JUDICIARY: Hearing On Jobs, Justice & Peace - Without Once Saying His Name

The Committee addressed qualified immunity by resurrecting the Second Amendment of the right to keep and bear the arms of the United States and the respective States which issues the licenses.

With great discernment, the Committee amazingly addressed the legacy of Conyers, without once saying his name, or the fact that he, as Chairman Emeritus of Judiciary, was denied due process, assassinated by blasphemy.

Absolutely amazing to witness the soulless execute such a bipartisan task.

Nessel calls for public database of Michigan's problem police officers

Detroit Police Chief James Craig speaks after officer Waldis Johnson's funeral Detroit Free Press

LANSING – The public could access a statewide database of problem police officers under a set of reforms put forward Tuesday by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel.

Nessel said in a news release she wants the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards to create a police misconduct registry of verified claims of abuse or other misconduct made against police officers in Michigan.


The proposed registry is part of a seven-point plan Nessel released amid nationwide discussions about police reform in the wake of the Memorial Day death of George Floyd, a Black man who died during an arrest by Minneapolis police.

Frank Guido, general counsel for the Police Officers Association of Michigan — a union representing more than 12,000 officers in more than 300 local police and sheriff departments — said he is OK with some of Nessel's proposals, two of which he said are already in place, but he has concerns with others.


As for the public database, how would misconduct be defined? Guido asked. Also, "is this a requirement that is appropriate for all government employees?" or would only police officers be singled out, he asked.

The Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards sets professional standards in education, selection, employment, licensing and funding in law enforcement and criminal justice in Michigan. Last week, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer announced she was adding four seats to the commission — which has been dominated by law enforcement representatives — to give it a greater community voice.


Nessel said that in 2016 the commission began requiring that law enforcement officers be licensed. But she said the commission "lacks sufficient authority to oversee law enforcement professionals and to revoke the licenses of police officers who demonstrate poor moral character or violate the public trust."

More: Michigan State Police graduates another school of troopers — with only 4 Black recruits

More: Whitmer: Require police to intervene if they see officers use excessive force

The measures she announced Tuesday are "the first step toward implementing positive change in our criminal justice system," Nessel said.

In addition to the database, Nessel called for:

Amending the Public Employee Benefits Forfeiture Act so that officers forfeit their retirement benefits upon conviction of a felony related to misconduct while on duty. 
Authorizing the commission to suspend or revoke a license when an officer engages in certain misconduct.
Requiring police agencies to maintain all disciplinary records of a police officers in their personnel files.
Requiring police agencies to report use of force data, with information about the civilians' race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion and age.
Creating an independent investigative and prosecutorial process for deaths resulting from police actions.
Requiring continuing education for officers as a condition of licensing and improving and standardizing policies and training related to conflict de-escalation, cultural awareness, and implicit bias.
The public registry of problem officers would be a departure for Michigan. Until 2018, when Public Act 128 of 2017 took effect, even Michigan police agencies often could not review the circumstances under which police officers seeking employment left their previous departments. That had led to an issue with problem officers moving from one police agency to another, without their records following them.

“We must do more than just condemn bigotry and acts of excessive force committed by law enforcement officers. We must act,” Nessel said.

"Making meaningful and concrete changes doesn’t end here, but it’s crucial that we move first with measures which create better accountability and more transparency to the actions of law enforcement here in Michigan."

Guido said no officer should forfeit pension money they have contributed or earned for past service.

He also expressed concern about the proposed license suspensions. Guido wondered who would make such determinations and what due process protections would be in place.

"The concepts are far too broad," he said. "Not much job security for a law enforcement officer if every move is subject to someone claiming, after the fact, it was detrimental to the department — and now you lose your job because of knee-jerk reactions."

Maintenance of disciplinary records already occurs, as do independent investigations, and additional training is always welcome as long as the government funds it, Guido said.

"Reporting data is not objectionable as long as sufficient funds are provided out of the AG budget for personnel to do record-keeping," Guido said. "Also, the data should include information concerning the individuals that attack law enforcement."

In an executive order Tuesday, President Donald Trump called for creation of a national database of problem officers to track potential police hires with records of abuse. But unlike the registry proposed by Nessel, Trump's database would not be accessible to the public. Instead, data from the national database would be made anonymous and periodically made public, according to the order.


