Kofi Bonner has been named CEO of Bedrock, the company announced Wednesday. The former Cleveland Browns chief administrative officer and California developer replaces Matt Cullen, who left Dan Gilbert's Detroit-based real estate development company last month to work on two Ohio casinos.
Bonner starts Sept. 21. Bedrock said that Bonner has "extensive experience in leading complex development projects in metropolitan areas."
Kofi Bonner is the new CEO of Bedrock.
As co-chief operating officer for Irvine, California- based FivePoint Holdings, Bonner led the development of projects including San Francisco Shipyard and Candlestick Communities.
“I look forward to building on the accomplishments of Mr. Gilbert and the talented team at Bedrock by advancing the transformational development program, partnering with the community to deliver positive social outcomes and working with local businesses to further the incredible momentum that Detroit and Cleveland have seen over the last decade," Bonner said in a statement.
Bonner was the executive vice president and chief administrative officer of the Cleveland Browns for seven years where he oversaw business operations and the development of the Cleveland Browns Stadium, according to Bedrock.
His other past experience includes roles as an affordable housing developer for Oakland Community Housing Inc.; redevelopment director for Emeryville, California; director of community and economic development and interim city manager of Oakland; and chief economic advisor to Willie Brown, then Mayor of San Francisco.
“With his extensive experience leading landmark projects on the West Coast and the years he spent in Cleveland with the Browns, Kofi Bonner is the right leader to build on Bedrock’s nearly 10 years of transformational development work,” said Bill Emerson, Bedrock Vice Chairman. “Bedrock has a really exciting future as momentum builds at the Hudson’s Site, Book Tower and dozens of other projects, and I look forward to partnering with Kofi to ensure they have a positive and lasting impact on the communities where we serve.”
Bill Emerson, the acting CEO, will retain his role as vice chairman of both Bedrock and Rock Holdings Inc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The U.S. Navy is drastically understating the severity of the ongoing environmental scandal at its former shipyard in San Francisco’s Hunters Point neighborhood, an official with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency declared in newly released documents.
The biggest redevelopment project in San Francisco since the 1906 earthquake, with 12,000 planned housing units as well as millions of square feet of office and retail space, transformation of the former warship repair base and nuclear weapons testing laboratory—an EPA Superfund site contaminated with industrial and radioactive pollution—has largely been on hold since 2016, when the EPA halted land transfers while a fraud scandal could be unraveled.
Workers with Tetra Tech, a Pasadena-based firm with a history of winning government contracts, first came forward beginning in 2012 with allegations that the cleanup had been faked on the orders of higher-ups at the company.
A review of Tetra Tech’s data, conducted last year by other contractors hired by the U.S. Navy and first published by Curbed SF, found that as much as 49 percent of the company’s work had signs of manipulation or outright falsification and could not be trusted.
However, an independent review by the EPA found that the Navy dramatically understated the scope of the problem. According to the EPA, as much as 97 percent of the cleanup data is unreliable and must be retested, John Chestnutt, manager of the EPA’s local Superfund Division, wrote in a December 27 letter.
“The data analyzed demonstrate a widespread pattern of practices that appear to show deliberate falsification, failure to perform the work in a manner required to ensure [cleanup] requirements were met, or both,” Chestnutt wrote.
Chestnutt’s letter was obtained and published Monday by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), an advocacy group based in the Washington, D.C., area.
The EPA’s current review only covered about 40 percent of the base. However, the EPA’s findings echo criticism of the Navy’s handling of the scandal from environmental watchdog groups and neighborhood advocates.
Tetra Tech first admitted to providing false soil samples in 2014, but was allowed to continue working after blaming the problem on low-level employees and submitting other workers to “ethics training,” excuses and solutions the Navy appeared ready to accept until more whistleblowers came forward alleging more widespread and systemic fraud—allegations that have now been sustained.
“What makes these findings so remarkable is that the Navy was on notice for years that it had a major data meltdown on its hands yet is still trying to cook the books,” said Jeff Ruch, PEER’s executive director. “The Navy created an environmental nightmare on this stretch of the San Francisco Bay but instead of cleaning it up has spent the past several years compounding it.”
The Navy created an environmental nightmare on this stretch of the San Francisco Bay but instead of cleaning it up has spent the past several years compounding it.
Derek Robinson, the Navy’s program manager for Hunters Point, did not respond to an email or a telephone message seeking comment.
Michele Huitric, a spokesperson at the local branch of the EPA, did not offer comment to Curbed SF. In a statement issued to the San Francisco Examiner Monday, Huitric said that the EPA, which is responsible for overseeing the Navy’s cleanup of the shipyard, is “pleased” that the Navy will be “resampling the impacted parcels.”
The Navy is supposed to begin retesting contaminated shipyard land sometime this summer. No timeline or start date for that work has been publicly released.
According to Ruch, the shipyard scandal is “unfolding into the biggest case of eco-fraud in U.S. history.” Only the Volkswagen emissions scandal, in which the automaker sold 500,000 cars designed to cheat the Clean Air Act, can compare, Ruch told Curbed SF.
The shipyard is divided into alphanumeric parcels. In a review of the work on Parcel B, the Navy found issues with 15 percent of the data collected. On Parcel G, the Navy recommended 49 percent of the data be resampled.
But according to a “technical team including national experts in health physics, geology, and statistics” assembled by the EPA, 90 percent of the data on Parcel B is untrustworthy. On Parcel G, 97 percent of the data is “suspect,” according to the EPA.
Tetra Tech workers falsified data in a variety of ways. These include pulling soil samples from an area known to be clean—the site of a former movie theater—and passing them off as soil from areas known to be dirty; running scanners too quickly to detect contamination; faking chain-of-custody records; and faking results at on-site testing laboratories.
