DOJ: Lobbyist Jack Abramoff And CEO Rowland Marcus Andrade Charged With Fraud In Connection With $5 Million Initial Coin Offering Of Cryptocurrency AML Bitcoin

Idiot.

Abramoff Also Agrees to Enter Guilty Plea to First-Ever Criminal Prosecution

Jack Abramoff

SAN FRANCISCO –Jack Abramoff has been charged in a criminal information with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and violating the Lobbying Disclosure Act. In a connected case, a federal grand jury in San Francisco has indicted Rowland Marcus Andrade for wire fraud and money laundering.  The announcements were made by United States Attorney David L. Anderson, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation John F. Bennett, and Special Agent in Charge of the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation, Kareem Carter. 

The allegations underlying the charges against Abramoff, 62, of Silver Spring, Md., and Andrade, 42, of Missouri City, Texas, are contained in two separate documents: the information filed June 25, 2020, charging Abramoff, and the indictment filed June 22, 2020, charging Andrade.  According to the allegations in the charging documents, Andrade and Abramoff conspired to make false and misleading statements to potential purchasers of a proposed new cryptocurrency called AML Bitcoin.  According to the indictment, Andrade was the founder and chief executive officer of NAC Foundation, also referred to as the “National AtenCoin Foundation,” an organization that was intended to develop and manage the new cryptocurrency AML Bitcoin.  Andrade claimed to be the creator of AML Bitcoin and inventor of its technology that purportedly would prevent money laundering and anonymous use through “biometric technologies.” The charging documents allege Andrade claimed this technology would allow the AML Bitcoin cryptocurrency to comply with anti-money laundering and know-your-customer laws and regulations.  According to the charging documents, the defendants misled purchasers through various means when raising money to fund the venture.  In addition, the charging documents allege Andrade defrauded investors by misusing funds that were raised and laundered funds that were illegally obtained.

The indictment and information allege that beginning in July 2017 Andrade and his company NAC Foundation began raising money for the development of AML Bitcoin by selling AML Bitcoin to purchasers in the United States and elsewhere, and that sales continued through at least December 2018. According to the charging documents, NAC Foundation raised more than $5 million through the sale of AML Bitcoin.  The charging documents allege the defendants engaged in the following criminal condu

• In January and February 2018, Andrade and Abramoff allegedly engaged in a false “rejection campaign” regarding a television commercial that they falsely stated was going to be aired during the 2018 Super Bowl television broadcast.  The television commercial portrayed AML Bitcoin as impervious to hacking efforts by the North Korean government and its leader in a manner demeaning to the North Korean government and its leader.  Andrade and Abramoff falsely claimed that the advertisement would have aired during the Super Bowl if the television network airing the Super Bowl and the National Football League had not rejected the advertisement as being too politically controversial. In fact, as Abramoff and Andrade knew, the NAC Foundation did not have the funds to purchase the advertising time, did not intend to air the television commercial, and the advertisement was not reviewed or rejected by the television network or the NFL.  Abramoff and Andrade used paid op-ed articles, social media, and AML Bitcoin press releases to make statements that the commercial had been rejected in order to promote AML Bitcoin to prospective purchasers. 
• Andrade, Abramoff, and Andrade’s NAC Foundation allegedly made false statements to the public and potential purchasers of AML Bitcoin that misrepresented the state of the development of the technology and the viability and timeline for the release of AML Bitcoin cryptocurrency. 
• Andrade, with assistance of Abramoff, allegedly made statements that falsely stated and implied NAC Foundation had reached or was about to finalize agreements with various government agencies for the use of AML Bitcoin or AML Bitcoin technology.  The statements were intended to convince prospective purchasers that the cryptocurrency was progressing toward widespread adoption.  In addition, Abramoff allegedly retained writers to disseminate these statements as op-eds published on various news and financial websites.  Included among the false claims were claims that the NAC Foundation was near a partnership with the Panama Canal Authority to permit AML Bitcoin to be used for ships passing through the Panama Canal when no such agreement or negotiations existed.
• Andrade allegedly diverted more than $1 million obtained through the sale of AML Bitcoin and spent it on personal expenses, including the purchase of two properties in Texas. 
• Andrade allegedly laundered funds from the venture by steering investor assets through various bank accounts before moving them into an account for Andrade’s personal expenses and the purchase of the two properties.

The information filed against Abramoff also alleges that he knowingly and corruptly failed to register as a lobbyist, as required by the Lobbying Disclosure Act, after being retained for lobbying efforts that would involve one or more lobbying communications with a federal official.  This is the first ever known prosecution of a lobbyist for a criminal violation of the Lobbying Disclosure Act.  The information alleges that during part of 2017, Abramoff was retained by a client in the marijuana industry, and that the engagement in part involved efforts to advocate for changes in federal law and policy.  The information also alleges that in June 2017, an FBI undercover agent, posing as a business person seeking to fund lobbying efforts, agreed to retain Abramoff for lobbying activities including lobbying contacts.  After being retained, and after having a later lobbying contact with a federal elected official, Abramoff failed to register as a lobbyist with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives within 45 days of the retention or the contact, as required by the Act.