Until Whitmer's recent executive order, the Commission on Law Enforcement Standards had 19 members. The AG, the director of the Michigan State Police and the chief of police in Detroit are all members. The other 16 members are appointed by the governor, based on recommendations from various law enforcement groups, such as the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police.

Whitmer's order adds as members the director of the Michigan Department of Civil Rights and three community representatives.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Which Public Private Partnership Did Mueller Subpoena On Russia Election Interference?

Ok. I am toggling between TEVA and Clinton Foundation.

Oh, wait, the Clinton Foundation never incorporated, and neither did the Detroit Land Bank Authority, and they are both in different District jurisdictions.

U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops?

National Children's Trust Fund?

Priests For Life?

Well, I know it is not the Trump Foundation because it is in the process of being dissolved, as I type.

Any other viable suggestions?

There are just so many state owned foreign corporations because they are called Public Private Partnerships.

I bet it has something to do with children's trust funds.

Mystery company must comply with subpoena linked to Mueller probe, appellate court rules

An unidentified, state-owned corporation must respond to a subpoena apparently connected to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's wide-ranging Russia probe -- or face the prospect of rapidly increasing monetary penalties, a federal appellate court ruled Tuesday.

Proceedings in the case have been shrouded in secrecy for weeks. During oral arguments in the case on Friday, court officials shuttered an entire floor of the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C., from the public and the press.

The unanimous judgment and opinion by the three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which indicated that a more comprehensive opinion will follow, upheld an earlier lower-court ruling and rejected the corporation's arguments that complying with the subpoena would violate the laws of its country and thus constitute an undue hardship.

The judges ruled "that text of the foreign law provision the Corporation relies on does not support its position" and found that the country's counsel -- and a regulator from the country -- offered only an "atextual" contrary interpretation that lacked "critical indicia of reliability."

The appellate panel also rejected the corporation's argument that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act rendered it immune from prosecutors' request.

An interpretation of federal law that "would completely insulate corporations majority owned by foreign governments from all criminal liability," the judges wrote, "seems in far greater tension with Congress’s choice to codify a theory of foreign sovereign immunity designed to allow regulation of foreign nations acting as ordinary market participants."

Judge Beryl Howell, the chief judge on the U.S. District Court for D.C., had ruled that the corporation could not legally resist the subpoena, and fined the entity a "fixed monetary penalty" that increased "each day the Corporation fail[ed] to comply."

"We also agree, contrary to the Corporation’s argument, that the Act allows for the monetary judgment ordered by the district court," the appellate panel wrote. "Whether and how that sanction can be executed on remand is a separate question for a later day."

It was not clear which country owns the corporation involved in the case, or what information prosecutors are requesting from the corporation.

The proceedings are believed to be linked to attempts by Mueller's team to secure information to present to an empaneled grand jury in the Russia investigation. Mueller is looking not only into whether members of President Trump's inner circle improperly colluded with Russia, but also a range of other matters pertaining to foreign activities by high-ranking Americans.

In addition to the the prosecutions of ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort for bank and tax fraud, and former National Security Adviser for lying to FBI agents, Mueller   reportedly referred Clinton-linked Washington insider Tony Podesta and former Obama White House Counsel Greg Craig to New York prosecutors looking into possible violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

Mueller's team has said Flynn would have faced FARA-related charges if he had not pleaded guilty and cooperated in the false statements case.

On Sunday, California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the incoming House Intelligence Committee chairman, charged that Trump's financial records with Deutsche Bank and Russia might reveal a "form of compromise" that "needs to be exposed."

TOP HOUSE DEM PREVIEWS NEW LINE OF ATTACK ON TRUMP RELATED TO POSSIBLE MONEY LAUNDERING

Days after he told The New Yorker that Deutsche Bank was an "obvious place to start" when he begins making records demands next month, Schiff suggested that there had to be some reason that the German banking giant was willing to work with the Trump Organization.

"The concern about Deutsche Bank is they have a history of laundering Russian money," Schiff said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

He continued: "They paid hundreds of millions of dollars in fines to the state of New York, because they were laundering Russian money. And this apparently is the one bank that was willing to do business with the Trump Organization. Now is that a coincidence?"

Last month, the Frankfurt-based lender was raided as part of a lengthy money laundering probe related to the Panama Papers disclosures, the reveal of millions of documents that exposed how the world's wealthiest politicians and business leaders hide their money.

