Showing posts sorted by date for query Lindsey Graham. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Lindsey Graham. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Monday, October 12, 2020

Of Parental Rights: What Amy Coney Barrett Did Not Disclose On Her SCOTUS Confirmation Hearing Application: "How Did You Get Those Tiny Haitian Humans?"

Well, I guess it is just pro forma when you take a foreign oath of fealty to intentionally omit how you traffic tiny humans.

John Roberts did it, so why not Amy?


If not, the heavens shall fall and Catholic Charities will no longer be able to acquire goods to procure and purvey tiny humans through Foster Care and Adoption, making all the assets of their tiny human trust funds, toxic.


Not one member of the Senate Judiciary Committee asked Amy how she got those tiny Haitian Humans.


#maytheheavensfall


(CNN)Judge Amy Coney Barrett initially failed to disclose two talks she gave in 2013 hosted by two anti-abortion student groups on paperwork provided to the Senate ahead of her confirmation hearing to become the next Supreme Court justice.

Barrett, President Donald Trump's nominee to succeed Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, gave the talks -- a lecture and a seminar -- in 2013 in her capacity as a law professor at the University of Notre Dame. The seminar was co-sponsored by the school's Right to Life club and constitutional studies minor, and the lecture was held by the law school's Jus Vitae club. CNN's KFile found advertisements for two lectures on social media and in a weekly Notre Dame faculty newsletter.

Late on Friday night, hours after this story published, the Senate Judiciary Committee released a supplemental update to Barrett's committee questionnaire that includes the lecture and seminar, as well as a paid advertisement she signed that criticized Roe v. Wade and reaffirmed support for Notre Dame's "commitment to the right to life." The release came after CNN asked the White House about the advertisement earlier on Friday.

It is not known what was said in the two events, though both centered on abortion court cases. In a separate instance, CNN's KFile found a publicized talk that Barrett gave to coincide with the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade -- a seminar Barrett disclosed in her Senate paperwork -- was removed by the university from YouTube in 2014. A school spokesman told CNN the video is now lost.
Content by CNN Underscored

Barrett's confirmation to the Supreme Court would strengthen its current conservative majority -- creating a 6-3 bloc of conservative justices -- and could limit abortion access.

Barrett's initial failure to disclose the two events also raises questions about whether the questionnaire is complete or whether there will be any consequences from the Republican-led Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees her confirmation hearing. Past chairmen of the powerful committee have halted the nomination process after judicial nominees omitted information in their Senate paperwork but under committee Chairman Lindsey Graham that scenario is unlikely.

The committee has slated a hearing for Barrett on October 12 in an effort to confirm her by the full Senate before the election.

Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee sent a letter to the Justice Department this week that said Barrett did omit materials concerning Roe v. Wade and asked if Barrett omitted any more materials after the National Review reported that Barrett signed a letter on a "right to life" ad in 2006 that called for the end of the landmark legal decision.

White House spokesperson Judd Deere told CNN in an email, "Judge Barrett submitted her lengthy Senate Judiciary Questionnaire, spoke with an overwhelming majority of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and continues to be transparent throughout her confirmation process. She looks forward to answering questions from the Senators next week."

A spokesperson for the Senate Judiciary Committee told CNN "it is a very normal practice" for Supreme Court nominees to update their questionnaire, noting that several current Supreme Court justices also supplied updated copies.

CNN reached out multiple times to Barrett through her law chambers but did not get a response.
While Barrett's association with anti-abortion groups has come under scrutiny -- including signing a Right to Life ad in 2006 -- little has been examined about her work with anti-abortion groups at Notre Dame. Barrett gave the talks hosted by the anti-abortion student groups while she was also a member of the Notre Dame chapter University Faculty for Life, which staunchly opposes abortion.

In 2016, the group sent a letter asking the university to rescind an award honored to then-Vice President Joe Biden in recognition for his work as an American Catholic. The group called it "a scandalous violation of the University's moral responsibility (as the American bishops wrote in 2004) never to honor those who act in defiance of fundamental moral principles about the sanctity of life" and attacked his views on abortion.

Barrett initially failed to disclose two seminars she gave students on Roe v. Wade
In April 2013, Barrett gave a small hour-long seminar "for students on changes to law and life for women after Roe v. Wade" entitled "Being a Woman After Roe."

According to a copy of the Facebook event advertising the seminar, spots were limited to 15 students. A student publication promoted the event as an informal seminar, small group setting in which students can learn more from faculty members who oppose abortion.