Together, those two parcels comprise about 40 percent of the base’s land area. According to plans filed by FivePoint, the developer of the SF Shipyard, those parcels are the planned future homes for the area’s densest residential development and the core of a retail area.
FivePoint is closely associated with Miami-based homebuilding giant Lennar Urban, which in turn has close ties to the local Democratic Party power structure in San Francisco.
The development behemoth’s regional vice president, Kofi Bonner, is a former aide to Willie Brown, San Francisco’s former mayor. And Brown is a principal in Golden Gate Global, an investment fund that’s luring overseas investors to sink capital in the shipyard project in exchange for visas.
California’s two U.S. senators are part of the same San Francisco-based power circle: former state attorney general Kamala Harris is a Brown associate who served as city district attorney. And senior U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein is a former San Francisco mayor.
Yet for some inexplicable reason, “we’re not seeing California’s or even San Francisco’s delegation up in arms about this,” PEER’s Ruch noted. “San Francisco’s members of Congress are very well placed. They could enact revenge. They could force hearings.”
“You would think at the head of the line of aggrieved parties would be the U.S. Navy, but they don’t appear to be aggrieved,” he added. “There are no consequences.”
In a statement emailed to Curbed SF, Taylor Griffin, a spokesperson for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who represents most of San Francisco in Congress, said Pelosi and her staff “continue to closely monitor” the situation, and has been in “close touch” with both the EPA and Navy.
“Public health and safety remains our top concern, while working to ensure the timely delivery of long-awaited housing and jobs when the cleanup is completed,” Griffin wrote.
Ironically, under embattled EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, cleaning Superfund sites has been a stated priority—and a source of rare praise for the Trump Administration from environmental advocates, who have credited Pruitt with pushing private companies to perform “aggressive, accelerated cleanups,” as the Washington Post reported in January.
[M]uch of the $1 billion in taxpayer money spent on cleaning up the shipyard has gone to waste.
Meanwhile, the fraud means that much of the $1 billion in taxpayer money spent on cleaning up the shipyard has gone to waste—and Tetra Tech, the contractor responsible for the faked data, has largely escaped punishment.
The company, which posted profits in excess of $350 million last year, managed to escape paying a $7,000 fine levied on it by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on appeal.
Tetra Tech is also a subcontractor on a $1.4 billion work arrangement with the Department of Energy to clean up pollution at Los Alamos in New Mexico—the historic home of the Manhattan Project that developed the atomic bomb (which was shipped in secret to Hunters Point, where it was loaded onto a ship for delivery to the Pacific). Critiques of that arrangement have fallen on deaf ears at the Department of Energy, which stated that Tetra Tech would remain involved.
Tetra Tech has yet to comment publicly on the findings. However, the company appears to be preparing for a leadership shift—and to compensate departing leaders.
According to SEC filings, in March, company shareholders approved a severance plan for Tetra Tech executives. For the next two years, executives “terminated by the company without ‘cause’” are eligible for “lump sum cash severance payments,” including salary, bonuses, and “full vesting of outstanding unvested stock options.”
Then, since only their selectively chosen audience received the accidentally released presser on the investment, stock prices soared from $2.00 a share to $60.00 a share, overnight.
But, during the maximum price peak, some of the top executives and their in-laws, in the midst of the stock price climax, ejaculates its shares either by sale or tax write off to a local synagogue.
Then, word got out and the stock price dropped back to $9.00 a share and now there is an FEC investigation.
The US DFC tweeted that ‘recent allegations of wrongdoing raise serious concerns’
An agreement between the US government and Kodak to develop generic drug ingredients appears to be on hold, after the US International Development Finance Corporation tweeted that “recent allegations of wrongdoing raise serious concerns.”
“We will not proceed any further unless these allegations are cleared,” the agency tweeted, without specifying what the allegations were.
On July 28, we signed a Letter of Interest with Eastman Kodak. Recent allegations of wrongdoing raise serious concerns. We will not proceed any further unless these allegations are cleared.
Kodak said Friday it was conducting an internal review of recent activity by the company in connection with a $765 million loan it would receive under the Defense Production Act to produce pharmaceuticals. The company’s stock price surged in the days before the deal was announced, CBS News reported, leading Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) to call for the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate whether there were any instances of insider trading.
Kodak, best known for its camera and film equipment, said it planned to create a new business arm called Kodak Pharmaceuticals to make ingredients that have “lapsed into chronic national shortage.” Kodak CEO Jim Continenza told The Wall Street Journal that he expected pharmaceuticals to become 30 to 40 percent of the company’s business. The company’s plans included production of ingredients for drugs such as hydroxychloroquine, according to The Wall Street Journal. President Trump has touted hydroxychloroquine as a possible treatment for COVID-19, despite evidence that the anti-malaria drug has been ineffective against the virus.
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), chair of the House Financial Services Committee and other Democrats sent a letter to DFC head Adam Boehler August 4th asking why the agency was supporting a loan for Kodak, “an organization that was on the brink of failure in 2012 and was unsuccessful in its previous foray into pharmaceutical manufacturing, in its efforts to develop the capacity to produce up to 25 percent of domestic pharmaceutical components.” The committee is asking to see all communications concerning the loan.
In light of the #coloredrevolution in its toppling of statutes honoring this nation's foundation, for representing the residuals of the peculiar institution, U.S. House Judiciary Committee Member, Louie Gohmert introduces a House Resolution to dismember the Democratic Party, and its other cohorts.
I know that if people are going to take down statutes representing the U.S. system of chattel law (a.k.a. slavery), well, then I demand taking down all legal decisions Pre-Emancipation Proclamation.
"Instead of canceling our culture and history, it’s time to #CancelDemocrats," Rep. Gohmert stated.