In sum, Andrade is charged in the indictment with one count of wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and one count of money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1).  Abramoff is charged in the information with one count of conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, and one count of violating the provisions of the Lobbying Disclosure Act, in violation of 2 U.S.C. § 1606(b). 

Andrade was arrested on June 23, 2020, in Missouri City, Texas, and appeared before a U.S. Magistrate Judge in Houston, Texas.  He was released on bond pending his initial San Francisco federal court appearance, which is set before the duty U.S. Magistrate Judge on July 1, 2020. 

Abramoff has filed a stipulated notice of an intent to change plea pursuant to a plea agreement.  The hearing for intended change of plea has not yet been scheduled.

An information and an indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, Andrade faces a maximum sentence of 20 years, and a fine of $250,000, plus restitution if appropriate, for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and a maximum sentence of 20 years and a fine of $500,000 for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1).  Abramoff faces a maximum sentence of 5 years, and a fine of $250,000 for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, and a maximum sentence of 5 years and a fine of $250,000, for violation of 2 U.S.C. § 1606(b).  However, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553. 

In separate civil actions filed on June 25, 2020, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission filed civil charges against Andrade and Abramoff, alleging securities fraud and acting as unregistered brokers of securities, among other charges.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Lloyd Farnham and Andrew Dawson are prosecuting the case with the assistance of Kimberly Richardson.  The prosecution is being conducted by the United States Attorney’s Office new Corporate Fraud Strike Force.  The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigations with the assistance of the San Francisco Regional Office of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Attachment(s): 

Download Abramoff Information

Download Andrade Indictment

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Audit On Bureau Of Elections - Will State Lobbying Registration Be Held Accountable The Same As FARA?

The Audit did not address the validity of elections, but the integrity of the Qualified Voter Files (QVF), effectiveness of access to controls of the QVF Refresh System, training of election officials, and compliance to Campaign Finance Act, Lobbyist, Lobbying Agents and Lobbying Activities Act (LLALAA) and Casino Interest Registration Act (CIRA).

It seems the Public Interest lawsuit against Janice Winfrey may be just another psyoptic because the Audit has reported that voters with no birth date were flagged with the date of 5-5-1850, with the oldest age of 122 years.

These electors were not deceased, but did not have a date of birth due to a lack of Driver License Files cross references.

Many township and city clerks were not certified.

The part which intrigued me the most was the lack of oversight of the lobbyist system because I want to know if these the same state standards of accountability in state registration are going to be applied in the same fashion as FARA, like the case with Mike Flynn and Bijan Kian.

The report did not address state meshed databases with th e Secretary of State and local property tax records, which are sold to third parties like Lexis Nexis, where the data are highly toxic, being really corrupt using maiden names and wrong property address descriptions.

Michigan OAG Electio Audit 2019 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Audit pings state bureau of elections on voter file, training, campaign finance oversight

Michigan’s Bureau of Elections failed to implement proper controls over the state’s file of 7.5 million qualified voters, a discrepancy that allowed an unauthorized user to access the file and increased the risk of an ineligible elector voting in Michigan, according to a recent report from the Office of Auditor General. 

Elections officials lack proper training in more than 14% of counties, cities and townships, the audit found. And the bureau did not make timely reviews for a majority of campaign statements, lobby reports and campaign finance complaints.

The audit conducted between Oct. 1, 2016, and April 30, 2019, found in the qualified voter file “230 registered electors who had an age that was greater than 122 years, the oldest officially documented person to ever live,” according to the Friday report.

The reviewed information fell largely under the tenure of Republican former Secretary of State Ruth Johnson. Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson took office Jan. 1. 

The audit did not review the implementation of Proposals 2 and 3, which were passed by voters in November 2018. The proposals change how political lines are drawn and allow no-reason absentee voting. 

The bureau, which falls under the Secretary of State’s purview, had 35 employees at the end of fiscal year 2018 and spent $24.6 million that year.

The bureau has begun to address some of the areas in the report and will continue to make improvements through 2020, according to Jake Rollow, a spokesman for Benson.

Among those changes are adding the state's first election security specialists, expanded risk-limit audits and future implementation of recommendations from the election security advisory committee. 

"Our elections are secure — the audit did not find any instances of illegal voting or improper modification of voter registration records — and the Bureau of Elections is continually updating its election security infrastructure," Rollow said in a statement. 