"The Right to Life Seminar Series was begun as an opportunity for students and professors to discuss a variety of issues related to human life and dignity," an advertisement for the event reads.

The conservative judge also did not disclose that in November 2013 she spoke to Jus Vitae, the law school's Right to Life club, on "The Supreme Court's Abortion Jurisprudence." The law school advertised the lecture as focusing on Roe v. Wade and the cases that followed it, including cases that were being litigated on the lower courts at that time.

The lecture Barrett did disclose was entitled "Roe at 40: The Supreme Court, Abortion, and the Culture War that Followed," taking place in January 2013 and open to the university community. It was co-sponsored by the university's Constitutional Studies minor.

However, video for the lecture, which CNN's KFile found on the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine was advertised by the school as being available on YouTube, was removed by the user in 2014, according to a YouTube spokesperson.

Of 11 lectures publicized as available to watch on the school's event, only Barrett's was removed from YouTube.

After CNN inquired to obtain video of the event, a university spokesperson, Dennis K. Brown, told CNN, "We have checked with the organizer of the event [sic] have no information on what has become of the video of that lecture."

Several on-campus publications covered the event and Barrett's remarks at the time.

The Observer, Notre Dame's student newspaper, wrote that Barrett said, ''I think it is very unlikely at this point that the court is going to overturn Roe as curbed by [Planned Parenthood v.] Casey. The fundamental element, that the woman has a right to choose abortion, will probably stand," she said.
The Irish Rover, a student publication covering Catholic identity, quoted Barrett as saying, "whether or not Roe gets overturned is irrelevant," saying the question of abortion would return to the state level and could still be legal in certain states.

Anti-Biden letter
As Barrett gave talks on abortion to groups associated with the on-campus Right to Life groups, Barrett was also a member of the university's chapter of the University Faculty for Life from the group's founding in 2010 until 2016, according to her Senate paperwork.

While she was a member of the group, the group unanimously passed a resolution for a letter calling on the university to rescind an award given to then-Vice President Biden because of his beliefs on abortion.
"Notre Dame claims to award the Laetare Medal 'annually to an American Catholic in recognition of outstanding service to Church and society,'" the letter reads. "But our Faculty for Life Chapter agrees with Bishop Kevin Rhoades that the awarding of the Laetare Medal to Vice-President Biden is a scandalous violation of the University's moral responsibility (as the American bishops wrote in 2004) never to honor those who act in defiance of fundamental moral principles about the sanctity of life."

The faculty letter attacks Biden's position on abortion for not wanting to "impose" the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion upon a woman or a doctor, supporting the death penalty and for rejecting "the truth that human life begins at conception." It also states that public officials like Biden have "an especially grave duty to preserve" life.


Preserving the residuals of the peculiar institution is just the work of the foreign tax exempt god.

Praise the lord.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, September 30, 2020

SENATE JUDICIARY: Comey Testifies On FISA Renewal & Not The Ex Parte Russian Election Interference Origins

"I disagree with your preamble."

"I do not agree with your predicate."

James Comey

Whatever you do, do not tell them that all the information the committee seeks is already public.

Ssssshhh... "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) at work...

#maytheheavensfall


Intel chief releases Russian disinfo on Hillary Clinton that was rejected by bipartisan Senate panel

Former top officials were aghast at the move by John Ratcliffe, the director of national intelligence.

The assessment claims that Hillary Clinton personally approved an effort during the 2016 election “to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee.” | Jeenah Moon/Getty Images

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified a Russian intelligence assessment that was previously rejected by Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee as having no factual basis, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

The extraordinary disclosure, released to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) earlier Tuesday, rankled Democrats, who said the move effectively put Russian disinformation into the public sphere in order to boost President Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated claims about the government’s efforts to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election.

“It’s very disturbing to me that, 35 days before an election, the director of national intelligence would release unverified Russian rumint,” or rumor intelligence, Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.) told reporters.

And several former senior intelligence officials described Ratcliffe’s move as incendiary and irresponsible, given the manner in which he was publicly releasing unverified information that originated from a foreign adversary.

The assessment claims that Hillary Clinton, then a Democratic candidate for president, personally approved an effort “to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee.” But in his letter to Graham, Ratcliffe noted that the U.S. intelligence community “does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee issued five reports on Russia’s sweeping effort to meddle in the 2016 election to boost Trump, ranging across thousands of pages. The panel was made aware of that allegation early on in its investigation, and quickly dismissed it, the sources said.

“I’m very, very proud of the bipartisan work of the Intelligence Committee — three and a half years, five volumes — and that work speaks for itself,” Warner said.