WASHINGTON D.C., DC — U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, of Tyler, is calling on the U.S. House of Representatives to ban Democrats and any "organization or political party that ever publicly supported slavery or the Confederate States of America.
The East Texas representative released the following statement through an opinion piece on Breitbart News on Thursday:
"Many on the left and their willing accomplices in the media would tell you otherwise, yet a cursory examination of our nation’s factual history and records proves the riots and chaos that have swept across our country in recent months stand as a devastating reminder of the racist policies and values held by the Democratic Party throughout much of its history.
Because of this, I introduced a privileged resolution in the House calling upon Congress to acknowledge the indecorous history of the Democratic Party. I asked that the Speaker of the House be instructed to ban any political organization or political party that ever publicly supported slavery or the Confederate States of America.
Since George Floyd’s tragic killing on May 25, the left which includes their “mainstream” Democrats, have resurrected their push to rid our nation of any entities, symbols, or reminders of the repugnant aspects of America’s past. Statues of American leaders have been torn down, defaced, and destroyed regardless of whether they were a party to improprieties or fought against them. The liberal mob is out in full force demanding that schools, sports teams, music artists, military installations, and even food products change their names if they have the slightest reference to any persons or events deemed unacceptable and offensive to the groupthink of the Marxist left.
Democrats argue that they are compelled to take these extreme actions because of “systemic racism” in America, all while conveniently pinning blame on Republicans and conservatives. This revisionist history tells a story that simply has no basis in historical fact. Their efforts are a veiled attempt to erase the Democratic Party’s own culpability, which for decades, if not centuries, was the ardent political advocate for discrimination and racism in our nation. For instance, when Republicans overwhelmingly supported the 14th and 15th Amendments, which recognized former slaves as citizens and granted them, as citizens, the right to vote, every single Democrat in Congress voted against their passage and, at times, blocked passage to the shame of the good done in our country’s history. Further, as Bruce Bartlett points out in his book, Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party’s Buried Past, for a century after Reconstruction, “The Jim Crow laws were enacted by Democrat legislatures and signed into law by Democrat governors. It could not have been otherwise, since there were virtually no Republicans in positions of authority in state governments in the South after the end of Reconstruction in 1877.” However, Democrats’ support for slavery and its subsequent support for institutionalized racism did not end in the 1800s. Elected in 1912, Democratic President Woodrow Wilson enacted policies to segregate the federal government. In a letter to editor Howard Bridgman who criticized President Wilson in his publication for his support of segregation, Democrat Wilson voiced support for his administration’s enactment of segregationist policies, stating, “I do approve of the segregation that is being attempted in several of the departments.” He went on to argue that segregation was “distinctly to the advantage” of blacks, which is, of course, an absurd claim steeped in blatant racism. When his administration began requiring that photographs be submitted with each employment application, which was used to discriminate against minority applicants, President Wilson, to whom many current Democrats either point with pride or say nothing, did nothing.
Nearly fifty years later, when Republicans steadfastly supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Democrats filibustered the bill for 75 calendar days. Republicans in Congress expended great effort to protect the basic rights promised to minorities in America by our nation’s founders. During his 14-hour speech filibustering the Civil Rights Act, Democratic Senator Robert Byrd (a known KKK recruiter) proclaimed, “Men are not created equal today, and they were not created equal in 1776. Men and races of men differ in appearance, ways, physical power, mental capacity, creativity, and vision.” This morally bankrupt view is what Democrats held for a majority of the Party’s history. That historically Democrat view is a total corruption of the Biblical view the Republican Party held, that although we may look different, we are absolutely equal in the view of our “Creator,” or “the Almighty” as Republican President Lincoln liked to say. On June 18th of this year, Speaker Nancy Pelosi ordered the removal of portraits from the Capitol building honoring four previous Speakers of the House—all of whom were Democrats. That was a good start on the job that she should now finish if she is going to avoid blatant hypocrisy.
Throughout America’s history, Republicans have fought to repeal Jim Crow laws, desegregate schools, and promote racial equality in America. In recent years, Republicans, including President Trump, have continued this fight by working valiantly to lift Americans of all races out of poverty through pro-growth economic policies that have done more to help the plight of the impoverished than any administration. Prior to the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, unemployment rates for minorities were at record lows with employment at record highs.
Efforts by Democrats to destroy all public traces of their own history of supporting slavery, the Confederacy, and segregation in an attempt to shift blame onto Republicans must no longer go unchallenged. It is time for Democrats to play by their own rules, and accept the standards they have forced onto everyone else. They must divest themselves of their name that has denied so many the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Their recent actions demand nothing less. Instead of canceling our culture and history, it’s time to #CancelDemocrats."
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF BUST OF ROGER BROOKE TANEY WITH BUST OF THURGOOD MARSHALL.
(a) Findings.—Congress finds the following:
(1) While sitting in the United States Capitol, the Supreme Court issued the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford decision on March 6, 1857. Written by Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney, whose bust sits inside the entrance to the Old Supreme Court Chamber in the United States Capitol, this opinion declared that African Americans were not citizens of the United States and could not sue in Federal courts. This decision further declared that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories.
(2) Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney’s authorship of Dred Scott v. Sandford, the effects of which would only be overturned years later by the ratification of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, renders a bust of his likeness unsuitable for the honor of display to the many visitors to the United States Capitol.
(3) As Frederick Douglass said of this decision in May 1857, “This infamous decision of the Slaveholding wing of the Supreme Court maintains that slaves are within the contemplation of the Constitution of the United States, property; that slaves are property in the same sense that horses, sheep, and swine are property; that the old doctrine that slavery is a creature of local law is false; that the right of the slaveholder to his slave does not depend upon the local law, but is secured wherever the Constitution of the United States extends; that Congress has no right to prohibit slavery anywhere; that slavery may go in safety anywhere under the star-spangled banner; that colored persons of African descent have no rights that white men are bound to respect; that colored men of African descent are not and cannot be citizens of the United States.”.