CADC Grand Jury Appeal by on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ Updates FARA Advisory Opinions For Legal Geniuses

Explaining to DOJ why the law firm did not register as FARA
"Lobbying is attorney client privilege".

Ooooo.... There was only one recent FARA Advisory Opinion that came out May 3, 2018 and it was dealing with a redacted name law firm and requirements to register as a foreign agent.

You have no idea how much I want this redacted name law firm to be Perkins Coie.

But then again, I keep my expectations extremely low when dealing with government administration, so I will take just about any named law firm at this juncture.

The FARA Advisory Opinion, below, is a warning shot to the community of "Legal Geniuses (trademark pending) stop stealin' , which includes.....how ever shall I coin these activities.....?

• Offering an elected official (or staffer) money, whether it be a political campaign contribution or your basic personal inurement for doing what you, the lobbyist using money from foreign corporations, tells them to do, is still considered to be bribery.
• This includes the use of NGOs to facilitate the transactions, whether simple or complex.
• If you engage in any of the aforementioned activities, and do not register under FARA, you are automatically stripped from any "attorney-client privilege" and any immunity arguments you can find diving in the dumpster of your career.

I shall assume there will be a mad dash of new FARA registrations coming in the new few weeks from the legal community.*

*Please note that "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) is a separate and distinct class of individuals with licenses to practice law as an officer of the court on behalf of private interests from those I have identified as the legal community.  Below, is the work of the legal community.  For an example of the work of "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending), always remember, Perkins Coie Sucks.

#perkinscoiesucks

Department Of Justice Posts Advisory Opinions On FARA.Gov Website

John Demers, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, announced today the public release of the advisory opinions issued by the Department of Justice’s Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) Registration Unit since January 1, 2010.  See below, or https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/advisory-opinions.

“Eighty years ago, Congress passed and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) to combat the spread of hidden foreign influence in American politics,” Assistant Attorney General Demers said.  “Today is the law’s 80th anniversary, and it remains a vital tool to combat this threat.  To enhance compliance, we are making these advisory opinions available publicly and online for the first time. By posting these advisory opinions, the Department of Justice is making clearer how we interpret some of FARA’s key provisions.”

FARA, as amended, 22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq., requires persons in the United States who engage in specified activities as agents of foreign principals to register with the Department of Justice (the “Department”) unless they are exempt.  Disclosures under FARA help to ensure transparency in the activities of foreign principals and make it more difficult for those principals to maintain secret their role in activities occurring in the United States.  Within the Department’s National Security Division (NSD), responsibility for the administration and enforcement of FARA resides with the FARA Registration Unit, which is part of the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section.

Pursuant to regulations that the Department has issued implementing FARA, potential registrants or their counsel may ask the FARA Registration Unit how the Department interprets and applies FARA.  See 28 C.F.R. § 5.2.  Such inquiries must be in writing, must pertain to an actual, as opposed to hypothetical situation, and must disclose the identities of the parties involved. Written materials submitted pursuant to such a request are treated as confidential.

The FARA Registration Unit has issued 49 advisory opinions since January 1, 2010, which are being posted on the FARA.gov website together with three other letters sent in response to requests for general information.  The opinions and letters will be organized on the website by topic of inquiry or the aspects of the statute they discuss.  Any proprietary information, including any information that would identify the parties who made the requests has been redacted. The FARA Unit will post future advisory opinions in a similar manner on a periodic basis.

In its September 2016 Audit of NSD’s Enforcement and Administration of FARA, the Department’s Inspector General recommended that NSD consider the value of making advisory opinions publicly available.  NSD agreed with that recommendation and posted summaries of a few opinions on the website.  With the public posting of a more comprehensive repository of correspondence, the Department has demonstrated its commitment to improving the public’s understanding of FARA.

The Department’s regulations implementing FARA give parties the ability to make inquiries of the FARA Registration Unit concerning the application of the Act to contemplated activities and the Department's present enforcement intentions with respect to those activities.  See 28 C.F.R. § 5.2.  Such inquiries must reflect actual, contemplated transactions and cannot be anonymous.  28 C.F.R. § 5.2(b). 

Below are links to advisory opinions that the FARA Registration Unit has issued pursuant to requests under 28 C.F.R. § 5.2 since January 1, 2010, as well as three opinions issued prior to that point (which were previously summarized on this website).  The identities of the parties and any personal identifying or proprietary information have been redacted from the opinions.  The FARA Unit will post future advisory opinions in a similar manner on a periodic basis.