According to Ratcliffe, former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Barack Obama on the Russian assessment, which included the allegation that Clinton approved the plan to tie Trump to the hack of the DNC after it was proposed by one of her foreign policy advisers.

Asked about Ratcliffe’s claims, Nick Merrill, a spokesperson for Clinton, said in a text message that the allegations were “baseless bullshit.“

Nick Shapiro, Brennan’s former deputy chief of staff at the CIA, said Ratcliffe “should be ashamed of his blatant politicization of his position.”

After receiving pushback against the declassified material, Ratcliffe said in a statement: “To be clear, this is not Russian disinformation and has not been assessed as such by the Intelligence Community. I’ll be briefing Congress on the sensitive sources and methods by which it was obtained in the coming days.”

Graham responded to his critics later Tuesday, saying that the veracity of the Russian intelligence assessment was irrelevant.

“I’m not saying whether it’s true or not,” Graham told reporters. “I’m asking Democrats, do you give a damn whether the FBI investigated it, or do you just care only about investigating Trump?”

When pressed on why he released the information even though it was unverified, Graham called it “the ultimate double standard.”

“They took the whole damn country through hell for two and a half years — and is it far-fetched to believe that the Clinton campaign would do something like this after Christopher Steele?” Graham said referring to the author of an unverified dossier of claims about Trump’s connections to Russia.

A former senior intelligence official said it was “a surprising choice to release this information — that is not new and that seems unconfirmed — now and in an unclassified letter,” adding: “I don’t know what good purpose is served.”

It has long been known that the Russians were trying to stir up false narratives about Clinton through similar avenues.

Another former senior intelligence official said Brennan would frequently brief Obama on Russia’s actions regardless of whether it was about Trump or Clinton, adding that Brennan also wanted to “demonstrate the extent of the U.S. intelligence community’s ability to collect against Russia.”

In recent days, Trump’s allies have been dripping out several disclosures related to the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, and other information aimed at denigrating Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

Graham’s committee will hear from former FBI Director James Comey on Wednesday as part of that sweeping GOP-led probe. Graham also announced on Tuesday that former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe will testify before the panel next week. McCabe agreed to appear voluntarily, according to an aide. McCabe’s lawyer said earlier Tuesday that he was being denied access to his old files that he says are necessary for him to prepare for his testimony.

The president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., was among those on the right who spotlighted Tuesday’s disclosure, writing on Twitter: “The Russia hoax was Hillary’s plan, and the Obama-Biden White House was briefed on it.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Sunday, September 27, 2020

Lindsey Graham Says The Day Of Reckoning Is Coming - How Ever Did That Mueller Russian Probe Start?

Lindsey Graham says the day of reckoning is coming in the search for the origins of the Mueller Russian probe.

Well, this should be interesting because I bet they spin the bobby, again.

Federal Judge Refuses to Dismiss Peter Strzok and Lisa Page’s Lawsuits Against DOJ Over Release of Texts: ‘Pour Yourself Another Cup of Coffee…’


Meet the judge, Amy Berman Jackson.

Amy Jackson has over twenty-five years of experience in complex criminal and civil trials and appeals. A former federal prosecutor, she has represented individuals and corporations
Amy Berman Jackson

in white collar criminal matters including government contract, public corruption, health care, scientific fraud, and independent counsel investigations. Her practice has involved the Congressional and administrative proceedings that often flow from criminal cases, as well as corporate internal investigations. Her civil litigation practice has ranged from commercial and intellectual property disputes to individual tort actions, including civil actions brought on behalf of victims of crime. She has represented current and former government employees in matters involving government ethics rules and conflicts of interest.

Ms. Jackson began her practice as a law clerk to the Hon. Harrison L. Winter of the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. She served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia before entering private practice with Venable, Baetjer, Howard & Civiletti, where she became a partner.  She joined Trout & Richards in May of 2000.

Ms. Jackson was elected to serve as a D.C. Bar delegate to the ABA House of Delegates, and she has been active in ABA Litigation Section and D.C. Bar activities. Outside the office, she has worked as a member of the Parent Steering Committee of the Interdisciplinary Council on Developmental and Learning Disorders, and she served on the Board of the D.C. Rape Crisis Center and other community organizations.

Ms. Jackson has lectured on corporate criminal investigations and regularly teaches trial advocacy at Harvard Law School and the National Institute of Trial Advocacy. She has appeared as an expert legal commenter on NBC, MSNBC, Fox News, CNN and local television stations.