(4) While the removal of Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney’s bust from the United States Capitol does not relieve the Congress of the historical wrongs it committed to protect the institution of slavery, it expresses Congress’s recognition of one of the most notorious wrongs to have ever taken place in one of its rooms, that of Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney’s Dred Scott v. Sandford decision.
(b) Removal Of Bust Of Roger Brooke Taney.—Not later than 45 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Joint Committee on the Library shall remove the bust of Roger Brooke Taney in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the United States Capitol.
(c) Replacement With Bust Of Thurgood Marshall.—
(1) OBTAINING BUST.—Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Joint Committee on the Library shall enter into an agreement to obtain a bust of Thurgood Marshall, under such terms and conditions as the Joint Committee considers appropriate consistent with applicable law.
(2) PLACEMENT.—The Joint Committee on the Library shall place the bust obtained under paragraph (1) in the location in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the United States Capitol where the bust of Roger Brooke Taney was located prior to removal by the Architect of the Capitol under subsection (b).
SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF CERTAIN STATUES AND BUST.
(a) Removal.—Not later than 45 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Joint Committee on the Library shall remove the statue of Charles Brantley Aycock, the statue of John Caldwell Calhoun, the statue of James Paul Clarke, and the bust of John Cabell Breckinridge from any area of the United States Capitol which is accessible to the public.
(b) Storage Of Statues.—The Architect of the Capitol shall keep any statue and bust removed under subsection (a) in storage until the Architect and the State which provided the statue or bust arrange for the return of the statue or bust to the State.
SEC. 3. REQUIREMENTS AND REMOVAL PROCEDURES FOR STATUES IN NATIONAL STATUARY HALL.
(a) Requirements.—Section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 2131) is amended by inserting “(other than persons who served as an officer or voluntarily with the Confederate States of America or of the military forces or government of a State while the State was in rebellion against the United States)” after “military services”.
(b) Statue Removal Procedures.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—
(A) IDENTIFICATION BY ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL.—The Architect of the Capitol shall identify all statues on display in the United States Capitol that do not meet the requirements of section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 2131), as amended by subsection (a); and
(B) REMOVAL BY JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE LIBRARY.—The Joint Committee on the Library shall arrange for the removal of each statue identified by the Architect of the Capitol under subparagraph (B) from the Capitol by not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
(2) REMOVAL AND RETURN OF STATUES.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (C), the Architect of the Capitol shall arrange to transfer and deliver any statue that is removed under this subsection to the Smithsonian Institution.
(B) STORAGE OR DISPLAY OF STATUES.—The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution shall follow the policies and procedures of the Smithsonian Institution, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, regarding the storage and display of any statue transferred under subparagraph (A).
(C) STATE REQUESTS.—A statue provided for display by a State that is removed under this subsection shall be returned to the State, and the ownership of the statue transferred to the State, if the State so requests and agrees to pay any costs related to the transportation of the statue to the State.
(3) REPLACEMENT OF STATUES.—A State that has a statue removed under this subsection shall be able to replace such statue in accordance with the requirements and procedures of section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 2131) and section 311 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001 (2 U.S.C. 2132).
(4) AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATIONS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—There are appropriated for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2021, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $5,000,000 to carry out this section, including the costs related to the removal, transfer, security, storage, and display of the statues described in paragraph (1)(A), of which—
(i) $2,000,000 shall be made available to the Architect of the Capitol; and
(ii) $3,000,000 shall be made available to the Smithsonian Institution.
(B) AVAILABILITY.—Amounts appropriated under subparagraph (A) shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
In addition to the amounts appropriated under section 3(b)(4), there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act, and any amounts so appropriated shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 5. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS.
The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the latest statement titled “Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation” for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.
Passed the House of Representatives July 22, 2020.
Attest:
Clerk.
116th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 7573
AN ACT
To direct the Joint Committee on the Library to replace the bust of Roger Brooke Taney in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the United States Capitol with a bust of Thurgood Marshall to be obtained by the Joint Committee on the Library and to remove certain statues from areas of the United States Capitol which are accessible to the public, to remove all statues of individuals who voluntarily served the Confederate States of America from display in the United States Capitol, and for other purposes.
I know Bill Clinton is already not very pleased with me.
Chairman Nadler Statement for the Markup of H.R. 2678, the No President is Above the Law Act
Washington, D.C. –Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) delivered the following opening remarks, as prepared, during the markup of H.R. 2678, the No President is Above the Law Act:
"The two bills we are considering today center around the same basic theme: presidential accountability. When the nation’s founders wrote the Constitution, after having just fought a war against a tyrant, they stood fast to a key principle—that the Executive must not be a king and must, instead, be accountable to Congress, to the people, and ultimately, to the rule of law.
"H.R. 2678, the 'No President is Above the Law Act,' reaffirms that important principle.
"This legislation, which I introduced along with Representatives Swalwell and Deutch, would suspend the statute of limitations for any federal offense committed by a sitting president, whether it was committed before or during the president’s term of office.
"This bill is necessary in order to close a dangerous loophole in the law created by Department of Justice policy—most recently embodied in a legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel—which holds that a president may not be criminally prosecuted during his or her term in office.
"Under current law, throughout the entire period that a president is presumed by some to be immune from prosecution, the statute of limitations continues to run on any offenses they may have committed.
"Since most federal criminal offenses carry a five-year statute of limitations, a president who is not prosecuted while in office for a crime they may have committed could end up evading justice altogether if the statute of limitations runs out before their term is over, particularly if they are elected to a second term.