Despite the reportable and material conditions it noted, the audit found the Bureau of Elections largely was "sufficient" when it came to maintaining the integrity of the voter file, training election officials and complying with the Campaign Finance Act, and was "moderately effective" in applying access controls over the qualified voter file system.

The bureau agreed to make changes to address the four conditions noted by the audit, one of which included incomplete election training among election officials in 12 counties, 38 cities and 290 townships. 

The bureau noted that those numbers largely include those who have not completed continuing education, while participation in initial accreditation programs remains “extremely high.”

The bureau agreed to explore more controls over the qualified voter file but noted there wasn’t “a single verified case that an ineligible person voted” among the cases reviewed by the auditor. 

Officials said further investigation was needed on the 230 individuals identified by the audit to confirm their birth dates, noting that the discrepancy might be a result of a system the bureau uses to identify information it needed to investigate further.

“Individuals with no recorded date of birth have been deliberately coded with an implausible birth date (such as 5/5/1850) to more clearly indicate records needing further follow-up,” the report said.

The unauthorized user was a former employee, the bureau said, but there was no modification or destruction of records in the qualified voter file in the period reviewed.

The bureau also agreed to work with local election officials to avoid clerical errors in voter history, but noted that since Michigan is a decentralized system “this is legally a local — note state — responsibility.”

The audit found the Bureau of Elections did not provide timely reviews of 79% of campaign statements, 42% of lobby reports and 67% of campaign finance complaints selected for the audit. 

The bureau said it will continue to work to meet the five-day complaint response window and the 10-day lobby report window, but said it could not “realistically meet” the four-day window to review campaign statements. 

The bureau “indicated that it will work to seek staffing increases that would allow for full review within the timeframes required, as well as a possible legislative change to lengthen the four-day review requirement,” the report said.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Massachusetts Federal Indictments On Public Corruption - Transposing The Detroit "Fat, Dumb & Happy" Model

Just waiting for Detroit.

Dana Pullman, former Massachusetts State Police union head, indicted on federal charges of racketeering, fraud

Dana Pullman

Dana Pullman, the former president of the Massachusetts State Police union, has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of racketeering, fraud, obstruction of justice and tax crimes, officials said Thursday.

Pullman, 57 of Worcester, the former President of the State Police Association of Massachusetts, known as SPAM, was indicted along with Anne M. Lynch, 68 of Hull, a former Beacon Hill lobbyist. The two were charged by criminal complaint and arrested on Aug. 22.

Pullman and Lynch will be arraigned in federal court in Boston on a date yet to be determined.

Flowers, caviar and payments toward a $75K Chevy Suburban: What feds say Dana Pullman did with police union funds

Authorities say that Dana Pullman, the former head of the State Police Association of Massachusetts, and lobbyist Anne Lynch stole tens of thousands from troopers.

SPAM consists of more than 1,500 troopers and sergeants from the Massachusetts State Police and is the exclusive bargaining agent between its members and the state.

Pullman was a trooper from 1987 to 2018 and the president of SPAM from 2012 until his resignation on Sept. 28, 2018. Lynch’s lobbying firm represented SPAM during the same time period, in exchange for monthly retainer payments, according to the indictment.

The indictment alleges that from at least 2012 until Pullman’s resignation, Pullman, Lynch and others were involved in a conspiracy to defraud SPAM members and the state.

Federal authorities say the conspiracy included illegal bribes and kickbacks that Pullman allegedly received from Lynch and her firm.

Pullman and Lynch are also charged with trying to obstruct the grand jury’s investigation of the matter by manipulating subpoenaed records, authorities said. Lynch is accused of lying to investigators.

An FBI investigator accuses Pullman of running SPAM like a mob boss, pressuring executive board members to authorize payments they thought were too high and used the SPAM debit card for personal dinners, vacations and flowers without telling board members, according to federal records.

Pullman used the SPAM debit card as his personal ATM, federal investigators said. They estimate he spent about $9,300 on flowers and gift baskets between May 2015 and May 2018. More than $4,400 of those flowers and gifts were for an unnamed woman with whom Pullman, who is married, was having an affair, according to the criminal complaint.

The charges of racketeering conspiracy, racketeering, fraud and fraud conspiracy each provide for a sentence of up to 20 years in prison.

In a recent motion filed in federal court, Pullman requested permission to keep in touch with two longtime friends, both of whom are current or former members of the union’s executive board.

Pullman receives an annual pension of $62,974, paid in monthly installments of $5,248 after his retirement, according to state records.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Meet Keenan Keller - He Sucks & I Call Him Mr. Icky Man

This is Keenan Keller.

He is a staffer for the U.S. House Judiciary Committee.

I like to call him Mr. Icky Man.

He was mean to my Sweetie.

He impugned my intelligence.

He is dumb.

Keenan is a subordinate  to the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending).

