Showing posts with label lawsuit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawsuit. Show all posts

Thursday, August 20, 2020

The Suitors Cometh: Children's Health Defense v. Facebook - Removing The Iron Curtain Of The Child Welfare Industry

This is not about censorship.

This is about Public Private Partnerships and the generation of propaganda.

I see FCPA.

Then, the case is about the process of discovery, because, in discovery, we shall find the original source of all the funding, what they do with the funding, and who came up with the statements and challenges to the statements.

Here, Robert Kennedy, Jr. argues on behalf of the Children's Health Defense.

#maytheheavensfall



Children's Health Defense Legal Team Led by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Sues Facebook, "Fact-Checkers", Zuckerberg for Government-Sponsored Censorship, False Disparagement and Wire-Fraud


WASHINGTON, Aug. 18, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Children's Health Defense (CHD) filed a lawsuit on Monday in San Francisco Federal Court charging Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, and three fact-checking companies with censoring truthful public health posts and fraudulently misrepresenting and defaming CHD. CHD, a non-profit watchdog group exposing wrongdoing and corruption in pharmaceutical and Telecom companies and public health agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO), has also sued the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for wireless health concerns.

Register for Online press conference with legal team and key witness: Wed., 8.19.20, 3:00 p.m. ET

In its Complaint, CHD alleges that Facebook has insidious conflicts with Pharmaceutical companies and their captive health regulators, and is invested in telecom and 5G. Facebook currently censors CHD's page, targeting its purge against factual information about vaccines and 5G.

Facebook acknowledges censorship coordination with WHO and CDC. While earlier court decisions have upheld Facebook's right to censor content, CHD argues that Facebook's pervasive Government collaboration makes its censorship a First Amendment violation. Facebook censorship began at the urging of Congressman Adam Schiff, who in March 2019 suggested Facebook suppress and purge content critical of government vaccine policies.

The lawsuit also challenges Facebook's use of so-called "independent fact-checkers"—who are neither independent nor fact-based—to create oppositional content on CHD's page, literally superimposed over CHD's original content. To further silence CHD's dissent against government policies and critique of Pharma, Facebook deactivated CHD's donate button and used deceptive technology (i.e. shadow banning) to minimize CHD's reach and visibility. In short, Facebook and the government colluded to silence CHD and its followers. Such tactics are fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment, which forbids Government from censoring private speech—particularly speech that criticizes Government policies or officials.

The court will decide whether Facebook's new Government-directed business model of false and misleading "warning labels," deceptive "fact-checks," and disabling a non-profit's donate button passes muster under the First and Fifth Amendments, the Lanham Act, and RICO. Those statutes protect CHD against online wire-fraud and false disparagement.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: "This is an important First Amendment case testing the boundaries of government authority to openly censor unwanted critiques of government policies and pharmaceutical and telecom products on privately owned internet platforms."

MEDIA CONTACT: Mary Holland 845-445-7807

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Sunday, March 8, 2020

Obama & Trump Are Suing Media For Bearing False Witness & Ignoring Voting Rights

People also use Obama's name to raise money.

It is nothing but a transposable model because they used to use my Sweetie's name, image, likeness, forged signature, fake ass congressional letters, to raise money for their campaigns almost everyday.

There is well established protocol to formally request endorsements and use of name and image in political campaigning, but very few care because it is free election publicity.

I call it the Fashion Show Selfie Phenomenon.

The candidate or, in some instances, the incumbent or current officeholder, has the right to vote on whether or not their image may be used in an act of commerce, whether it is selling news papers by falsely advising the public, or to generate profit, as a for profit office holder, where the rights to hold office can be terminated.

Oh, almost forgot to mention...

Trump is suing CNN and Washington Post for bearing false witness in the public record, too.

#perkinscoiesucks

Obama warns against 'unauthorized use' of his image to mislead voters in cease-and-desist letter

The law firm representing former President Obama on Wednesday sent a cease-and-desist letter to a Republican super PAC demanding that the political group immediately pull a TV ad that has been airing in South Carolina.

The ad — which was created by the Committee to Defend the President, a political group committed to seeing President Trump get reelected in November — goes after former Vice President Joe Biden by taking Obama's words out of context.

Titled “Enough Empty Promises,” the ad starts by saying "Joe Biden promised to help our community. It was a lie. Here's President Obama."

The ad then uses excerpts from Obama's 1995 memoir "Dreams from My Father," taking out of context a conversation that Obama had with a barber in Chicago about the brutal and cruel treatment the black community had endured.

"Plantation politics. Black people in the worst jobs. The worst housing. Police brutality rampant. But when the so-called Black committeemen came around election time, we'd all line up and vote the straight Democratic ticket. Sell our souls for a Christmas turkey," Obama reads in the audiobook recording.

The letter says the ad's "unauthorized use" of Obama's "name, image, likeness, voice and book passage is clearly intended to mislead the target audience of the ad into believing that the passage from the audiobook is a statement that was made by President Obama during his presidency, when it was in fact a statement made by a barber in a completely different context more than 20 years ago."