Ms. Jackson graduated cum laude from Harvard College in 1976 and received her J.D., cum laude, from Harvard Law School in 1979. She is a member of the bars of the District of Columbia and Virginia. She is admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th, 5th, and District of Columbia Circuits, and the U.S. District Courts for the District of Columbia, Maryland, and the Eastern District of Virginia.

The Interdisciplinary Council on Developmental and Learning Disorders Diagnostic Manual for Infants and Young Children – An Overview

*Note that there is a copyright of NIH funded research, I claim fair use because they are nothing but a bunch of Predictive Modeling Crappers resegregating tiny humans for the purposes of maximizing revenue in the industry of chattel ranching.

This is lab ratting at its best because they are diagnosing tiny humans for their database so they know what one's god given potential is.

They can predict human behavior in the womb, too!

It is always wise to have an indexing system when it comes to procuring and purveying tiny humans.

Objective

To describe the Interdisciplinary Council on Developmental and Learning Disorders Diagnostic Manual for Infants and Young Children (ICDL-DMIC) created by representatives of the Interdisciplinary Council on Developmental and Learning Disorders.

Method

A description of the rationale of the different sections of the ICDL-DMIC dealing with infants and young children, focusing on a classification system which integrates all components of development and functioning which have been traditionally addressed by different disciplines.

Results

A description of an in-depth approach to mental health diagnosis for infants and young children that goes beyond simply a description of symptoms and captures the qualities of the individual.

Conclusion

The ICDL-DMIC presents an innovative approach to the assessment and diagnosis of infants and young children and their families, featuring a multi-dimensional classification system which uniquely considers the emerging functional emotional developmental capacities of the infant and young child and the developmental pathway to symptom patterns.

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

https://www.icdl.com/research

The Board

An introduction to how they maximize revenues with tiny human lab rats, because there will be a need will be a greater need to generate targeted populations to test second generation antipsychotropics.

Praise the lord.


Oh, and it is also, always good to have a special kind of fealty with those you adjudicate, but, hey, what do I know?

I know Lindsey is going to tell us a tale, then the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed shall tell hers.

#maytheheaavensfall


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Saturday, August 15, 2020

Why Is Lindsey Graham So Giddy With The Guilty Plea Of Kevin Clinesmith?

Why are you so giddy, Lindsey? 

You know I know you know there are two other Horowitz IG Reports that have yet to see the light of day.

Actually, there is an entire slew of Horowitz IG Reports that have yet to see the light of day, being referred to DOJ, who then, deferred to the Districts, where, some of them have Grand Juries, but, hey, what do I know?

What about Michael Flynn?

He plead guilty, twice.

You do know Boo Boo Barr knows more than he is doing, right?



Hey, Lindesy,

How come Barb knows more about the Mueller investigation than you?

Hey, Lindsey,

How come Trey Gowdy is taking over for  Hannity?

Stinky Touch?

#maytheheavensfall

Mueller deputy Weissmann criticizes DOJ for bringing case against ex-FBI lawyer

Weissmann weighed in following reports Friday that Clinesmith intends to plead guilty to falsifying a document that was part of the FBI's justification for wiretapping former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page as part of the 2016 investigation into Russian election interference.

"Question for [U.S. Attorney General William Barr]: how are [former national security adviser Michael Flynn's] confessed lies to the FBI (repeated to the VP) not a crime, but Clinesmith changing an email (the full version of which he also sent to DOJ) is?" Weissmann tweeted, referencing the Justice Department's controversial move to withdraw its case against Flynn, who had already pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

Weissmann later asserted that there were "two systems of justice at play."

"Questions judge should ask before accepting Clinesmith guilty plea: What precisely is the falsity of the statement that Clinesmith made? What investigation was it material to?" he tweeted.

Questions judge should ask before accepting Clinesmith guilty plea:
What precisely is the falsity of the statement that Clinesmith made?
What investigation was it material to?
He gave DOJ accurate information for the Page FISA?
How does the Barr materiality std for Flynn apply?

— Andrew Weissmann (@AWeissmann_) August 14, 2020
The charge against Clinesmith marks the first criminal case arising from the probe led by U.S. Attorney John Durham. The Justice Department alleges that the former FBI attorney altered an email to say that Page was not a source for the CIA, even though Page had had a relationship with the agency.

Georgia state trooper charged with murder after fatally shooting man...
Clinesmith’s lawyers on Friday said this was unintentional.

“Kevin deeply regrets having altered the email. It was never his intent to mislead the court or his colleagues as he believed the information he relayed was accurate. But Kevin understands what he did was wrong and accepts responsibility,” his lawyers told The Washington Post.