Please note that these letters, and the guidance they provide, are based on the information submitted to the FARA Registration Unit.  Nothing in these letters is intended to create any substantive or procedural rights, privileges, or benefits enforceable in any administrative, civil, or criminal matter. See United States v. Caceres, 440 U.S. 741 (1979). For further information please contact the FARA Registration Unit at FARA.Public@usdoj.gov or by telephone at
(202) 233-0776.

ShowAgency: Advisory Opinions on Agency Relationship 611(a) - (d)

ShowCommercial Exemption: Advisory Opinions on 613(d)

ShowReligious, Scholastic, Fine Arts, or Scientific Pursuits: Advisory Opinions on 613(e)

ShowNational Security Exemption: Advisory Opinions on 613(f)

ShowLegal Exemption: Advisory Opinions on 613(g)

ShowFARA vs. LDA: Advisory Opinions on 613(h)

ShowAttorney General Exemption: Advisory Opinions on 612(f)

ShowAdvisory Opinions: Additional General Information

FARA Legal Exemption Advisory Opinion - 5-3-2018 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JUDICIARY: Hearing On Sworn v. Civilian Officers - Privatization, Civil Rights & Attorney Client Privileges Of Immunity

To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit uniformed law enforcement officers to carry agency-issued firearms in certain Federal facilities, and for other purposes.

Well, it seems we have new developments in our continuing series of Cocktails & Popcorn.

Raskins asked Goodlatte to enter into the record the financial records of Michael Cohen seized from his home which produced three instances of indication that there are missing SAR mandated reports of suspicious financial activities that have, I guess, magically disappeared in FinCEN databases dealing with Essential Consultants.

Cohen Leaker Steps Forward: "To Say That I Am Terrified Right Now Would Be An Understatement"

The plot thickens, does it not?

Essential Consultants must have been busy, busy, busy building those dossiers.

I bet Essential Consultants was really busy, busy, busy on or about August 20, 2015 or at least someone was.

I decided to save the Committee some time and just tell them that the difference is privatization because there are no civil rights; just use the child welfare system as your working model of comparison, which is probably how Essential Consultants were busy, busy, busy.

Most States do not execute any oaths of office for Child Protective Service workers or its privatized contractual services and you can see how that is working out.

Oh, and they talked about holding a hearing about the difference between a sworn officer and a civil officer, like "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) doing private consulting for a federal law enforcement agency by hiring more "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) who then hire someone to throw under the bus when they get busted as being a civil officer through privatization.

Then, the immunity of "attorney-client" privilege becomes the enigma wrapped in the conundrum of
the corporate shape shifting of privatization.

Just consider myself as the original source when it comes to the subject matter of sworn officers v. civilian law enforcement officers.

Here is a really great piece of privatized predictive propaganda to hand out to "The Elected Ones" who will do anything for another re-election dollar, so they can make sure everyone continues to keep their Byrne private policing contracts.

Always remember, all that private data are being exfiltrated through those privatized, intellectual property, framed zooms, to other foreign corporate entities who like to keep busy, busy, busy.

Michigan tried to arm a civilian policy enforcement officers for the purposes of suspected welfare fraud in Department of Health & Human Services Offices.

My apologies for not finding the introduced Bill, but when I questioned the Senator who supported it on the sworn v. civil policy enforcement officers being armed, I was met with silence, but it took a few years to learn why I was ignored.

Civilian Staff in Policing: An Assessment of the 2009 Byrne Civilian Hiring Program by Beverly Tran on Scribd

115th CONGRESS 1st Session

H.R.2561

To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit uniformed law enforcement officers to carry agency-issued firearms in certain Federal facilities, and for other purposes.

---

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 19, 2017

Mr. Hollingsworth (for himself and Mr. Reichert) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

---

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit uniformed law enforcement officers to carry agency-issued firearms in certain Federal facilities, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Protecting Officers of the Law In Civilian Establishments Act of 2017” or as the “POLICE Act of 2017”.

SEC. 2. PERMITTING UNIFORMED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO CARRY AGENCY-ISSUED FIREARMS.