In a statement to The Washington Post, Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates called the ad a "despicable torrent of misinformation."

Obama spokeswoman Katie Hill said the ad came from the "Republican disinformation playbook."

In response, Ted Harvey, chairman of the Committee to Defend the President, told CNN: "The Committee has a long history of taking on Joe Biden, beyond Nevada and South Carolina. President Obama made a point in his book about Democrats paying lip-service to the African-American community, and we believe his point applies perfectly to Joe Biden."

Nonetheless, the letter concludes with Obama's legal team firmly stating that the group "must immediately remove this ad from its Facebook page and any other social media platform or website, and must refrain from airing this ad in any form or medium in the future."

"Further, The Committee to Defend the President must agree on behalf of itself and all affiliated entities to refrain from future misuse of President Obama's intellectual property or right of publicity," the letter stated.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Thursday, August 16, 2018

Cocktails & Popcorn: What Do Keith Ellison, Donald Trump & John Conyers Have In Common?

Related image
Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed vs. The "Legal Geniuses"
(trademark pending) Final Boss Fight - Detroit
Q: What Do Keith Ellison, Donald Trump & John Conyers Have In Common?


I do hope everyone knows why Keith Ellison is being smeared, just 2 days before election, right?

Oh, you do not believe it is a smear?

Very well.

I need someone to explain to me how there is a video of him snatching his ex-girlfriend from the bed, cursing her out to get out his house.

My first questions are:

  • "Who was recording the video?" 
  • "How come the person recording the video did not intervene?"
  • "How come it took years for this to come into question?"
  • "Why did this come out days before an election?"
  • "How come there was no police report?"
  • "Why is the media reporting on a third party statement, without any formal Ethics or DOJ, or the U.S. Treasury referral for investigation?"
  • "Why is the media omitting anything dealing with the DNC lawsuit and Wikileaks?"
  • "Why does Perkins Coie Sucks?"
Oh, you ask, how do I know Perkins Coie Sucks?

Well, transposable models happens to be their forte' and they are "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) and I can prove it, in multiple dimensions and jurisdictions.

I think they are practicing their psyop skills for the Epic Final Boss Fight.


KEITH ELLISON JUST SENT A MESSAGE TO HIS EX-GIRLFRIEND OVER DOMESTIC ABUSE ALLEGATIONS THAT WILL LEAVE YOU WONDERING WHAT IN THE WORLD IS HE THINKING



Democratic Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison wants ex-girlfriend Karen Monahan to know that the two “don’t have to destroy each other” over her claim that Ellison physically abused her.

Monahan, a liberal activist for Sierra Club, accused Ellison of physically and emotionally abusing her and claims to have a video of him dragging her off a bed, although she has yet to produce it.

Ellison is the deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and on Tuesday won the party’s nomination for Minnesota attorney general. He has repeatedly denied Monahan’s
allegations.

(RELATED: DNC Finally Breaks Silence On Ellison Allegations. Here’s What It Said)

A reporter for local Minnesota station WCCO asked Ellison on Wednesday what he would say to Monahan if he could.

“I would say: we loved each other, we don’t have to destroy each other,” Ellison said.

“Is that what you think she is trying to do?” asked the interviewer.

“I don’t know, I don’t want to speculate on motive,” Ellison answered.

Monahan’s son Austin first aired the allegations against Ellison on Saturday and claimed to have witnessed the alleged video of Ellison’s abuse.

“I was using my moms computer trying to download something and I clicked on a file, I found over 100 text and twitters messages and video almost 2 min long that showed Keith Ellison dragging my mama off the bed by her feet, screaming and calling her a ‘fucking bitch’ and telling her to get the fuck out of his house,” Austin wrote in a viral Facebook post.

“Sitting all this time, watching what our mom went through and not being able to say or do anything was hard as hell. None of you know the hell our family has gone through. I don’t think half of you would even care,” Austin added.

“We watched her so called political friends stand by say or do nothing. People had an idea what happened and never reached out to my mom. The same people who are posting about social justice are ready to smear my mom, protect a person who abused her and broke the law.”

Like her son, Monahan has also said that she expects to be smeared for speaking out against Ellison.
“I was well prepared for the smears, etc. It is exactly what I wanted to bring to light,” she tweeted Monday.

“This issue is so much bigger than my story, but with each story that surfaces, we make a dent each time and it brings us closer to justice.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Sunday, July 29, 2018

Baby LK's Top 10 CPS Horror Stories Of The Week: July 29, 2018

Baby LK is back to report on the horrors of the Child Protection Industry, as an original source.

For all the latest dirt on the Child Protection Industry, go to http://legallykidnapped.com.

For more in depth analysis of CPS, go to http://cpsfiles.blogspot.com/.

Just remember, it can happen to you.

Special bonus edition:
5 lawsuits against CPS in 1 video!



Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

FEC Sued For Allowing Money Laundering

The following is the verified complaint of a Political Action Committee suing the Federal Election Commission for allowing money laundering of the Hillary Victory fund, Democratic National Committee and Hillary for America.

The laundering went through the State Democratic Parties.

Wait until someone starts looking into the Congressional Campaign Committees the unions...oh wait, I think people are looking into this.

And something tells me they know which bank they used.

Plaintiff COMMITTEE TO DEFEND THE PRESIDENT brings this action for injunctive and declaratory relief and alleges as follows: 

INTRODUCTION 1. This lawsuit seeks to compel the Federal Election Commission ( “ FEC ”) to take action on an administrative complaint the Committee to Defend the President (“CDP”) filed with the FEC four months ago disclosing the existence of an unprecedented nationwide scheme to violate federal campaign finance law in which $84 million was effectively laundered over more than a year by the Hillary Victory Fund (“HVF”) through dozens of state political party committees to the Democratic National Committee (“ DNC ”) and, ultimately, to Hillary for America (“HFA”) .

COMMITTEE TO DEFEND THE PRESIDENT v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION by Beverly Tran on Scribd



Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Saturday, April 21, 2018

DEFANGO: DNC Files Lawsuit against Trump Wikileaks Russia based on Debunk evidence

The DNC lawsuit has invoked the law of chattels.


One thing we do know, Perkins Coie is not on the case.

Perkins Coie must be busy with other legal stuff.

It is also using the RICO statute, which means they, "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) have no clue about the history or the man behind of RICO.

There is a whole bunch of motions requesting help with service of the defendants, I do not know why, they were making money with them.

Bring it on because that is child welfare law.



Can you smell what I smell?

It's popcorn.


Do you realize the DNC is going to have to swear to the authenticity of the emails Russia and Wikileaks and G2 "hacked" to be true to enter into the record, which would be an admission to crimes against humanity, right?

It is my belief there was a legal plant deep within the DNC and I believe I know who it is, and he trolled theses "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) to file this, as a form of self incrimination to even more stuff.

Do you realized Wikileaks has another traunch of DNC and Clinton Foundation emails, perhaps the emails for a few others, that they would have to give up in discovery?

No one is this stupid.

The DNC was trolled by an old school civil rights pimp.

Get your popcorn. 

DETROIT IN THE HOUSE!!!

Vis beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Monday, December 4, 2017

Day 44.3. Focused On the Misuse of Power



It is all about archiving the public record because it is being destroyed and manipulated into what I call propaganda.

This is why I do what I do to preserve the annals of history and tell the world's greatest epic romance of an errant knight and a celestial goddess.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Saturday, November 25, 2017

Wednesday, October 4, 2017

Gotta Pay The Bills: How Arizona Legally Kidnaps Children Of The Poors

Q: Why did the Arizona Child Protective Services worker snatch the kid?

A: To pay the light bill.

Of course, the issue of sustainability for these child placing agencies is a bit more complex, well, not really.

It is like this.

Child poverty is a multi-billioin dollar industry where these so called think tanks, like Center for American Progress, come up with some really sophistocated crap to create another layer of service programs, training, and whatever other pop up ancillary, unecessary administrative operations to bill Medicaid, complete with the fraudulent billing, so they can pay the best interests of the child in those social impact bonds.

Notice in this video that the reporter makes no mention of the horrific treatment of these kids in foster care nor does it even address the trauma of being legally kidnapped, even if it was just for a few days, for no reason, or for just being poor.

But, the worst part of this story is that the State of Arizona sees nothing wrong with how they treat children of "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth) and has made no effort to address the human trafficking epidemic in the state.

But, you know what they say, "Gotta pay the bills."




Judge: All children in DCS care are now part of class-action lawsuit

A lawsuit that seeks improvements in Arizona's foster-care system will apply to all Arizona children in the system, now as well as in the future, a federal judge has ruled.

U. S. District Court Judge Roslyn Silver granted class-action status, below, in the litigation
, filed 2 years ago against the state, on behalf of a number of foster children.

The ruling late last week means the federal lawsuit can proceed. A trial is expected in spring 2018.
"It's no longer about one, two or three foster children," said Anne Ronan, an attorney with the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, which brought the suit. Rather, it's about the thousands of children in Arizona's foster-care system, as well as any children who will enter the system in the future, she said.

Arizona had nearly 17,000 children in foster care as of March 31, 2017, its latest report shows. In August, 900 children entered the system when they were removed from their homes due to allegations of abuse and neglect, according to the Department of Child Safety. In the same month, another 1,068 children left the system, primarily by being returned to their parents or through adoption.

DCS, in a statement, said the ruling did not reflect on the merits of the case. It said it looks forward to showing the court the improvements it has made over the last three years, which its said "have solidified an enduring commitment to ensuring children in state custody receive the care they need and deserve.”

AHCCCS, the state's Medicaid program, is also named in the suit. That agency declined to comment, citing the ongoing litigation.