The DOJ's probe into Clinesmith came at Barr's behest after a report from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz found “significant inaccuracies and omissions” in the FBI’s application to a court to obtain permission to monitor Page.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Friday, July 3, 2020

The Tale Of Lindsey Graham & His Gerrymandering DC Statehood - Stealin' The Children, Land & Votes

Come hither, my Dearies, for the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed shall tell the tale of why Lindsey Graham is so opposed to the DC statehood.

Once upon a time there was Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare, but before we called it child welfare, long before I called it the residuals of the peculiar institution, there was this thing called Dum Diversas which gave the church the authority to snatch the children, land and vote of the savages, strictly for the purposes of salvaging their souls, you know.

I would call it slavery, but that just dumbs down this tale.

Remember, the Queen has had her Parental Rights to the allodial title of the children's trust with the termination of her right to keep and bear the arms of the Royal Seal.

The Parental Right was transferred, or rather reinstated to the United States by the Apostolic Nuncio, but I do not know the technicalities of the procedure because I do not believe it has ever been done before.

Pretty darn sure there is no Midrash on this.

DC has been emancipated which is a state of existence under chattel law, as a juridic person.

Keep in mind that one must be of proper age (15 years) to be emancipated.

Could this be as simple of a concept as the United States being granted Parental Rights to the land, similar to the fungible concept of adoption of a child?

We are reclaiming our most precious treasures, the children's trust, in the best interest of posterity, because the children are attached to the land as immoveable chattel, but you can work around that if you do some fancy paperwork like quiet titles, land patents, land grants, but, hey, what do I know?



I know Lindsey Graham was being really cryptic in opposition to the DC statehood.

What if DC was under a land patent like United Methodist holds on the land of the Supreme Court?

So, I looked up DC UCCs.

Then I went to the database, which looks like it was set up with ACCESS or some ancient database system.


The District of Columbia has its own seal.

I touched one before.

It was on an official UCC1.

The entire process was $15.

I know how it is done.

That is how they run big game in land banks, using the Detroit Land Bank Authority as my working example.

I bet someone ran big game for land in DC.

I wonder if it was Lindsey.

We should ask him.

I found this was passed the exact same time the DC statehood initiative was launched.

It was stealin' the children, land & vote Act all rolled into one!

This is an Act of Gerrymandering, but it is ok, because SCOTUS said so.

Yes, that is correct, this new Temporary Amendment Act allows for Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare by using tiny humans as lab rats through their foreign research ops funded by the National Institute of Health, being neatly wrapped up in some more TARP 5.0 money they will probably call reparations because all the kids in need of medical research will be of the darker persuasion, all tied with a big ass bow of controlling the population, for, within about 10 years, under that tiny human asset forfeiture law called Foster Care, more readily recognized as wards of the State being transferred to a private, foreign guardianship organization, like Catholic Charities, or perhaps United Methodists, the tiny humans mature into voting age adults (18 years) where they will not have a clue that their voting rights were terminated through a matter of a simple transfer.

D.C. Law 23-124. Children's Hospital Research and Innovation Campus Phase 1 Temporary Amendment Act of 2020.
AN ACT

To amend, on a temporary basis, Chapter 10 of Title 47 of the District of Columbia Official Code to provide a real property tax exemption to the properties designated as Lots 824 and 826, 2950, and to require that development of the property be in compliance with the Small and Certified Business Enterprise Development and Assistance Act of 2005 and the First Source Employment Agreement Act of 1984.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, That this act may be cited as the "Children's Hospital Research and Innovation Campus Phase 1 Temporary Amendment Act of 2020".

Note § 47-1099.09
Sec. 2. Chapter 10 of Title 47 of the District of Columbia Official Code is amended by adding a new section 47-1099.09 to read as follows:

"Sec. 47-1099.09. Children's Hospital real property tax exemption.

"(a) Only that portion of real property currently described for assessment and taxation purposes as Square 2950, Lot 808, which is to be subdivided in part into Square 2950, Lots 824 and 826, effective for tax year 2020, and the buildings located thereon ("Property"), owned by Children's National at Walter Reed, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Children's Hospital, a District of Columbia nonprofit corporation, shall remain exempt from real property taxation to the extent the Property is validly exempt as of the day before the date any lease is granted to certain business entities known as Building 52/53 NMTC Borrower, LLC, and Building 54 NMTC Borrower, LLC (controlled directly or indirectly by Children's Hospital), and for the period during which the Property is eligible to receive federal tax benefits, including New Markets Tax Credits under 26 U.S.C. § 45D, Opportunity Zone tax benefits under 26 U.S.C. § 1400Z-1, et seq., or Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits under 26 U.S.C. § 47; provided, that the Property shall be subject to subsection (c) of this section and §§ 47-1007 and 47-1009. The Property shall be subject to the provisions of §§ 47-1005, 47-1007 and 47-1009 where a sublease or lease is made to another entity (other than the certain business entities referenced in this subsection) that would not qualify for exemption under § 47-1002 if it were both the owner and user of the property.