He lies about the true heraldry of voting rights.

He created the architecture of the #coloredrevolution.

I rewrote H.R. 40 because it was stupid, but I just learned KK was the one who wrote it, so now my life all makes sense.

Nirvana has been achieved.

Keenan sucks.

Fuck you, Mr. Icky Man.

Stay tuned.

#perkinscoiesucks

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Trump wants 'lifetime ban' for lobbying for foreign governments

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Mueller Is Going After Child Welfare Propaganda & Voting Rights

It started right here, in Detroit, in child welfare.

Bob Goodlatte Has An Issue In Judiciary, Dark Campaign Money & Medicaid Fraud In Child Welfare

This is not just about Foreign Agent Registration Act, it is also about Foreign Corrupt Practices Act because it funds political campaigns.

Mueller fuels foreign lobbying crackdown

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation has given federal prosecutors momentum to litigate alleged violations of what until last year was an obscure law governing foreign lobbying.

In the course of his now 19-month probe, Mueller has uncovered a web of alleged criminality linked to violations of a World War II-era law enacted amid concerns over foreign propaganda.

Mueller has obtained guilty pleas under the law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), from two of President Trump’s 2016 campaign aides, Paul Manafort and Richard Gates. Both pleaded guilty to charges linked to their lobbying work on behalf of pro-Russian forces in Ukraine.

Mueller has also referred cases falling outside his mandate to other U.S. prosecutors.

One of those referrals resulted in the guilty plea last summer of GOP consultant Sam Patten, an associate of Manafort’s. Patten pleaded guilty to illegally lobbying on behalf of a political party in Ukraine called the Opposition Bloc, the successor to Russia-backed oligarch Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions. Patten has been cooperating with Mueller and other federal officials and prosecutors are expected to give an update on his case by Monday.  

Meanwhile, federal prosecutors in Manhattan are said to be accelerating an investigation into Washington, D.C., firms that helped Manafort lobby on behalf of Yanukovych, raising the possibility new charges could be filed in the future.

And government prosecutors in Virginia are poised to lay out their case against a former business partner of Michael Flynn, Trump’s onetime national security adviser. Flynn is expected to be a witness against his old partner, who is charged with illegally lobbying on behalf of the Turkish government.

The developments have had a chilling effect in Washington among lobbyists and consultants.

“When you become ground zero for what America is angry about ... anything can happen,” said one lobbyist who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “All it takes is a couple of scandals.”

FARA dates back to 1938, when it was passed to ensure transparency of foreign influence in the American political process as a result of fears over Nazi and communist propaganda. It has been amended twice since then but is essentially the same law.

It requires that “agents of foreign principals,” typically lobbyists or consultants who work for foreign governments or political parties, register and file regular reports with the Justice Department on their activities. They also must file copies of materials they distribute for any foreign entities and keep a record of their activities.

Criminal prosecutions under the law have been few and far between. Indeed, a Justice Department inspector general report released two months before the 2016 presidential election concluded that Justice lacked a “comprehensive” strategy to enforce FARA.

Mueller’s investigation has turned the tides, at least for the time being.

Mueller charged Manafort and Gates with acting as unregistered foreign agents in October 2017, in addition to a slew of other federal offenses stemming from their lobbying on behalf of politicians in Ukraine. Both have since pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate, though Manafort’s plea deal broke down dramatically last month as the special counsel accused him of lying.

Their cases spell potential trouble for two D.C. firms that Manafort recruited to lobby on behalf of Yanukovych in the United States. Manafort has admitted to arranging for the firms, the now-defunct Podesta Group and Mercury Public Affairs, to work for a nonprofit that claimed to be independent but was in fact under Yanukovych’s direction in order to obscure that their efforts were done at the behest of the Ukrainian government.

Mueller’s prosecutors said in September that some employees of both firms, identified only as “Company A” and “Company B” in court filings, knew that they were receiving direction from Yanukovych and not the nonprofit.

Neither firm registered under FARA for the lobbying work. Instead, they registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. The two firms said they did so on advice from counsel, and both have subsequently registered under FARA.

FARA allows for some exemptions in which lobbyists could register under the Lobbying Disclosure Act rather than FARA. To do so, individuals or firms must represent foreign principals who are not foreign governments or political parties.

The Associated Press reported earlier this month that prosecutors in Manhattan, on Mueller’s referral, had in recent weeks interviewed witnesses to probe the lobbying done by the Podesta Group and Mercury, a sign of the investigation accelerating. Neither firm has been charged with wrongdoing.

Mueller’s referral also reportedly included Greg Craig, who worked as White House counsel under former President Obama and whose law firm Manafort hired to produce a report that defended the Ukrainian government’s imprisonment of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, Yanukovych’s political rival.