AHCCCS is charged with providing physical, mental and behavioral-health care to kids in the system. The suit seeks improvements to the system to ensure that children are well cared for and their physical and behavioral-health needs are met.

The state argued against class-action certification. Among its objections: Many of the children named in the original complaint have since been adopted. Because of that, there is no legal standing for advocates to sue on the children's behalf, the state said in court filings.

DCS Director Greg McKay also cited his agency's plans to improve the system to the point that foster children would no longer face what he called "substantial risk of serious harm," saying those plans make the grounds for the lawsuit meaningless.

But Silver noted while four of the children named in the original complaint have been adopted, two have not. Besides, the judge wrote, "Children in the foster care system are inherently transitory," and therefore could come in and out of state care.

That has been the case for at least one of the children, a 12-year-old girl identified only by her initials, "B.K."

DCS also argued that the two children remaining in the complaint had not shown any personal harm from the state's care, something the judge rejected.

"McKay's argument overlooks the seven pages in the (complaint) dedicated to outlining the injuries B.T. and B.K. personally suffered," Silver wrote. It also ignored the numerous exhibits presented in court filings that show personal harm the children suffered, she added.

For example, the girl was separated from her siblings and placed in a group home on what was supposed to be a short-term stay. Instead, she remained in the home for more than two years, the lawsuit alleges.

Likewise, the 16-year-old boy identified as "B.T." has been shuttled among various group homes and other placements during his eight years in state care. When his aunt told AHCCCS the child was not getting the mental-health services he needed, the state moved him to an emergency foster home rather than providing services, Silver said, citing the plaintiffs' lawsuit.

In another instance, the judge cited a 2013 incident in which the boy grabbed the steering wheel of van driven by a worker at the group home where he was living at the time. The boy said, "I want us all to die," according to the lawsuit. But on the same day, the therapists working with the child reported "with a few exceptions, B.T. is doing well over the last two weeks."

Silver said the filings offer evidence that children suffer personal harm while in state care, enough to help establish a class-action claim.

Ronan said the plaintiffs had discussions with the state about a settlement, but they went nowhere.
DCS is seeking $3.8 million in its budget for the next fiscal year to cover its expenses as it defends against the lawsuit.

Kris Jacober has a front-line view of the foster-care system in her role as a foster parent as well as executive director of the Arizona Friends of Foster Children Foundation.

She said there's a disconnect from the state's reports of improving conditions and what she sees on a daily basis.

"The numbers are going down," she acknowledged, noting state reports that show a decline in the number of children removed from their homes and an uptick in the number of adoptions and family reunifications.

But looking at individual cases, "I'm not aware the situation has changed for families dramatically," she said.

"Thirty kids are going to come into foster care today," Jacober said. "Day in, day out, we still answer the phone for grandmas and grandpas who say they don't have the money to keep food in the refrigerator."

The lawsuit is proceeding as other child-welfare agencies have faced similar legal challenges.
In July, a federal judge released the state of Tennessee from oversight of its child-welfare system, ending a lawsuit that started 17 years ago. The suit was brought by Children's Rights, a New York-based advocacy organization that is part of the lawsuit against Arizona.

In 2015, Clark County, Nevada, settled a similar lawsuit brought on behalf of seven foster children. The California-based National Center for Youth Law filed the initial complaint.

Ronan said those developments don't indicate a trend: Litigation over foster care has existed almost as long as foster-care systems have operated, she said.

In 2016, when the number of children removed from their families peaked at over 18,000, the Arizona Community Foundation gave The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com a three-year grant to support in-depth research on the topic. As part of that effort, reporter Mary Jo Pitzl and our other staff experts investigate the reasons behind the surge in foster children and the systems meant to support and protect them.

Are you part of the system? We want to understand your story. Go to childwelfare.azcentral.com.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Friday, September 1, 2017

CONYERS & BLUMENTHAL File Amicus Brief Supporting Citizens For Responsibility And Ethics In Washington


Conyers and Blumenthal are the lead plaintiffs in Congressional action to hold President Trump accountable for violations of the Constitution’s anti-corruption Foreign Emoluments Clause

[WASHINGTON, DC] – U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) filed an amicus brief today in support of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s (CREW) effort to hold President Trump accountable for his ongoing violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. Blumenthal and Conyers are the lead plaintiffs in a separate effort to compel the President to comply with the Constitution’ critically important anti-corruption measure.

Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that Trump International Hotel has already turned a $1.97 million profit in 2017. Those profits include payments from foreign governments which have housed their officials in rooms or hosted events at the hotel.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyer, Jr.
“The Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause is clear. Federal officials, including the President, cannot accept benefits of any kind from foreign states unless Congress consents.  President Trump, however, continues to violate this key anti-corruption provision, which was meant to ensure that the Nation’s leaders put the national interest above their personal interests,” said Conyers. 