Section 930 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in subsection (d)—

(A) in paragraph (2), by striking “or” at the end;

(B) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and

(C) by adding at the end the following:

“(4) the lawful carrying of agency-issued firearms and other dangerous weapons in Facility Security Level I and II Federal civilian public access facilities by a uniformed officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law.”; and

(2) in subsection (g), by adding at the end the following:

“(4) The term ‘Facility Security Level’ means a security risk assessment level assigned to a Federal facility by the facility’s security agency in accordance with the biannually issued Interagency Security Committee Standard.

“(5) The term ‘civilian public access facility’ means a facility open to the general public.

“(6) The term ‘uniformed officer, agent, or employee’ means an officer, agent, or employee wearing a clearly identifiable agency standard-issued uniform with a clearly identifiable agency-issued identification badge.”.Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Congressional Investigations Final Paper To John Podesta On Immunity

The following document was taken from  the Podesta Email Wikileaks.

This paper addresses congressional investigations and immunities by examining the Oliver North and John Poindexter cases during the Iran-Contra Affair.

The paper was submitted as a final exam to Professor John Podesta and U.S. District Judge Richard Leon,

Elizabeth Purcell Congressional Investigations Seminar Final Paper To Professor Podesta and Judge Leon On... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Ricky Holland: Murdered By False Claims In Child Welfare

Ricky Holland,
Murdered by Michigan,
Billed to Medicaid

Sometimes, there is a need for reiteration.

You do not have the Right To Lie in a court of law.

You cannot generate fraudulent documents to submit into the public record.

You cannot submit false claims for federal cost reimbursement.

But you can submit false claims for federal cost reimbursement in Medicaid during a child welfare case, then funnel money into non-taxable trust funds, where that money is funneled into political campaigns and for other nefarious activities.

See, according to the False Claims Act:

Liability The statute begins, in § 3729(a), by explaining the conduct that creates FCA liability. In very general terms, §§ 3729(a)(1)(A) and (B) set forth FCA liability for any person who knowingly submits a false claim to the government or causes another to submit a false claim to the government or knowingly makes a false record or statement to get a false claim paid by the government. Section 3729(a)(1)(G) is known as the reverse false claims section; it provides liability where one acts improperly – not to get money from the government, but to avoid having to pay money to the government. Section 3729(a)(1)(C) creates liability for those who conspire to violate the FCA. Sections 3729(a)(1)(D), (E), and (F) are rarely invoked. 

But, herein lies the problem.

If, during another civil action, child welfare to be precise, judges find that a child placing agency, rather the State lied to legally kidnap a child and place as its ward, the Court is not mandated to refer any federal fraud to the States Attorney General nor the U.S. Attorney General.

One reason is because the States Attorney General are either prosecuting the child welfare case or defending its privatized contractual arm of the State.

There are so many child welfare cases, where it is documented in legal opinions, of false claims to federal programs.

There are so many Single Program Audits which are administratively adjudicated and monetarily settled, with no criminal penalties, no contractual disbarment, no listing on exclusionary databases of Medicaid, no sanctions, no removal of licensure.

Nada.

Then, there are so many secrecy laws, quite unique to privacy laws, where, these same child placing agencies have been found to, literally, get away with murder, which is exactly what happened in the Michigan case of Ricky Holland.

I will make the world honor that little boy.

This is personal.

This is why Child Welfare is modern day human trafficking of "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth), or as I have previously stated, those who are more comfortable utilizing the terms of the peculiar institution can are free to chime in.

Besides, how can the DOJ prosecute when the records are shredded?

So much for preserving the annals of history.

Always remember, it takes a judicial determination to turn on the federal funding spigot.

So, here you have it, federal policy on immunity from prosecution in child welfare and not one congressional hearing...yet.

Anyone want to help me re-write the False Claims Act?  You do know I already started on it, right.

U.S. Administration on Children, Youth and Families Report To Congress On Immunity From Prosecution For Pro... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Foster care and adoption is human trafficking and if you do not like what I have to say, then I strongly encourage you to submit a rebuttal, including your proofs.

In the academic and legislative world, these debates are skewed with dirty data, jack legged philosophies and ass backward theories.

In real life, the truth about human trafficking is not pretty, not pretty, at all.

I speak as an original source.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 215 - Hillary's Leakers and Hackers: FBI Immunity & EB5

McCabe Pee Pee Dossier Maybe Partially True \

EB5 Visa's Require You To Launder Only $1M To Get a Visa and Even Passport  

 Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Child Welfare Is The Extremely Profitable Industry Of Human Trafficking

For those who are just now popping in, we have a routine when it comes to children being legally kidnapped by Child Protective Services, so let's begin with the basics.