Separately, Mueller’s investigation has contributed to prosecutors bringing charges against Bijan Kian, a co-founder of Flynn’s lobbying group who was indicted alongside another associate in mid-December on charges of conspiracy and acting as an unregistered agent of the Turkish government.

The charges came roughly a year after Flynn pleaded guilty in connection with Mueller’s investigation and admitted to making false statements in filings to the Justice Department about the Flynn Intel Group’s lobbying work related to Turkey.

Kian has pleaded not guilty and his trial is slated to begin in February in Alexandria, Va., where Flynn is expected to testify.

Lobbyists who do work with foreign governments insist they comply with FARA, and some have suggested that the recent charges give the false impression that the industry is characterized by shady dealings.

“One bad lobbyist can tarnish the whole industry,” said one lobbyist, who likened the latest controversy to the Jack Abramoff scandal, which resulted in the former D.C. power player spending four years in prison and spurred congressional action to regulate lobbying.

Regardless, Mueller has thrown a spotlight on foreign lobbying activities that is unlikely to wane even after his investigation has concluded. Some lawmakers have pushed for legislation they argue would strengthen FARA and prevent individuals from exploiting loopholes in the law.

Lobbying shops may also start to turn away foreign clients if they haven’t already, given that Russian interference and other recent developments have cast a shadow over the work. A handful of firms, for instance, have recently dropped Saudi Arabia as a client in light of journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.

“I think that even those who have been following the rules are going to think twice about this because I think there are probably ample numbers who have not been following the rules,” one lobbyist told the Hill.

“Even those that register appropriately, the question is going to be why are you working for an oppressive regime? Why are you trying to bolster a foreign government over the U.S. government?” the person continued.

New bills are expected to be introduced in the coming year and House Democrats will likely push to get a bill that tackles foreign lobbying regulations out of the lower chamber.

“I think there is definitely more focus. People are more engaged,” said Steven Cash, a D.C.-based lawyer at Day Pitney and former chief counsel to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

“I think there is more to come that is going to spin out of Mueller, and I suspect there is more to come generally, because we’re going to be more attentive to this,” Cash added.  

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Indictment Model For Fake Lobbying, Fake Congressional Documents, With Forged Signatures

It seems the Carolinas are having their way with "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) when it comes to fraud.

In order to claim the legal status of a whistleblower, one must first report through formal mechanisms established under the rule of law.

You cannot go around, using fake profiles, in some instances, on social media, representing yourself as singular letter, or as someone claiming to be engaging in "internet vigilante justice", for lack of a better description, producing bogus, public reports, which are videos for some, without any form of legal scrutiny, soliciting online investments for your online funding accounts, for purposes of furthering your fraudulent activities, and you cannot take foreign money for doing it.

It is like going around anonymously calling Child Protective Services, pointing fingers at random people accusing them of child abuse, then soliciting funding for your actions.

That is not a whistleblower, that is a predator.

It is also the same as funding propaganda with foreign money to interfere in an election, even if the origin of the money started out as tax payer dollars, laundered to overseas accounts, and back in to the U.S. online social media manipulative psychoptics.

In this case, we have an individual who has sworn an oath as a licensed attorney, registered as a lobbyist, engaged in a bold & cold financial fraud scheme, with bogus reports generated and filed with the Library of Congress and the National Archives, across state lines.

This sounds like Hobbs Act stuff.

This interference with the obviation of the Congress is but only one, of a multitude of complex fraud schemes, that have yet to see the light of day.

I am quite sure there will be more to come from this one when it comes to fake lobbying, and fake congressional letters, with forged signature of a member of congress, being entered into the formal congressional record.

Former Lobbyist Indicted for Obstruction of Justice

A former lobbyist was charged in an indictment with obstructing justice in connection with an ongoing federal investigation and proceedings concerning a multi-million dollar high-yield investment fraud scheme, announced Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division.  

Christopher Petrella, 51, of Greer, South Carolina, was arrested yesterday and charged in the Western District of North Carolina with one count of obstruction of justice.  

Ten individuals had been previously indicted by a Charlotte grand jury for their alleged roles in a high-yield investment scheme involving Niyato Industries Inc.  The charges in that case allege that the defendants raised money from investors by representing that Niyato manufactured electric and compressed natural gas (“CNG”) automobiles when, in truth, the company had no facilities, no operations, and no capability to manufacture anything.  That case is scheduled for trial.     