"Allowing complete immunity from criminal prosecution merely because of the office a person holds would make a mockery of the rule of law.
"Statutes of limitations are an important element of criminal law. As a general matter, they provide a necessary balance between protecting defendants from delay and allowing prosecutors adequate time to investigate and charge cases. They ensure that the possibility of a criminal prosecution does not hang over a defendant’s head forever and they encourage prosecutors to bring charges while evidence is fresh.
"But the law has also long recognized that certain limited exceptions to this general rule are necessary, such as when the commission of a crime has been concealed or a defendant has fled or is unavailable. The case of a sitting president, whose prosecution is barred under Justice Department policy—no matter how strong the evidence may be—fits comfortably among such exceptions.
"I would note that even if the OLC opinion is reversed, there may be many practical difficulties in bringing an indictment against a president who is still in office. It is necessary, therefore, to simply pause the statute of limitations so that the president—any president—can be held to account for his or her actions and to ensure that the presidency is not a get-out-of-jail free card.
"I want to thank Mr. Swalwell and Mr. Deutch for their work in helping to craft this legislation. The 'No President Is Above the Law Act' would ensure that every person—no matter his or her title or office—is held accountable under our laws.
"I urge all Members to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 116th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 2678 To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for the tolling of the statute of limitations with regard to certain offenses committed by the President of the United States during or prior to tenure in office, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES May 10, 2019 Mr. Nadler (for himself, Mr. Swalwell of California, and Mr. Deutch) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for the tolling of the statute of limitations with regard to certain offenses committed by the President of the United States during or prior to tenure in office, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the “No President is Above the Law Act”. SEC. 2. TOLLING OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. (a) Offenses Committed By The President During Or Prior To Tenure In Office.—Section 3282 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: “(c) Offenses Committed By The President During Or Prior To Tenure In Office.—In the case of any person serving as President of the United States, the duration of that person’s tenure in office shall not be considered for purposes of any statute of limitations applicable to any Federal criminal offense committed by that person (including any offenses committed during any period of time preceding such tenure in office).”. (b) Applicability.—The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply to any offense committed before the date of the enactment of this section, if the statute of limitations applicable to that offense had not run as of such date.
This is absolutely amazing that I have been filled with awe in the ability of these Members of Congress, to stand on the House Floor, to so seductively distract the public in the fact that they, themselves, are all co-conspirators in the bleachbitting of history in the removal from office, the longest serving U.S. Congressman, who championed civil rights as his legacy, whilst denying him the civil right of due process.
Watch these people demonize history in their acts of sedition, as they advocate the end of racism, as they contemporaneously, and miraculously, omit , the name of the Chairman Emeritus of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee from the annals of history.
These are all vile creatures, for they know, that they know, that the heavens shall fall, in their acts of treachery.
If they are going to remove statutes of Judiciary, then, I suggest the opinions generated by these persons also be removed as case precedent, too.
To direct the Architect of the Capitol to replace the bust of Roger Brooke Taney in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the United States Capitol with a bust of Thurgood Marshall to be obtained by the Joint Committee on the Library and to remove certain statues from areas of the United States Capitol which are accessible to the public, to remove all statues of individuals who voluntarily served the Confederate States of America from display in the United States Capitol, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 13, 2020
Mr. Hoyer (for himself, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Clyburn, Ms. Bass, Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, and Mr. Butterfield) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration
A BILL
To direct the Architect of the Capitol to replace the bust of Roger Brooke Taney in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the United States Capitol with a bust of Thurgood Marshall to be obtained by the Joint Committee on the Library and to remove certain statues from areas of the United States Capitol which are accessible to the public, to remove all statues of individuals who voluntarily served the Confederate States of America from display in the United States Capitol, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF BUST OF ROGER BROOKE TANEY WITH BUST OF THURGOOD MARSHALL.
(a) Findings.—Congress finds the following:
(1) While sitting in the United States Capitol, the Supreme Court issued the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford decision on March 6, 1857. Written by Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney, whose bust sits inside the entrance to the Old Supreme Court Chamber in the United States Capitol, this opinion declared that African Americans were not citizens of the United States and could not sue in Federal courts. This decision further declared that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories.
(2) Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney’s authorship of Dred Scott v. Sandford, the effects of which would only be overturned years later by the ratification of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, renders a bust of his likeness unsuitable for the honor of display to the many visitors to the United States Capitol.
(3) As Frederick Douglass said of this decision in May 1857, “This infamous decision of the Slaveholding wing of the Supreme Court maintains that slaves are within the contemplation of the Constitution of the United States, property; that slaves are property in the same sense that horses, sheep, and swine are property; that the old doctrine that slavery is a creature of local law is false; that the right of the slaveholder to his slave does not depend upon the local law, but is secured wherever the Constitution of the United States extends; that Congress has no right to prohibit slavery anywhere; that slavery may go in safety anywhere under the star-spangled banner; that colored persons of African descent have no rights that white men are bound to respect; that colored men of African descent are not and cannot be citizens of the United States.”.
(4) While the removal of Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney’s bust from the United States Capitol does not relieve the Congress of the historical wrongs it committed to protect the institution of slavery, it expresses Congress’s recognition of one of the most notorious wrongs to have ever taken place in one of its rooms, that of Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney’s Dred Scott v. Sandford decision.
(b) Removal Of Bust Of Roger Brooke Taney.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Architect of the Capitol shall remove the bust of Roger Brooke Taney in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the United States Capitol.
(c) Replacement With Bust Of Thurgood Marshall.—
(1) OBTAINING BUST.—Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Joint Committee on the Library shall enter into an agreement to obtain a bust of Thurgood Marshall, under such terms and conditions as the Joint Committee considers appropriate consistent with applicable law.