No photo description available.
Lot 824
https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_sc/41093

https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_dc/EXTUID_2916396
Lindsey is from South Carolina, too.

"(b) Any transfer, assignment, or other disposition of all or any portion of the Property, including an assignment of leasehold interest in the Property or a sublease of the Property, between Children's National at Walter Reed, LLC, and Children's Hospital, any business entity controlled directly or indirectly by Children's Hospital, or a security interest instrument, including a deed of trust, secured by the Property or any interest therein, shall be exempt from the tax imposed by §§ 42-1103 and 47-903.).

No photo description available.
Lot 826

"(c) Any contract that Children's Hospital, or a subsidiary of Children's Hospital, enters into for architectural design services, construction services, or materials needed for the development, remodel, or construction of Phase II of the Children's National Research & Innovation Campus on the Property is subject to the contracting and procurement requirements under the Small and Certified Business Enterprise Development and Assistance Act of 2005, effective October 20, 2005 (D.C. Law 16-33; D.C. Official Code § 2-218.01 et seq.), and the employment and job creation requirements under the First Source Employment Agreement Act of 1984, effective June 29, 1984 (D.C. Law 5-93; D.C. Official Code § 2-219.01 et seq.).".

To my uncanny ability to have never experienced an episode of chagrin (just a fancy way of me being humble and not doing the "I told you so" dance), I found a land bank, and you know what happens when I find a land bank?

I experience bouts of Post Traumatic Fraud Disorders.....
Wesley Housing Development Corporation profile - coUrbanize
https://wesleyhousing.org/our-history/
The establishment of the nonprofit organization resulted from the 1974 Urban Consultation sponsored by the United Methodist Church in Northern Virginia. Ms. Virginia Peters chaired the Affordable Housing Task Force and Wesley Housing Development Corporation (WHDC) was born.
The organization was little more than a cardboard box of files in the back of Peters’ car....or was it Peter's Pence?

https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_dc/EXTUID_4130473

https://www.allagesreadtogether.org/about-us/leadership/
Then, I found its tiny human trust fund with a really fancy board who knows lots about financing to teach people to read everything but the financial fraud schemes they are about to launch for more Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare.






Sec. 3. Fiscal impact statement.

The Council adopts the fiscal impact statement of the Budget Director as the fiscal impact statement required by section 4a of the General Legislative Procedures Act of 1975, approved October 16, 2006 (120 Stat. 2038; D.C. Official Code § 1-301.47a).

Sec. 4. Effective date.

(a) This act shall take effect following approval by the Mayor (or in the event of veto by the Mayor, action by the Council to override the veto), a 30-day period of congressional review as provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Official Code § 1-206.02(c)(1)), and publication in the District of Columbia Register.

(b) This act shall expire after 225 days of its having taken effect.

And that ends the tale of Lindsey & his gerrymandering quest to stop DC Statehood.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Thursday, October 17, 2019

Sunday, August 18, 2019

Cocktails & Popcorn: Lindsey Graham Is Clueless On SCOTUS & Its Trafficking Tiny Humans Issues

Poor Lindsey!

He is absolutely clueless on what is going on.

This is not about Trump.

This is about Democrats or Republicans.

This is about Trafficking Tiny Humans.

How are you going to enhance background checks on guns when child welfare records are sealed, due to all that trafficking tiny humans, stuff, you know, like what John Roberts did.

SCOTUS has a long and illustrious history of promulgating the trafficking of tiny humans.

But Lindsey is right about one thing and that is that this is about guns, which is really about parental rights, or rather corporate parental rights.

This is about the Magnitsky and Detroit.


Oh, and he is clueless about Rashida and Ilhan, the #MeToo Girls, because Lindsey will not #sayhisname.


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Monday, May 13, 2019

Cocktails & Popcorn: The Legal Geniuses Thicken The Plot - Barr Welcomes Durham Back To The War Crimes Fun

Oh, this is going to be champagne buffet-style worthy because he never went away.

DOJ is coming from all directions, even from the pension side.