The indictment returned on Tuesday and unsealed yesterday alleges that Petrella, who worked to promote Niyato and purportedly lobbied on Niyato’s behalf, attempted to obstruct, influence and impede the ongoing federal investigation into the alleged Niyato fraud, as well as the upcoming trial, by misleading federal law enforcement about his own involvement with Niyato and by portraying himself as a whistleblower.  Petrella is alleged to have produced to a federal law enforcement agent a bogus “quarterly report” related to his lobbying work for Niyato.  According to the indictment, Petrella also falsely claimed he had filed the “quarterly report” with the U.S. Congress pursuant to certain requirements applicable to federal lobbyists.  The bogus “quarterly report” purportedly disclosed to authorities that certain individuals had made false and misleading statements about Niyato’s business and operations on Niyato’s Twitter and Facebook pages.  In reality, the indictment alleges that the “quarterly report” Petrella produced to federal law enforcement was a sham and Petrella’s statement that he had filed the document with the U.S. Congress was false. 

Petrella’s initial court appearance is scheduled on Wednesday, Oct. 24, at 10:40 a.m. before Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer in the Western District of North Carolina.

An indictment is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. 

This case was investigated by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.  Trial Attorneys William Bowne and Christopher Fenton of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: No More Lobbying From The Bench

You mean to tell me Judiciary can no longer lobby from the bench?

Someone better tell Maura Corrigan and her protegees.

Kansas, Meet the Queen of Judicial Lobbying: Maura Corrigan 

I wonder if the DOJ is going to get into the blackmail and bribery?

I bet those 9th Circuit emails have some rather juicy attachments, but hey, what do I know?

I know that Perkins Coie sucks and is trying to privatize the justice system.

#perkinscoiesucks

Attorney General Sessions Releases Memorandum on Litigation Guidelines for Nationwide Injunctions Cases

Attorney General Jeff Sessions today issued litigation guidelines to aid Department of Justice attorneys involved in litigation challenging a federal government program, regulation, order, or law. The litigation guidelines will arm Department litigators handling these cases to present strong and consistent arguments in court against the issuance of nationwide injunctions and to reaffirm the existing constitutional and practical limitations on the authority of judges. The Department opposes the issuance of nationwide injunctions, consistent with the longstanding position of the Executive Branch under previous Administrations from both parties.

Nationwide injunctions—sometimes called “non-party injunctions”—prevent the federal government from enforcing an Executive Branch law or policy as to any person or organization, across the entire United States, regardless of whether such broad injunctions are necessary to provide relief to the specific plaintiffs involved in the case. In effect, they allow a single unelected federal district judge to set or veto a national policy. The increase in the number of nationwide injunctions in recent years, across Administrations of both parties, highlights the problem of judges acting outside of the bounds of their authority to grant relief to people or organizations that extends beyond the particulars of a specific case. 

In releasing the litigation guidelines, Attorney General Sessions provided the following statement:

“Increasingly, we are seeing individual federal district judges go beyond the parties before the court to give injunctions or orders that block the entire federal government from enforcing a law or policy throughout the country. This kind of judicial activism did not happen a single time in our first 175 years as a nation, but it has become common in recent years. It has happened to the Trump administration 25 times in less than two years. This trend must stop. We have a government to run. The Constitution does not grant to a single district judge the power to veto executive branch actions with respect to parties not before the court. Nor does it provide the judiciary with authority to conduct oversight of or review policy of the executive branch. These abuses of judicial power are contrary to law, and with these new guidelines, this Department is going to continue to fight them.”

In a recent speech to the Eight Circuit Judicial Conference, the Attorney General stressed that the use of nationwide injunctions threatens the rule of law. The Attorney General also emphasized how nationwide injunctions are a danger to our constitutional order in a (link is external)

. The litigation guidelines published today will strengthen the Department’s efforts to help restore order, boundaries, and common sense to the U.S. judicial system.

Attorney General Sessions Memorandum on Litigation Guidelines for Nationwide Injunctions Cases by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Arkansas Child Welfare Fraud Scheme Busted Financing Political Campaigns

It happens in every state.

Former Executive Director of Non-Profit Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy with Unnamed State Senator and Convicted Lobbyist

A Former Executive Director of a non-profit pleaded guilty today to conspiring to unlawfully divert over $380,000 from South Arkansas Youth Services (SAYS), without the authority of the non-profit’s Board of Directors.  According to plea documents, the scheme involved steering the non-profit’s funds to an Arkansas state senator and the lobbying firm of convicted lobbyist Milton “Rusty” Cranford, in exchange for the state senator agreeing to influence Arkansas officials regarding state contracts.

Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Duane (DAK) Kees for the Western District of Arkansas made the announcement. 

Jerry Walsh, 72, of Magnolia, Arkansas, who served as the Executive Director of SAYS pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Susan O. Hickey to an information charging him with conspiracy to misapply the non-profit’s funds without authority from the Board of Directors. 