(2) PLACEMENT.—The Joint Committee on the Library shall place the bust obtained under paragraph (1) in the location in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the United States Capitol where the bust of Roger Brooke Taney was located prior to removal by the Architect of the Capitol under subsection (b).
SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF CERTAIN STATUES.
(a) Removal.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Architect of the Capitol shall remove the statue of Charles Brantley Aycock, the statute of John Caldwell Calhoun, and the statue of James Paul Clarke from any area of the United States Capitol which is accessible to the public.
(b) Storage Of Statues.—The Architect of the Capitol shall keep any statue removed under subsection (a) in storage until the Architect and the State which provided the statue arrange for the return of the statue to the State.
SEC. 3. REQUIREMENTS AND REMOVAL PROCEDURES FOR STATUES IN NATIONAL STATUARY HALL.
(a) Requirements.—Section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 2131) is amended by inserting “(other than persons who served as an officer or voluntarily with the Confederate States of America or of the military forces or government of a State while the State was in rebellion against the United States)” after “military services”.
(b) Statue Removal Procedures.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Architect of the Capitol shall—
(A) identify all statues on display in the United States Capitol that do not meet the requirements of section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 2131), as amended by subsection (a); and
(B) subject to the approval of the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library, arrange for the removal of each such statue from the Capitol by not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
(2) REMOVAL AND RETURN OF STATUES.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (C), the Architect of the Capitol shall arrange to transfer and deliver any statue that is removed under this subsection to the Smithsonian Institution.
(B) STORAGE OR DISPLAY OF STATUES.—The Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution shall follow the policies and procedures of the Smithsonian Institution, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, regarding the storage and display of any statue transferred under subparagraph (A).
(C) STATE REQUESTS.—A statue provided for display by a State that is removed under this subsection shall be returned to the State, and the ownership of the statue transferred to the State, if the State so requests and agrees to pay any costs related to the transportation of the statue to the State.
(3) REPLACEMENT OF STATUES.—A State that has a statue removed under this subsection shall be able to replace such statue in accordance with the requirements and procedures of section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 2131) and section 311 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001 (2 U.S.C. 2132).
(4) AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATIONS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—There are appropriated for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2021, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $5,000,000 to carry out this section, including the costs related to the removal, transfer, security, storage, and display of the statues described in paragraph (1)(A), of which—
(i) $2,000,000 shall be made available to the Architect of the Capitol; and
(ii) $3,000,000 shall be made available to the Smithsonian Institution.
(B) AVAILABILITY.—Amounts appropriated under subparagraph (A) shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
In addition to the amounts appropriated under section 3(b)(4), there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act, and any amounts so appropriated shall remain available until expended.
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.
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?
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.
"(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.).
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.....
The establishment of the nonprofit organization resulted from the 1974 Urban Consultation sponsored by the United Methodist Churchin 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?
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.
Where is the Certificate of Oath, with the Great Seal of the United States, Signed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States? #Sealsmatter
Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector. The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice President....unless those electors engaged in election interference fraud schemes like stealin' the children, land & vote through what is called gerrymandering, through a political party who has had its parental rights to keep and bear the arms of the United States, as a registered business entity, terminated, making any casting of the vote and tally to be illegitimate because, as a nullified entity, there are no duly existing quorum, the 2016 vote was fraudulently certified through the Secretaries of State, all the way down to the City Clerks, like what was done in Detroit, in Wayne County, by its Secretary of State, who filed the fake ass Michigan certification of the 2016 election with the Clerk of the House in that fake ass 2016 Special Election, which means Trump is not duly elected, hence he is illegitimate, where the Senate, U.S. Attorney General, and Chief Justice of SCOTUS, who administered the fake ass oath of Donald J. Trump, because his real legal name is Donald John Trump, and they all know it, because McGahn and the JonesDay crew made sure to cloak the foreign invasion of Detroit and is about to sell Trump down the river in another round of the 202 fake ass election.
The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States....there are no electors for the Democratic National Committee nor the Republican National Committee because their fake all LLCs and backdoor inc. were dissolved, December 2015 and everyone covered it up because they are covering up the residuals of the peculiar institution, which is child welfare, the trafficking of tiny humans.
Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee as his last two opponents, Ted Cruz and John Kasich, dropped out of the race. Running against the Democratic Party’s candidate, former First Lady Hillary Clinton, Trump won a number of critical “Rust Belt” states and was elected the 45th U.S. President on November 8, 2016. Trump took the oath of office on January 20, 2017 in Washington, D.C.
Offered is President Trump’s signature, in blue marker, on a typewritten copy of the Oath of Office, dated January 20, 2017 on White House stationary. The 8½ x 11-inch white sheet has “Memorandum The White House Washington” in blue type across the top of the page, with the date and oath in bold black type. Trump’s signature is on the lower third of the page. The sheet has blue ink on the top edge. Trump was administered the oath by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on the steps of the U.S. Capital. This comes with a LOA from Beckett Authentication. https://goldinauctions.com/Donald_Trump_Signed_Presidential_Oath_of_Office__B-LOT56879.aspx
{My apologies for bringing you with me into one of my Post Traumatic Fraud Disorder Episodes, but I had flashbacks when it came to forging names of elected officials behind their backs, or having them sign documents under false advisement, or Chiefs of Staff and anyone else who has sold the signatures of Members of Congress and the White House, for about the same price range......, but hey, what do I know....}
The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them....wherefore this doctrine of emolument also applies to his cabinet, Chiefs of Staff, White House counsel, and campaign, like JonesDay, including the Vice President and CIA Director because they all have foreign corporations who raped Detroit in TARP through the act of gerrymandering, otherwise known as stealin' the children, land & vote, by executing an international coup in a well funded insurrection, to remove a sitting member of congress and U.S. icon, like they are tearing down statues, bleachbitting history, in foreign titles of lands, under a crown.