We already know what he is going to find, because he already found it, which is why the real show is going to be the art of the inquiry, because you already know there are going to be #coloredrevolutions and #clownfests, for they have no clue of what is coming....but hey, what do I know?

I know why Trump is obstructing justice by keeping that IG Report in his back pocket.

#sayhisname

Barr Assigns U.S. Attorney in Connecticut to Review Origins of Russia Inquiry


John H. Durham.jpg
John H. Durham
"Grrrrrr....ok, but this is the last time,
 so let's finally get it right."
WASHINGTON — Attorney General William P. Barr has assigned the top federal prosecutor in Connecticut to examine the origins of the Russia investigation, according to two people familiar with the matter, a move that President Trump has long called for but that could anger law enforcement officials who insist that scrutiny of the Trump campaign was lawful.

John H. Durham, the United States attorney in Connecticut, has a history of serving as a special prosecutor investigating potential wrongdoing among national security officials, including the F.B.I.’s ties to a crime boss in Boston and accusations of C.I.A. abuses of detainees.

His inquiry is the third known investigation focused on the opening of an F.B.I. counterintelligence investigation during the 2016 presidential campaign into possible ties between Russia’s election interference and Trump associates.

The department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is separately examining investigators’ use of wiretap applications and informants and whether any political bias against Mr. Trump influenced investigative decisions. And John W. Huber, the United States attorney in Utah, has been reviewing aspects of the Russia investigation. His findings have not been announced.

Additionally on Capitol Hill, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said he, too, intends to review aspects of law enforcement’s work in the coming months. And Republicans conducted their own inquiries when they controlled the House, including publicizing details of the F.B.I.’s wiretap use.

Thomas Carson, a spokesman for Mr. Durham’s office, declined to comment, as did a spokeswoman for the Justice Department. “I do have people in the department helping me review the activities over the summer of 2016,” Mr. Barr said in congressional testimony on May 1, without elaborating.

Mr. Durham, who was nominated by Mr. Trump in 2017 and has been a Justice Department lawyer since 1982, has conducted special investigations under administrations of both parties. Attorney General Janet Reno asked Mr. Durham in 1999 to investigate the F.B.I.’s handling of a notorious informant: the organized crime leader James (Whitey) Bulger.

In 2008, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey assigned Mr. Durham to investigate the C.I.A.’s destruction of videotapes in 2005 showing the torture of terrorism suspects. A year later, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. expanded Mr. Durham’s mandate to also examine whether the agency broke any laws in its abuses of detainees in its custody.

Mr. Barr has signaled his concerns about the Russia investigation during congressional testimony, particularly the surveillance of Trump associates. “I think spying did occur,” he said. “The question is whether it was adequately predicated. And I’m not suggesting that it wasn’t adequately predicated. But I need to explore that.”

His use of the term “spying” to describe court-authorized surveillance aimed at understanding a foreign government’s interference in the election touched off criticism that he was echoing politically charged accusations by Mr. Trump and his Republican allies that the F.B.I. unfairly targeted the Trump campaign.

Last week, the F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray, defended the bureau, saying he was unaware of any illegal surveillance and refused to call agents’ work “spying.” Former F.B.I. and Justice Department officials have defended the genesis of the investigation, saying it was properly predicated.

Yet Mr. Durham’s role — essentially giving him a special assignment but no special powers — also appeared aimed at sidestepping the rare appointment of another special counsel like Robert S. Mueller III, a role that allows greater day-to-day independence.

Mr. Trump and House Republicans have long pushed senior Justice Department officials to appoint one to investigate the president’s perceived political enemies and why Mr. Trump’s associates were under surveillance.

Mr. Trump’s calls to investigate the investigators have grown after the findings from Mr. Mueller were revealed last month. Mr. Mueller’s investigators cited “insufficient evidence” to determine that the president or his advisers engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Russia.

The Mueller report reaffirmed that the F.B.I. opened its investigation based on legitimate factors, including revelations that a Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, had told a diplomat from Australia, a close American ally, that he was informed that the Russians had stolen Democratic emails.

“It would have been highly, highly inappropriate for us not to pursue it — and pursue it aggressively,” James Baker, who was the F.B.I.’s general counsel in 2016, said in an interview on Friday

As part of the early Russia inquiry, the F.B.I. investigated four Trump associates: Mr. Papadopoulos; Paul Manafort, the Trump campaign chairman; Michael T. Flynn, the president’s first national security adviser; and Carter Page, another campaign foreign policy adviser.

