorn politics
"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.





2018 COMMITTEE INFORMATIONC00409797
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
Itemized IndividualContributionsOffsets to OperatingExpendituresUnitemized IndividualContributionsOther CommitteesContributions20.4%72%
Taskmoney
Itemized Individual Contributions$36,534
Offsets to Operating Expenditures$364
Unitemized Individual Contributions$13,198
Other Committees Contributions$128,600
Disbursements
Individual RefundsOperating ExpendituresOther DisbursementsOther CommitteeRefunds86.8%
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©