As part of his plea, Walsh admitted that beginning in 2013, while serving as Executive Director for SAYS, he agreed to divert SAYS funds to Rusty Cranford and an unnamed Arkansas state senator in exchange for the state senator’s influence in protecting the non-profit’s state contracts with the Arkansas Department Health Services (DHS) and DHS’ Division of Youth Services (DYS).  As part of that agreement, Walsh was to provide a monthly “legal retainer” to the Arkansas state senator without the expectation that the senator ever provide any legal work.  Instead, the purpose of the payment was to obtain the senator’s assistance in preserving the contracts by influencing DHS and DYS officials.  According to the plea, the amount paid to the senator was negotiated by convicted lobbyist Rusty Cranford and amounted to over $120,000.

Additionally, as part of the agreement, Walsh locked SAYS into a more expensive contract with Cranford’s lobbying firms and employed a relative of Cranford who would have a “no-show” job with SAYS.  Between the new contract with the Cranford lobbying firm and the payment for the no-show job, the non-profit paid out an additional $262,000 in diverted funds.    As part of his plea, Walsh admitted that these payments and those to the state senator were not authorized by the SAYS Board of Directors.  

“Jerry Walsh diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars intended to help vulnerable children in southern Arkansas as a part of a corrupt scheme to influence the award of state contracts,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski. “Walsh’s actions ultimately risked destroying the non-profit he helped lead and undermining the public’s confidence in its elected officials.  The Criminal Division and our law enforcement partners are committed to protecting the integrity of charitable programs, rooting out corruption, and ensuring that individuals like Walsh are held accountable for their actions.”

“This plea exposes the depths to which ‘pay to play’ politics has corrupted a non-profit organization which was formed with the best of intentions, to help children,” said U.S. Attorney Kees.  “Unfortunately, there are many victims in a scheme like this.  The people of this state were deprived of the uncorrupted functioning of their government agencies, the non-profit was stripped of funds, and now that the non-profit has been shuttered, the community is deprived of a non-profit dedicated to providing services to their most vulnerable children, those who are incarcerated and in state custody.  I look forward to a day when all politicians exercising influence do so based upon the best interests of the children in their communities and not on who is paying them for no-show jobs.”    

The FBI investigated this case along with the assistance of the Magnolia Police Department and the 13th Judicial District of Arkansas Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Ben Wulff of the Western District of Arkansas and Trial Attorney Marco A. Palmieri of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section are prosecuting the case with the assistance of Deputy Prosecutor Ryan Phillips with the 13th Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.  This is a combined investigation with the Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice, the Eastern District of Arkansas, Western District of Arkansas, and the Western District of Missouri. 

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.©

DOJ Busts Missouri Child Welfare Fraud Scheme Funding Arkansas Political Campaigns & Other Forms of Stealin'

What?

A child welfare fraud scheme funding political campaigns for personal inurement???

They were stealin'.

I would do my "I told you so" dance, but I shall be humble...for now and drop the tutorial video for this matter, below.

Former Charity Executive Pleads Guilty to Bribery and Embezzlement Scheme

A former executive of a Springfield, Missouri charity, who was also an Arkansas lobbyist, pleaded guilty in federal court today to bribing Arkansas elected officials in a multi-million-dollar scheme, and then along with other charity executives, embezzling millions of dollars from the Springfield health care organization.

Acting Assistant Attorney General John P. Cronan of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Timothy A. Garrison for the Western District of Missouri made the announcement.

Milton Russell Cranford, aka “Rusty,” 57, of Rogers, Arkansas, pleaded guilty before U.S. Magistrate Judge David P. Rush to one count of federal program bribery.  Cranford was an executive at Preferred Family Healthcare Inc. (formerly known as Alternative Opportunities Inc.), a nonprofit corporation headquartered in Springfield, and oversaw the charity’s operations and lobbying efforts in the state of Arkansas. Cranford also operated three lobbying firms: The Cranford Coalition, The Capital Hill Coalition and Outcomes of Arkansas.

By pleading guilty today, Cranford admitted that he and other Preferred Family Healthcare executives paid bribes to Arkansas State Senator Jonathan Woods, Arkansas State legislator Henry Wilkins IV, a person identified in court documents as “Arkansas Senator A,” and others, to provide favorable legislative action for Cranford, his clients, and Preferred Family Healthcare. In exchange for the bribes paid by Cranford, the officials identified in the Information steered Arkansas General Improvement Fund (GIF) money to Preferred Family Healthcare and other Cranford clients; held up agency budgets; requested legislative audits; and sponsored, filed and voted for legislative bills that favored the charity and Cranford clients.

The additional income gained by Preferred Family Healthcare from Cranford’s bribes enabled Cranford and other executives of the charity to engage in multiple schemes to embezzle, steal, and unjustly enrich themselves at the expense of the charity, including, but not limited to, diverting charity funds to for-profit companies owned by the executives, causing the charity to make rental payments to properties owned by Cranford and the executives; paying for their personal expenses using corporate credit cards; and causing the charity to lend significant funds to Cranford personally, and to for-profit companies owned by other charity executives.  The executives also caused the charity to misapply its funds for unlawful contributions to the campaigns of elected public officials and causing the charity to spend substantial amounts of funds on lobbying and political advocacy.