Mr. Flynn and Mr. Papadopoulos later pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. as part of the inquiry; Mr. Manafort was also convicted of tax fraud and other charges brought by the special counsel, who took over the investigation in May 2017, and pleaded guilty to conspiracy.

F.B.I. agents and federal prosecutors also obtained approval from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Mr. Page after he left the campaign. Mr. Trump’s allies have pointed to the warrant as major evidence that law enforcement officials were abusing their authority, but the investigation was opened based on separate information and the warrant was one small aspect in a sprawling inquiry that grew to include more than 2,800 subpoenas, nearly 500 search warrants and about 500 witness interviews.

Law enforcement officials have also drawn intense criticism for using an informant — a typical investigative step — to secretly report on Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos after they left the campaign and for relying on Democrat-funded opposition research compiled into a dossier by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer who was also an F.B.I. informant.

Investigators cited the dossier in a lengthy footnote in its application for permission to wiretap Mr. Page, alerting the court that the person who commissioned Mr. Steele’s research was “likely looking for information to discredit” the Trump campaign.

The inspector general is said to be examining whether law enforcement officials intentionally misled the intelligence court, which also approved three renewals of the warrant. The last application in June 2017 was signed by Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, who defended the decision last month in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Horowitz is also said to be scrutinizing how the F.B.I. handled Mr. Steele and another informant, Stefan A. Halper, an American academic who taught in Britain. Agents asked Mr. Halper to determine whether Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos were in contact with Russians. Mr. Barr has said the inspector general could finish his inquiry in May or June.

Mr. Durham is also investigating whether Mr. Baker made unauthorized disclosures to the news media, according to two House Republicans closely allied with Mr. Trump, Representatives Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina, who disclosed in a letter to Mr. Durham in January that they had learned of that inquiry.

While they implied that it was related to the Russia investigation, another witness in Mr. Durham’s inquiry into Mr. Baker, Robert Litt, the former general counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, came forward to say that he had been interviewed and that the investigation has nothing to do with Russia. Mr. Baker said last week that he was confident he had done nothing wrong and would be exonerated.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Sunday, May 5, 2019

Cocktails & Popcorn: Mueller "Might" Meet Judiciary Jolly Jerry On May 15th

Image result for mueller
Bob preparing for his tentative House Judiciary hearing
This is going to be a major global event because Judiciary is going to put on a #clownfest in a full-blown #coloredrevolution like has never before been witnessed in the annals of history.

See, the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) are trying really, really hard to find out what is going on.

I know.

They are reaching out to me.

It is fun to watch them try and reach out to me without having to #sayhisname.

Judiciary does not want to #sayhisname.

Media does not want to #sayhisname.

Republicans and Democrats do not want to #sayhisname.

So, the question at hand is, "Will Bob #sayhisname?

I think that is why Bob's meeting with Jolly Jerry is tentative, you know, polishing the last few brass nails in legal filings, but hey, what do I know?

I know someone is going to #sayhisname but I just do not know who shall have the honors because his birthday is on the 16th.

Happy Birthday, Sweetie!


#perkinscoiesucks

MUELLER AGREES TO ‘TENTATIVE’ DATE TO TESTIFY BEFORE HOUSE JUDICIARY, DEMOCRAT SAYS

Special counsel Robert Mueller has set a “tentative” date of May 15 to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, Democratic Rhode Island Rep. David Cicilline told “Fox News Sunday.”

Democrats have ramped up calls for Mueller to testify to Congress in the wake of Attorney General William Barr’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 1 about his interactions with the special counsel’s office regarding the release of the Russia report.

Mueller, a former FBI director, was unable to establish that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to influence the 2016 election. He declined to make a decision on whether President Donald Trump should be charged with obstructing the investigation. That left the decision up to Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who decided against pursuing an obstruction case.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, offered Mueller a chance Thursday to testify before that panel if he feels the need to correct any statements made by Barr.
Mueller sent Barr a letter on March 27 raising concerns about a four-page memo that Barr sent Congress summarizing the main conclusions of the special counsel’s probe. Mueller claimed that Barr’s letter lacked “context” and had led to misinterpretations in the press.

(RELATED: Mueller Expressed Concern To Barr Over Letter To Congress)

Barr said that he spoke with Mueller by phone on March 28 and that Mueller said he did not believe Barr’s congressional letter had any inaccuracies. Instead, according to Barr, Mueller expressed concerns about how the press was reporting on the letter.

Barr said he has no qualms with Mueller testifying before Congress.
A spokesman for Mueller did not respond to a request for comment Sunday.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©