“The payments from foreign governments that President Trump’s hotel is raking in are just one example of how President Trump is thumbing his nose at the Constitution and the American people. The immense magnitude of President Trump's vast business empire is no excuse for his disregard for the Constitution and disrespect for the American people. No one – not even the President – is above the law,” said Blumenthal.

The full text of the lawmakers’ amicus brief is below.

Blumenthal and Conyers are the lead plaintiffs in Blumenthal, Conyers, et al. v. Trump, the lawsuit brought by nearly 200 members of Congress against President Trump for his violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause.

The Foreign Emoluments Clause requires that all elected officials, including the president, seek the “Consent of the Congress” before receiving any gifts, payments, or benefits from foreign governments. The Constitution’s Framers included such a requirement to protect against foreign influence on U.S. officials, and to ensure that those officials act in the national interest, instead of their own.

Because President Trump has refused to disclose his business dealings abroad, the full scope of his potential Constitutional violations is unknown. Independent reporting has shown that President Trump has received the following foreign emoluments during his presidency among others:

·         Payments from foreign governments housing their officials in rooms or hosting events at Trump’s Washington, D.C. hotel after Inauguration Day;
·         Entities owned by foreign states paying rent at Trump Tower in New York City; and
·         The Chinese government granting forty trademarks to the Trump Organization.

While President Trump continues to accept benefits from foreign governments, Congress has no choice but to seek a remedy through the courts.

A Congressional Research Service analysis of suits by members of Congress found no larger action.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Saturday, July 15, 2017

Child Welfare Administrators Pitch Privatization To Investors, But Not Medicaid Fraud Or Human Trafficking

It breaks my heart how absolutely clueless our leadership is at the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services in child welfare, but hey, gotta fund those political campaigns through those NGOs!
Taken from the HHS lecture, she could not figure out
Medicaid fraud in child welfare increased costs

The U.S. Department of Human Services just made history busting human trafficking in foster care, but this video, even though it is from 2016, focuses on maximizing revenue from Medicaid, and makes no mention of Medicaid fraud in child welfare.

God forbid there is any mention of civil rights, human trafficking, rape, torture, drugging, etc.

Lawsuits against the States child welfare systems, specifically Children's Rights, was glossed over by stating that they could all work together as a "blended funding", or rather privatization.

There was no mention of the horrors these children and their parents endure.

This is nothing but a pitch for social impact bonds.


Why are foster kids depressed?

Because they want to go home.

Why do foster kids have an average of 13 months in care?

Because they run away to have a better chance on the streets.

Upon age out of foster care, there is no more revenue maximization through Medicaid.

For a quick synopsis of the above HHS presentation video, enjoy.


The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children & Families, Office of Planning, Research & Evaluation is having a Research and Evaluation conference on Self-Sufficiency and even gave it a code (RECS).

How quaint.

The RECS provides a valuable opportunity to gather in Washington, D.C. and hear the latest findings from evaluations of social welfare programs and policies, discuss ways to incorporate findings into the design and implementation of programs, and develop strategies for future evaluations.

The conference focuses on programs, policies and services that support low-income and vulnerable families on the path to economic self-sufficiency and well-being. Past conferences have featured presentations on topics including:
  • Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
  • Education, Training, and Success in the Labor Market
  • Child and Youth Well-Being
  • Fatherhood, Relationships, and Strengthening Families
  • Evaluating Social Programs: Building and Using Evidence
  • Approaches to Alleviate Poverty and Strengthen the Safety Net
The conference will definitely not focus on programs, policies and services that support low-income and vulnerable families to report:
  • Fraud, waste and abuse in its child welfare programs;
  • Human trafficking;
  • Generation of fraudulent documentation used to file cost-reimbursed Medicaid billing;
  • Rape, torture and drugging of children who are wards of the courts and the States.
The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children & Families, Children's Bureau, Child Welfare Information Gateway held a conference.

Guess what the focus is on?

Human trafficking!  

Yes, It seems U.S. DHHS is slowly, very slowly, coming to understand, with bouts of denial, of course, that what they do is human trafficking when you take a tiny human, without permission of the parent, and physically move the tiny human to another location in exchange for money, then pay someone else to watch over the booty of your human pilfering for maximizing revenues.

Child Welfare Virtual Expo 2017
Strengthening Assessment and Decision-Making for Improved Outcomes

Thursday, July 13, 2017, 10 a.m.–5 p.m. EDT

The Capacity Building Center for States, a service of the Children’s Bureau, hosted the Child Welfare Virtual Expo 2017 on July 13. All sessions have been recorded and will be posted along with related resources in CapLEARN, the Collaborative’s Learning Center. Registration is free.

2017 Theme: Strengthening Assessment and Decision-Making for Improved Outcomes

This year’s Virtual Expo highlights the critical importance of assessment and decision-making to enhancing outcomes for children and families. Sessions cover strategies for assessing safety, conducting comprehensive assessment of parents, collaborating across systems for families with co-occurring issues, and using data effectively.