In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected....if there exists what is called a tacit resignation, then, in the converse, there must also exist a tacit election, where tacit means, in this instance, someone lied, making Obama, the Archpresident, transposing Ecclesiastic models of juridic persons, under the Second Amendment, where, it may be a situation of Trump being the Archtreasury, or, as I prefer, the keeper of the children's trust.
Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.....unless the president was not duly elected and is illegitimate because there are no valid certifications throughout the entire electoral process, making any appointments and executive orders such as this, nullified.
The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.
Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.
Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors....for falsely advising the President, because Chief Justice of SCOTUS John Roberts condoned the bad faith of the policy in his own breach of his oath of office, in failing to uphold the public policy of insurance to protect and serve the people in justice, which means not to procure and purvey tiny humans as lab rats, in Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare, by promulgating the residuals of the peculiar institution, by allowing Trump to continue to be falsely advised.
Trump was falsely advised in the christian invasion of the United States through Religious Freedom Restoration Act, where the church is supposed to be the authority over the oaths of offices to protect the posterity of the nation, rather the best interests of the child, whereby the Vice President and all civil officers shall fall from the heavens, under the Second Amendment, which is why I am pacified.
See, how that all works out?
The USCCB is supposed to be the watchers over the oaths of office for the people, hence, the doctrine of separation, except when it comes to the Thirteenth Exception, strictly for the purposes of maximizing revenues, because it is illegal for a not for profit office holder to generate profit from the selling of tiny humans.
This Executive Order is entered into the public record, for the purposes of obviation of the congress, as a fraud, because the data cited in this are false, or rather, fake, fake, fake.
#maytheheavensfall
Executive Order on Strengthening the Child Welfare System for America’s Children
LAW & JUSTICE
Issued on: June 24, 2020
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Purpose. Every child deserves a family. Our States and communities have both a legal obligation, and the privilege, to care for our Nation’s most vulnerable children.
The best foster care system is one that is not needed in the first place. My Administration has been focused on prevention strategies that keep children safe while strengthening families so that children do not enter foster care unnecessarily. Last year, and for only the second time since 2011, the number of children in the foster care system declined, and for the third year in a row, the number of children entering foster care has declined.
We no longer "sell" children because the Great Thirteenth Exception affords, through federal funding, that, we, the holders of not-for-profit and for-profit corporate offices, to "procure and purvey" tiny humans through human asset management databases in the name of the tax exempt god.
But challenges remain. Too many young people who are in our foster care system wait years before finding the permanency of family. More than 400,000 children are currently in foster care. Of those, more than 124,000 children are waiting for adoption, with nearly 6 out of 10 (58.4 percent) having already become legally eligible for adoption.
More than 50 percent of the children waiting for adoption have been in foster care — without the security and constancy of a permanent family — for 2 years or more. The need for stability and timely permanency is particularly acute for children 9 years and older, children in sibling groups, and those with intellectual or physical disabilities.
Even worse, too many young men and women age out of foster care having never found a permanent, stable family. In recent years, approximately 20,000 young people have aged out of foster care each year in the United States. Research has shown that young people who age out of the foster care system are likely to experience significant, and significantly increased, life challenges — 40 percent of such young people studied experienced homelessness; 50 percent were unemployed at age 24; 25 percent experienced post-traumatic stress disorder; and 71 percent became pregnant by age 21. These are unacceptable outcomes.
Several factors have contributed to the number of children who wait in foster care for extended periods. First, State and local child welfare agencies often do not have robust partnerships with private community organizations, including faith-based organizations. Second, those who step up to be resource families for children in foster care — including kin, guardians, foster parents, and adoptive parents — may lack adequate support. Third, too often the processes and systems meant to help children and families in crisis have instead created bureaucratic barriers that make it more difficult for these children and families to get the help they need.
It is the goal of the United States to promote a child welfare system that reduces the need to place children into foster care; achieves safe permanency for those children who must come into foster care, and does so more quickly and more effectively; places appropriate focus on children who are waiting for adoption, especially those who are 9 years and older, are in sibling groups, or have disabilities; and decreases the proportion of young adults who age out of the foster care system.
Always remember, DACA is a policy, not a law! Only congress makes law, not the executive branch, unless there is an exception for an unduly elected president to elucidate gerrymanding, but, hey, what do I know?
Children from all backgrounds have the potential to become successful and thriving adults. Yet without a committed, loving family that can provide encouragement, stability, and a lifelong connection, some children may never receive the support needed to realize that potential.
This order will help to empower families who answer the call to open their hearts and homes to children who need them. My Administration is committed to helping give as many children as possible the stability and support that family provides by dramatically improving our child welfare system.
Sec. 2. Encouraging Robust Partnerships Between State Agencies and Public, Private, Faith-based, and Community Organizations. (a) In order to facilitate close partnerships between State agencies and nongovernmental organizations, including public, private, faith-based, and community groups, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) shall provide increased public access to accurate, up-to-date information relevant to strengthening the child welfare system, including by:
(i) Publishing data to aid in the recruitment of community support. Within 1 year of the date of this order and each year thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, a report that provides information about typical patterns of entry, recent available counts of children in foster care, and counts of children waiting for adoption. To the extent appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including all privacy laws, this data will be disaggregated by county or other sub-State level, child age, placement type, and prior time in care.
(ii) Collecting needed data to preserve sibling connections.
(A) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall collect information from appropriate State and local agencies on the number of children in foster care who have siblings in foster care and who are not currently placed with their siblings.