Repeat after me....

"You cannot audit God".

This statement is to mean that any 501c3, tax exempt, privatized, not-for-profit organization, which includes religious or anything dealing with children, are excluded and exempted from any form of external scrutiny, through self-reporting, for the purposes of maximizing revenue.

TRANSLATION:  Child welfare is the extremely profitable industry of human trafficking.

The following video is from 2013, but I post it for the purposes of demonstrating that the State of California, the rest of the nation, refuses to address what "lying" in a child welfare proceeding means.

It means fraudulent billing through the filing of false claims.

System of lies from Gina Silva on Vimeo.

CPS has the Right To Lie, even though the 9th Circuit Court said it did not, but, then again, who is going to enforce this basic concept that a lie is nothing less than fraudulent manipulation of the public record in order to maximize revenues of these privatized, tax exempt child placing organizations?

U.S. Administration on Children, Youth and Families Report To Congress On Immunity From Prosecution For Pro... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Will Michigan Stop Medicaid Fraud In Child Welfare With New Bills?

For those of you who do not know, Child Protective Services, and its child welfare contractual arms of the state, are allowed to enter into public record, lies.

CPS has the Right To Lie, even though the 9th Circuit Court said it did not, but, then again, who is going to enforce this basic concept that a lie is nothing less than fraudulent manipulation of the public record in order to maximize revenues of these privatized, tax exempt child placing organizations?

We most certainly know "The Elected Ones" have no intention of lifting a finger, as demonstrated for the last 20 years by ignoring the most staunch, outspoken advocates calling for the entire child welfare system of Michigan to be examined.

God forbid "The Elected Ones" compromise their campaign funding.

Will the federal court which is monitoring the State's child welfare system ever address the fact that a lie, in a child welfare court proceeding, is cost reimbursed through the filing of a false claim to Medicaid?

Nope, which is because Children's Rights, who is the plaintiff in the federal case, never thought what I had to say about Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare was relevant to their attorney fees.

Will the Michigan Attorney General step up to the plate and speak upon "lying" in a child abuse and neglect proceeding by its privatized, tax exempt child welfare contractual arms?

Hell no.  That would mean the Attorney General would have to snitch upon itself as Wayne County is the only county in the state where child abuse cases are prosecuted by Assistant Attorney Generals, and not the County Prosecutors.

How could the Attorney General possibly, contemporaneously "advise and advocate"?

Will the Michigan Attorney General Medicaid Fraud Control Unit lift a finger to prosecute & recover, contractually bar, invoke license revocation against these contractual child welfare arms of the state which "lie" in a court of law to fraudulently bill Medicaid?

Why start now when the state has a good thing going on through privatization fraud schemes?

Besides, if the state did go after "lying" in the court, it would mean the state would eventually have to reimburse the federal government all that Medicaid money, which typically goes into political campaigns, tax exempt as dark money, of course.

So what lying in a CPS proceeding basically means is that Michigan will remain #1 in human trafficking of children.

I have serious concerns with the concentrated powers relegated to these Child Advocacy Centers, and rightfully so.

Michigan House Representative Jim Runestad has been on the ground floor in dealing with child welfare dysfunctioning for quite some time.

Bills would make CPS tape interviews with kids

Mecosta County father who lost custody of his daughters urges passage of measure

LANSING, Mich.  (WOOD) — On a sunny, early spring day in Lansing, Cary Flagg was itching for a fight.

“I can’t fight legally anymore for my kids. Now I fight for other parents,” he said.

The 35-year-old father from Mecosta County lost custody of his four daughters over allegations of sexual abuse, even though he was never charged with a crime.

Flagg was accused of sexually abusing two of his young daughters after an investigation by Children’s Protective Services. The court’s decision was based on the testimony of a state-paid psychologist, a state-administered polygraph and an investigation that even the judge said deviated from protocol. It was a civil rather than criminal matter, where the rules of evidence were less stringent.

Now Flagg is fighting for change in Lansing.

Appearing before the state House Judiciary Committee this month, Flagg told lawmakers his child custody case is a prime example of why forensic interviews with small children should always be video recorded.