Engaging presentations will feature insights from national subject matter experts, child welfare professionals and partners, parents, and youth.

Two sessions are tailored for managers and administrators, and two are designed for frontline workers. Each session includes presentations and a virtual reflection activity to help you apply presentation concepts to your daily work. To promote group learning and interaction, you are encouraged to gather with colleagues to watch, discuss, and begin planning for implementation of new ideas.

Want to access sessions from last year's Virtual Expo? Archived sessions from the Child Welfare Virtual Expo 2016 are available on CapLEARN.

I am downloading and analyzing the training material from CapLearn and will provide an overview of how there are developments to maximize revenues in social impact bonds.

Questions? Contact capacityinfo@icf.com.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

CONYERS: Statement for the Markup of H.R. 469, the “Sunshine for Regulations and Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2017”

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
H.R. 469, the “Sunshine for Regulations and Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2017,” has a simple goal:  to discourage the use of settlement agreements and consent decrees.

Here are just a few reasons why this is problematic.

To begin with, this bill, by delaying regulatory protections, jeopardizes public health and safety.  This explains why the Administration issued a veto threat against a very similar version included in legislation considered last Congress. 

It also explains why a broad consortium of more than 150 organizations strenuously oppose this bill. 

These organizations include the National Resources Defense Council, the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP, the Sierra Club, and EarthJustice, among other groups.

Simply put, this bill could be used to prevent critical, life-saving federal regulatory actions from being implemented.

For example, the bill gives opponents of regulation multiple opportunities to stifle agency regulatory actions by allowing essentially any third party who is affected by such actions to:
                     intervene, subject to rebuttal;
                     participate in settlement negotiations; and
                     submit public comments about a proposed consent decree or settlement agreement that agencies would then be required to respond to.

In the case of consent decrees concerning a rulemaking, an agency would be forced to go through two public comment periods:  one for the consent decree and one for the rulemaking that results from the consent decree, doubling the agency’s effort.

Take, for example, a consent decree resolving a dispute under the Clean Air Act.  The bill would allow any private party whose rights are affected by such decree a right to intervene, which could conceivably include anyone who breathes air. 

Like nearly all of the anti-regulatory bills we have considered to date over the last three Congresses, H.R. 469 piles on unnecessary procedural requirements for agencies and courts.

Another concern is that this bill threatens to undermine a critical tool that Americans use to guarantee their Congressionally-mandated protections, including civil rights laws. 

By reducing costly and time-consuming litigation, consent decrees and settlement agreements benefit both plaintiffs and defendants. 

They ensure that federal protections are enforced, while giving state and local governments flexibility as to how they meet their federal obligations.

Consent decrees, in particular, have been instrumental in enforcing various civil rights statutes in a wide variety cases, ranging from those involving voting rights -- to reform of mental health institutions -- to law enforcement misconduct.  Indeed, they are at the heart of civil rights enforcement.
           
Because of H.R. 469’s a chilling effect on the use of consent decrees and settlement agreements, civil rights enforcement will be undermined. 

Given this concern, I intend to offer an amendment addressing at least this one shortcoming of the bill.

Finally, H.R. 469 will inevitably generate more litigation that will result in millions of dollars of additional transactional costs, all of which will be borne by the American taxpayer. 

For example, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, in its analysis of the bill’s predecessor from the last Congress, concluded the measure would impose millions of dollars in additional costs, most of which would be “incurred because litigation involving consent decrees and settlement agreements would probably take longer under the bill and agencies would face additional administrative requirements.”
           
For all of these reasons, I must accordingly oppose H.R. 469 and I yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, July 5, 2017

CONYERS: President Trump, follow the Constitution

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
My colleagues and I have taken the extraordinary step of filing a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump for his violations of the U.S. Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments ClauseArticle I, Section 9 of the Constitution forbids federal officeholders, including the President, from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state” without the consent of Congress.

The Framers included the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution because they were deeply concerned about foreign powers gaining influence over our leaders through the promise of personal financial gain. They feared that our experiment in self-government would fail if the American people could not be assured that their elected officials made decisions based on the best interests of the nation rather than the best interests of their pocketbooks. “[I]f we do not provide against corruption, our government will soon be at an end,” George Mason of Virginia warned in 1787. 


At the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, the Framers debated for days how best to ensure the undivided loyalty of elected officials. “[N]othing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption,” Alexander Hamilton explained in the Federalist Papers.  They eventually settled on the Emoluments Clause, which by its broad terms assumes that a financial benefit provided to a federal officeholder by a foreign power should be suspect and therefore subject to Congressional approval.

Since taking office, however, President Trump has&nbsp' refused to divest his business empire and has financially benefited from the actions of foreign powers that may be attempting to curry favor. To name but a few examples:  The governments of China, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia lease properties in Trump office buildings; China swiftly granted President Trump’s businesses 38 trademarks following the election, after the Trump Organization spent a decade litigating the issue in court to no avail.  Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. actively courts foreign diplomats, some of whom have hosted events or stayed at his hotel since the Inauguration.  In January 2017, a lobbying firm working for Saudi Arabia spent $270,000 on rooms and other expenses at President Trump’s Washington hotel after Inauguration Day.