(B) Within 3 years of the date of this order, to support the goal of keeping siblings together (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(31)(A)), the Secretary shall develop data analysis methods to report on the experience of children entering care in sibling groups, and the extent to which they are placed together. The Secretary’s analysis shall also assess the extent to which siblings who are legally eligible for adoption achieve permanency together.
(iii) Expanding the number of homes for children and youth.
(A) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall develop a more rigorous and systematic approach to collecting State administrative data as part of the Child and Family Services Review required by section 1123A of the Social Security Act (the “Act”) (42 U.S.C. 1320a–2a). Data collected shall include:
(1) demographic information for children in foster care and waiting for adoption;
(2) the number of currently available foster families and their demographic information;
(3) the average foster parent retention rate and average length of time foster parents remain certified;
(4) a target number of foster homes needed to meet the needs of children in foster care; and
(5) the average length of time it takes to complete foster and adoptive home certification.
(B) The Secretary shall ensure, to the extent consistent with applicable law, that States report to the Secretary regarding strategies for coordinating with nongovernmental organizations, including faith-based and community organizations, to recruit and support foster and adoptive families.
(b) Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Secretary shall issue guidance to Federal, State, and local agencies on partnering with nongovernmental organizations. This guidance shall include best practices for information sharing, providing needed services to families to support prevention of children entering foster care, family preservation, foster and adoptive home recruitment and retention, respite care, post-placement family support, and support for older youth. This guidance shall also make clear that faith-based organizations are eligible for partnerships under title IV-E of the Act (42 U.S.C. 670 et seq.), on an equal basis, consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Sec. 3. Improving Access to Adequate Resources for Caregivers and Youth. While many public, private, faith based, and community resources and other sources of support exist, many American caregivers still lack connection with and access to adequate resources. Within 1 year of the date of this order, the Secretary shall equip caregivers and those in care to meet their unique challenges, by:
(a) Expanding educational options. To the extent practicable, the Secretary shall use all existing technical assistance resources to promote dissemination and State implementation of the National Training and Development Curriculum, including, when appropriate, in non-classroom environments.
(b) Increasing the availability of trauma-informed training. The Secretary shall provide an enhanced, web-based, learning-management platform to house the information generated by the National Adoption Competency Mental Health Training Initiative. Access to this web-based training material will be provided free of charge for all child welfare and mental health practitioners.
(c) Supporting guardianship. The Secretary shall provide information to States regarding the importance and availability of funds to increase guardianship through the title IV-E Guardianship Assistance Program (42 U.S.C. 673), which provides Federal reimbursement for payments to guardians and for associated administrative costs. This information shall include which States have already opted into the program.
(d) Enhancing support for kinship care and youth exiting foster care. The Secretary shall establish a plan to address barriers to accessing existing Federal assistance and benefits for eligible individuals.
Sec. 4. Ensuring Equality of Treatment and Access for all Families. The Howard M. Metzenbaum Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 (the “Multiethnic Placement Act”) (Public Law 103-382), as amended, prohibits agencies from denying to any person the opportunity to become an adoptive or a foster parent on the basis of race, color, or national origin (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(18)(A)); prohibits agencies from delaying or denying the placement of a child for adoption or into foster care on the basis of race, color, or national origin (id. 671(a)(18)(B)); and requires agencies to diligently recruit a diverse base of foster and adoptive parents to better reflect the racial and ethnic makeup of children in out-of-home care (id. 662(b)(7)). To further the goals of the Multiethnic Placement Act, the Secretary shall:
(a) within 6 months of the date of this order, initiate a study regarding the implementation of these requirements nationwide;
(b) within 1 year of the date of this order, update guidance, as necessary, regarding implementation of the Multiethnic Placement Act; and
(c) within 1 year of the date of this order, publish guidance regarding the rights of parents, prospective parents, and children with disabilities (including intellectual, developmental, or physical disabilities).
Sec. 5. Improving Processes to Prevent Unnecessary Removal and Secure Permanency for Children. (a) Federal Review of Reasonable Effort Determinations and Timeliness Requirements.
(i) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall require that both the title IV-E reviews conducted pursuant to 45 CFR 1356.71 and the Child and Family Services Reviews conducted pursuant to 45 CFR 1355.31–1355.36 specifically and adequately assess the following requirements:
(A) reasonable efforts to prevent removal;
(B) filing a petition for Termination of Parental Rights within established statutory timelines and court processing of such petition, unless statutory exemptions apply;
(C) reasonable efforts to finalize permanency plans; and
(D) completion of relevant required family search and notifications and how such efforts are reviewed by courts.
(ii) In cases in which it is determined that statutorily required timelines and efforts have not been satisfied, the Secretary shall make use of existing authority in making eligibility determinations and disallowances consistent with section 1123A(b)(3)(4) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-2a(b)(3)(4)).
(iii) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall develop metrics to track permanency outcomes in each State and measure State performance over time.
(iv) Within 6 months of the date of this order, the Secretary shall provide guidance to States regarding flexibility in the use of Federal funds to support and encourage high-quality legal representation for parents and children, including pre-petition representation, in their efforts to prevent the removal of children from their families, safely reunify children and parents, finalize permanency, and ensure that their voices are heard and their rights are protected. The Secretary shall also ensure collection of data regarding State use of Federal funds for this purpose.
(b) Risk and Safety Assessments.
(i) Within 18 months of the date of this order, the Secretary shall collect States’ individual standards for conducting risk and safety assessments required under section 106(b)(2)(B)(iv) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106(b)(2)(B)(iv)).
(ii) Within 2 years of the date of this order, the Secretary shall outline reasonable best practice standards for risk and safety assessments, including how to address domestic violence and substance abuse.
Sec. 6. Indian Child Welfare Act. Nothing in this order shall alter the implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act or replace the tribal consultation process.
Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