“The videotaping of the forensic interviews (is important). If the jury would have actually heard what was said, I would have never lost my children. I wouldn’t have been terminated,” Flagg testified.

CARY FLAGG’S STORY

In 2013, Flagg and his ex-wife were going through a bitter divorce and custody fight. CPS was involved and there were complaints on both sides, though nothing was ever substantiated. Later that year, the girls’ mother took their then-5-year-old daughter to the hospital after blood was found in her underwear. A CPS investigation was opened and investigators immediately focused on Flagg.

Flagg insists he never touched his daughter.

CPS investigators and a Mecosta County sheriff’s deputy interviewed the children — but none of those interviews were documented on video, leading to ambiguities as to what the child said or didn’t say. That confusion would have been eliminated if the interview had been taped.

“I would have been able to use these tools to prove my innocence and to prove what was actually said in their own voices to the jury and that jury would have never given jurisdiction,” Flagg said.

Last year, Target 8 asked former CPS caseworker Ben Hall to look at Flagg’s case. Hall said what happened to Flagg is an example of a department employing investigators who were inexperienced, overworked and often at the mercy of supervisors who never had any contact with the families under investigation.

“Children are being removed from families not because of the law, not because of safety, but because of policy,” Hall said.

BILLS WOULD REQUIRE RECORDED INTERVIEWS

Since his termination, Flagg and his new wife Sara have lobbied lawmakers to support CPS reforms. They have formed online support groups and have gotten active, throwing their support behind a trio of bills that would mandate investigators videotape forensic interviews of children.

“It’s something that protects everybody, if there’s abuse we would like to see that excised.  If it’s not we would like a clearer picture of that as well,” Sara Flagg said.

The proposal has detractors. The interviews would span each county and family court statewide, creating potential storage and maintenance issues. Others insist the camera itself may retraumatize vulnerable children, although supporters say the device would be hidden.

The bills have bipartisan support, including from state Rep. Jim Runestad, R-White Lake.

“It is a major, major issue with families and our system today,” Runestad proclaimed.

Michigan Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Bob Wheaton said in an email to Target 8 that the agency “has not taken a position on the bills.” Wheaton said they “are working with the bill sponsors.

“Our goal with any legislation is to make sure our staff have the tools they need to adequately protect children,” the statement said.

CPS Manager Colin Parks acknowledged to Target 8 last year that there were areas for improvement.

As of Tuesday, the bills — House Bills 4298, 4299 and 4300 — remained in committee.

“There are cases where we could have done better,” Park admitted.

Cary Flagg says the state owes it to parents to be better, and recording the interviews with small children would be a start.

“I know not being able to play that recording in front of a jury is what cost me my kids,” he said.

Below, is another example of how Michigan refuses to stop Medicaid fraud in child welfare because we all know, well, at least those of you who are fans, that the feds will not do a damn thing, but let us keep the faith that this, too, shall soon come to pass.

First Amended Petition of Quo Warranto by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Why you can lie in child welfare, per U.S. HHS, Administration on Children, Youth and Families.

Seriously.

U.S. Administration on Children, Youth and Families Report To Congress On Immunity From Prosecution For Pro... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

ACYF & Dr. Stephen Baskerville On Immunity and Public Corruption In Child Welfare

I just so happened to run across this video.

These are my old school running buddies.

We were the first ones on the internet to address the fraud in child welfare as family rights advocates.

We all came together in the first, national rally against the racketeering in child welfare.

Below, is the policy authorizing immunity for criminal misconduct referred to in this video.

These are professionals.

Dr. Stephen Baskerville, was a political science professor at Howard University at the time and has written a book on the matter public corruption in child welfare.

We were some wild and crazy guys back then.

I am getting old...not really.

U.S. Administration on Children, Youth and Families Report To Congress On Immunity From Prosecution For Pro... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Can State Contractors Lie With Consitutional Immunity?

Well, of course, my darlings!

This is an interesting case coming out of Washington.

"I was just doing what I
was hired to do."

In a nutshell, the question before the Court of Appeals is whether a state contracted agency, which knew its social workers were generating false reports to the courts, recommending extended lengths of stay in foster care and/or termination of parental rights in child welfare cases, mainly due to poverty, is a grant, wait, get this, "constitutional guarantee" of immunity.

Seriously.

See, under the good ol' 11th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, States are granted soverign immunity and the only way to strip immunity is to demonstrate a breach of good faith, a malafide scienter.