As one Asian diplomat boasted to the Washington Post for a November article, “Why wouldn’t I stay at [Trump’s] Hotel blocks from the White House, so I can tell the new president, ‘I love your new hotel,’” and another Middle Eastern diplomat acknowledged, “Believe me, all the delegations will go there.”

In January, President Trump’s attorney Sheri Dillon assured Americans that President Trump would “donate all profits from foreign government payments made to his hotels to the United States Treasury.” Nevertheless, in response to a request from the House Oversight Committee for documentation identifying foreign profits, the Trump Organization refused via  a single glossy brochure to “fully and completely identify all patronage” because it would be “impractical.”  Compounding the problem is the complete lack of transparency by the Administration or any form of oversight by the Majority in Congress. We learned that the “White House is telling federal agencies to blow off Democratic lawmakers oversight requests,” as Politico reported last month. 

President Trump’s actions demonstrate that he has no plans to voluntarily submit to Congressional approval of his financial benefits derived from foreign governments. By failing to do this, the President violates one of the Constitution’s most critical anti-corruption commands, and deprives Congress of its constitutionally assigned role in assessing what financial benefits from foreign states the president may accept.

No elected officeholder may be above the law, especially if he or she claims to be the sole judge of his or her own integrity. The Framers reasoned that if Congress were to decide which financial benefits a president may receive, the chances of corruption and foreign influence would be diminished because each transaction would be open to public examination. 

In deciding for himself what constitutes an emolument, President Trump is denying Congress its constitutional authority to grant – or withhold – its consent. And in our system of government, the judicial branch has the ultimate responsibility to interpret the Constitution, not the executive.   
Congress alone cannot force President Trump to comply with the Constitution. In the face of his continued defiance, therefore, we and our colleagues must ask the courts to help enforce this critical anti-corruption provision in the Constitution and direct President Trump to do what the Constitution requires. 


Our lawsuit is not just about protecting our institutional prerogative, but also to ensure that the Office of the President is not under any undue foreign influence. We owe this duty to uphold the Constitution to all Americans.

To learn about the history of Conyers enacting the constitutional mechanism of the Emoluments Clause, follow this link or just keep coming back.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, June 28, 2017

CONYERS: Floor Statement on H.R. 1215, the so-called “Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017”


H.R. 1215, the “Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017,” will do little to protect Americans’ access to safe and affordable health care.  Instead, it will deny victims of medical malpractice and defective medical products the opportunity to be fully compensated for their injuries and to hold wrongdoers accountable.

This legislation imposes various restrictions on lawsuits against health care providers concerning their provision of health care goods or services that would apply regardless of the merits of a case, the misconduct at issue, or the severity of the victim’s injury. 

There are so many problems with this bill that I would need 5 hours to discuss them all, but here are just a few.

To begin with, H.R. 1215 deeply intrudes on state sovereignty.

In particular, H.R. 1215 preempts state law governing joint and several liability, the availability of damages, the ability to introduce evidence of collateral source benefits, attorneys’ fees, and periodic payments of future damages. 

Members should not be fooled by assertions that the bill preserves state law. In fact, the rule of construction contained in the bill expressly states that it preempts state law except in very limited circumstances where state law is more favorable to defendants. 

And a number of so-called “state flexibility” provisions simply reinforce one-way preemption where the bill mostly supersedes state laws that are more favorable to victims, while leaving intact State laws that are more favorable to defendants.

In truth, H.R. 1215 does nothing to address the fundamental concerns about states’ rights previously raised by Members on both sides of the aisle.  In fact, just yesterday the House Liberty Caucus, a group of conservative libertarian members, registered their strong opposition to this bill stating that it “unconstitutionally voids state laws governing health care lawsuits.”

Further yet, this bill would cause real harm by severely limiting the ability of victims to be made whole.


For instance, the bill’s $250,000 aggregate limit for noneconomic damages -- an amount established more than 40 years ago pursuant to a California statute -- would have a particularly adverse impact on women, children, the poor, and other vulnerable members of society.

These groups are more likely to receive noneconomic damages in health care cases because they are less able to establish lost wages and other economic losses. 



Women, for example, are often paid at a lower rate than men, even for the same job, and are also more likely to suffer noneconomic loss, such as disfigurement or loss of fertility.

Imposing a severe limit on noneconomic damages, therefore, hurts them disproportionately.

Finally, this bill is particularly harmful for veterans, members of the military, and their families.  Because the bill preempts state tort law in any health care related lawsuit that includes any coverage provided by a federal health program, all cases arising from substandard care received in a Veterans Administration facility or a military hospital would be subject to the bill’s restrictions.