In addition, Cranford entered into an illegal kickback scheme whereby Cranford paid over $600,000 in illegal kickbacks to a charity executive in exchange for more than $3.5 million in payments made to The Cranford Coalition.  Cranford also acknowledged his role in a second illegal kickback scheme involving the charity’s contract with Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-based political operative Donald Andrew Jones, also known as “D.A.” Jones, and another charity employee, former Arkansas State Representative Eddie Wayne Cooper.  In exchange for Cranford’s role in facilitating the charity’s contract with Jones for lobbying and political advocacy, under which the charity paid Jones almost $1 million, Cranford received kickbacks totaling $219,000 from Jones, $18,000 of which Cranford provided to Cooper, and Cooper received another $45,000 directly from Jones.  In separate but related cases, both Jones and Cooper previously entered guilty pleas acknowledging their roles in that kickback scheme.

A sentencing hearing will be scheduled after the completion of a presentence investigation by the U.S. Probation Office.

The case was investigated by IRS-Criminal Investigation, the FBI and the Offices of the Inspectors General from the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Veterans Affairs, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. This is a combined investigation with the Western District of Arkansas, the Eastern District of Arkansas, and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.  This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven M. Mohlhenrich of the Western District of Missouri and Trial Attorneys Marco A. Palmieri and Sean F. Mulryne of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Michael Cohen "Consulting" In Government Without Registration As A Lobbyist

Someone "consulting" in federal government without registering as a lobbyist?

Geeze, that sounds oddly familiar, but I shall bite my tongue for now.

We do not know what type of "consulting" was solicited by Cohen, now do we?

Was it Ford Motor Company or the Ford Foundation.

TARP?

I got popcorn, you know.

Oh, and #perkinscoiesucks

Cohen approached Ford for consulting, Mueller wants to see the records

President Donald Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen approached Ford shortly after Trump's election offering his services as a consultant, but the Dearborn-based automaker told him no thanks, the Free Press learned late Friday.

Special counsel Robert Mueller, who is charged with investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign, learned of the incident and has asked Ford for records, the Free Press was told.

Ford, which avoided a publicity black eye suffered by AT&T and Novartis pharmaceuticals, both of which hired Cohen, had no comment Friday evening.

Michael Avenatti, attorney for Stephanie Clifford, the adult entertainer known as Stormy Daniels, late Friday confirmed what sources told the Free Press.

“I can confirm that Mr. Cohen solicited Ford Motor Company," he said by phone. "It was in late 2016 into ’17. On multiple occasions. There was no policy. He was trying to sell access to the president. My understanding is that it was by phone and electronic communication.”

Avenatti declined to say whether he knew if Cohen had approached other automakers.

The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the incident, said Mueller's team has interviewed Ford’s head of government affairs, Ziad Ojakli, who the Journal said rejected Cohen's offer.

Cohen's offers of advice to major companies has come to light through Avenatti's legal fight with Trump and Cohen on behalf of Clifford, who is suing the president to get out of a confidentiality agreement. Cohen set up a company called Essential Consultants through which he paid Clifford $130,000 to buy her silence about asexual encounter she alleges she had with Trump in 2006.

Essential Consultants, which Cohen set up shortly before making the payment to Clifford just weeks before the 2016 election, has since been tied to payments to Cohen by AT&T, Novartis Pharmaceuticals and a Russian oligarch.

AT&T said Friday that hiring Cohen was a “big mistake." In a memo to employees, CEO Randall Stephenson called the hiring a “serious misjudgment,’” and said that the company’s chief lobbyist in Washington is leaving.

AT&T's one-year contract paid Cohen $50,000 per month.

Novartis paid Cohn $100,000 a month, but let the contract expire, company officials have said. 

An American company tied to Russian Viktor Vekselberg paid $500,000 to Essential Consultants, reports have said. Vekselberg was stopped and questioned at an airport this year by investigators for Mueller. Cohen's offices and hotel room were raided in an investigation by the U.S. attorney in Manhattan after a referral from Mueller. 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 125.2 Is Weissman Feeding Us Bolshevic Biscuits?

The Sordid Tale Of Michigan Privatization: From Emergency Manager To Russia

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

INTERVIEW: Allen J. Cannon on U.S. Constitution and Landmark Lawsuit Involving Congress

Allen Cannon is not a member of "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending), but #perkinscoiesucks is.

Here is a link to the Amended Complaint.  

In a nutshell, federal representation is a fraud.

LAVERGNE et al v. UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES et al

Congressional Apportionment Amendment

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©