So, the arguments are going the route of the principal-agent way, saying that they were just lil ol' state actors, just doing their jobs of maximizing revenue for the state.

In Michigan, there is law, already on the books, called the "Cotton Rule" which is applied to the decisions of the Superintendent of the Michigan Children's Institute.

In short, the rule states that you can challenge the decision of the Superintendent to grant consent or withhold consent to adoption, not on the grounds if the decision is right or wrong (whether he lied or was just incompetent, for which I support the latter), but if the decision was arbitrary and capricious, meaning, one must prove the decision was "whimsical".

Seriously.

"Can social workers lie in court to take away children and have immunity.? This is a clip from the 9th Federal Court district...Washington State social worker standards will be guided by the outcome of this decision. This is a nail biter." said Kathlee Arthur

For me, this case just got a bit more interesting under the recent veto override of JASTA which, in essence, stripped sovereign immunity.

Will JASTA have more fallout implications by opening doors for the people to sue The States in child welfare actions such as human trafficking and/or fraudulent termination of parental rights?

When a kid is Legally Kidnapped, it is considered, to the entire family, an act of terror.

Stay tuned.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Goodlatte Presses Justice Department on Secret Agreements with Top Clinton Advisors

Washington, D.C. - As part of the House Judiciary Committee’s ongoing oversight of Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State, the Justice Department provided a private review of certain immunity agreements entered into during the investigation.

The immunity agreements mentioned secret side agreements between the Justice Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Beth Wilkinson, the lawyer representing Cheryl Mills, chief of staff and counselor to Secretary Clinton, and Heather Samuelson, senior advisor to Secretary Clinton. After reviewing the side agreements, the Committee has learned that the FBI agreed to destroy Mills and Samuelson’s laptops after inspecting them.

In his letter to Attorney General Lynch, Chairman Goodlatte calls on the Justice Department to provide information about the side agreements and answer the many questions they raise about the FBI’s investigation.

Goodlatte Presses Justice Department on Secret Agreements with Top Clinton Advisors Letter To Attorney Gene... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

When Congress Came Back From Its JASTA Acid Trip

Every so often, I come across an act, of such utter asshattery, I am forced to take immediate pause,

The 114th U.S. Congress just now
realizing what JASTA really is.

and allow myself a moment, to embrace the artistic elegance of breathakingly crass arrogance, while stolidly demonstrating a significant deterioration in cognitive functioning.

I almost pissed my pants, laughing,

First they ignore letters and public statements from the White House, anything reported in social media, C-SPAN, and the local rag clanging around the establishments of D.C. where many congressional staffers hang out and eat, or the cacophony warnings within the legal community.

They even go so far as to ignore a U.S. House Floor Statement to sustain the veto before the vote.

Then, when they realize our own corporations, elected officials, military and country can, also be sued, then turn around and blame the White House, anything reported in social media, C-SPAN, and the local rag clanging around the establishments of D.C. where many congressional staffers hang out and eat, or the cacophony warnings within the legal community, for not warning them beforehand, you can only justify this behavior as a congress coming down from its JASTA acid trip.

Stay away from the JASTA.

This is your Congress.  Enjoy it, because, you know I am.

Senators Blame Obama For Not Helping Them Understand Their Own Bill

Last Friday, President Barack Obama vetoed a bill called the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, better known as JASTA. The bill, which enjoyed broad bipartisan support in both houses of Congress, would, among other things, have allowed plaintiffs to sue countries known to have sponsored terrorist acts for compensatory damages. Many of the bill’s supporters had pitched JASTA as a “sue Saudi Arabia” bill, based on their insistent belief that Saudi Arabia was behind the Sept. 11 attacks. The bill’s supporters in Congress frequently cited the 9/11 attacks as their motivation for passing the bill in the first place.

Obama vetoed JASTA, but the story didn’t end there. Earlier this week, Congress handed Obama the first veto override of his presidential tenure. JASTA was law, baby! All that’s left is the high-fiving!

But there always has to be a morning after. And many members of Congress, after they’d come down a bit from their veto override high, evidently started to wonder about what they’d done, exactly. That’s when they found that the bill they supported through a veto override maaaaaybe needed a tweak or two. Per Jordain Carney at The Hill:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/senators-jasta-override-durrrrrrr_us_57ee7303e4b024a52d2e725c?

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©