As a diverse coalition of veterans organizations noted in their letter of opposition, H.R. 1215 would limit the ability of veterans and military families to “hold health care providers, drug manufacturers and medical products providers accountable for pain and suffering, and death that result from substandard care, preventable medical errors, and defective drugs and devices.” 

For these and many other reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 1215 and I reserve the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Monday, June 26, 2017

Lalanea Little-Tobeler Officially Notifies Michigan That She Is Not Happy With Elected Officials Condoning Fraud In Child Welfare

Lala is not happy.

Michigan tortured her, stole her children and the state's elected officials refuse to do anything about the fraud in child welfare or what happened to her and her children, human trafficking.

Well, Lala has just given formal notice to Governor Rick Snyder, Attorney General Bill Schuette and Children's Ombudsman, Orlene Hawks, that she is going to file a federal lawsuit.

It does not matter if she cannot find an attorney, nor does it matter that she does not have the financial support or resources to battle the taxpayer funded behemoth  Michigan Office of Attorney General to prove her case.

When one files a complaint in federal court, that complaint is now preserved in the annals of history, as documentation of evidence.

Eventually, there will be enough of these "pro se" cases, alleging the exact same thing, with the exact same evidence, to eventually be used, as metadata, to establish a pattern of practice in the industry of Medicaid fraud in child welfare.

For those of you who are not familiar with Lala, here is her debut.  Enjoy the Lala.

Get 'em, girl.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

CONYERS & BLUMENTHAL Lay Out The Constitutional Case For Compelling President Trump To Obey Anti-Corruption Foreign Emoluments Clause



In the week since nearly 200 Members of Congress filed a lawsuit to compel President Trump to comply with the Constitution, public reporting has revealed new evidence of foreign benefits

No automatic alt text available.
#TrumpForSale
[WASHINGTON, DC] – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) held a press conference at 12:30 PM in the Capitol Visitors Center (SVC-215) to outline the Constitutional case for compelling President Trump to obtain the consent of Congress before accepting payments, benefits, or gifts from foreign states. 

Last week, nearly 200 Members of Congress filed a complaint, below, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against President Trump, whose ongoing failure to disclose his foreign business dealings violates one of the Constitution’s critical anti-corruption provisions: the Foreign Emoluments Clause.

In the week since the lawsuit was filed, public reporting has revealed that President Trump has received additional foreign benefits – including new trademarks in China– and is brokering business deals in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf while regional tensions escalate.


“We are joining in this action to prevent Donald Trump from thumbing his nose at the Constitution and the American people. The Constitution clearly states that no elected official - including the President - may receive gifts, payments, or benefits from foreign governments without disclosing them to Congress and seeking our consent,” Senator Blumenthal said. “The immense magnitude of President Trump's vast business empire is no excuse for his disregard of the Constitution and disrespect for the American people.”

“For generations,” Representative Conyers said, “presidents of both parties have complied with the Foreign Emoluments Clause by either divesting their business and financial holdings, or coming to Congress to seek approval prior to receiving any foreign government payment or other benefits. Our current President has done neither. This course of conduct is keeping Americans in the dark – leaving us to speculate if he’s acting on behalf of the American people or for his own financial benefit. Today’s legal action is designed to help lift our Nation out of this morass of conflicts and restore faith in our government, just as the founders intended.”

Because President Trump has refused to disclose his business dealings abroad, the full scope of his potential Constitutional violations is unknown. Independent reporting has shown that President Trump has received the following foreign emoluments during his presidency among others:

  • Payments from foreign governments housing their officials in rooms or hosting events at Trump’s Washington, D.C. hotel after Inauguration Day;
  • Entities owned by foreign states paying rent at Trump World Tower in New York City; and
  • The Chinese government granting thirty-nine trademarks to the Trump Organization.

U.S. Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Representatives Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Katherine Clark (D-MA) and Steve Cohen (D-TN) will also attend Tuesday’s press conference. They will be joined by Elizabeth Wydra, President of the Constitutional Accountability Center, the public interest organization whose attorneys are representing Members of Congress.

U.S. Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI)
U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal, (D-CT)
U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
U.S. Senator Tom Udall (D-NM)
U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)
U.S. Representative Jerry Nadler (D-NY)
U.S. Representative Katherine Clark (D-MA)
U.S. Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN)
Elizabeth Wydra, President, Constitutional Accountability Center


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Day 237 - Hillary's Leakers Hackers and Henchmen: Maersk, GulfTainer, NSPD 51 & Smith Mundt

Helping the New York Times Get It Right - Our Viewers Called For a Specific, Meaured , Standard Response to a Credible, Imminent Threat with Standard Tools, Not a General Alarm at Port of Charleston


 Be Your Own Journalist - We Just Give You Tools. Gulftainer Deal 

 Getting To Know the Law.- NSPD-51, PDD-62, and Smith Mundt Modernization Act 

 Lots of Stories Here in the Midwest, Always Love To Meet Contributors. Gulftainer Deal 

Yet Another MSM Hit Piece - Just Can't Seem To Say Awan Brothers
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©