Search This Blog

Translate

Blog Archive

Middleboro Review 2

NEW CONTENT MOVED TO MIDDLEBORO REVIEW 2

Toyota

Since the Dilly, Dally, Delay & Stall Law Firms are adding their billable hours, the Toyota U.S.A. and Route 44 Toyota posts have been separated here:

Route 44 Toyota Sold Me A Lemon



Showing posts with label rule of law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rule of law. Show all posts

Friday, October 25, 2019

Bar Association Threatens Trump’s Attorney General Bill Barr



The NY Bar Association is about to sanction Barr

About this website
BIPARTISANREPORT.COM|BY GLORIA CHRISTIE REPORTS
Donald Trump famously asked his former Attorney General Jeff Sessions “Where is my Roy Cohn?” The man POTUS reference was one of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s top attorneys during his hunt for Communists and later worked for Trump. Then, he was disbarred, but it appears the president has found his...



Donald Trump famously asked his former Attorney General Jeff Sessions “Where is my Roy Cohn?” The man POTUS reference was one of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s top attorneys during his hunt for Communists and later worked for Trump. Then, he was disbarred, but it appears the president has found his Roy Cohn again.





The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has always been defined by the Constitution. The New York City (NYC) Bar Association just called for Attorney General (AG) William Barr to recuse himself in the Ukraine investigation.
In its statement, the bar indicated that the AG was “allegedly involved.” Should that not appeal to Barr, the statement suggested he resign. If the AG did not want to resign, the NYC bar said he should be sanctioned “including possible removal by Congress.”

‘SINCE OUR DEMOCRACY’S INCEPTION IN 1789, ITS FOUNDATION HAS BEEN THE RULE OF LAW.  OUR LEADERS ARE SELECTED AND EXERCISE THEIR POWERS UNDER LAW, BEGINNING WITH OUR CONSTITUTION. ALTHOUGH OUR COURTS HAVE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR INTERPRETING AND APPLYING OUR LAWS, BOTH THE CONGRESS AND THE EXECUTIVE – INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT – ARE SUBJECT TO, AND ACCOUNTABLE UNDER, THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS ENACTED THEREUNDER.’
The associated said the attorney general’s responsibility was to “see that our laws are justly administered for the benefit of the American people.” Therefore, the AG has to be a role model for advising the president. In addition, he must:
‘[D]DEMONSTRATE AN UNQUESTIONED COMMITMENT TO COMPLIANCE WITH LAW BY ALL WHO EXERCISE THE POWERS OF GOVERNMENT…[T]HE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OBLIGATIONS ARE NOT OWED SOLELY TO “THE GOVERNMENT AS HIS CLIENT,” THEY ARE NOT OWED TO THE PRESIDENT IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY.’
The statement said that the AG:
‘M]UST ENSURE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW IS ABOVE AND AWAY FROM POLITICS.  NOTHING COULD BE MORE DESTRUCTIVE OF OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, OF THE RULE OF LAW OR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AS AN INSTITUTION THAN ANY TOLERATION OF POLITICAL INTERFERENCE WITH THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW.”’
The Bar Association reminded Barr that he took an oath as Attorney General:
‘”[THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE TO KNOW THAT THERE ARE PLACES IN THE GOVERNMENT WHERE THE RULE OF LAW, NOT POLITICS, HOLDS SWAY AND WHERE THEY WILL BE TREATED FAIRLY BASED SOLELY ON THE FACTS AND THE EVENHANDED APPLICATION OF THE LAW.  THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE MUST BE THAT PLACE.”‘
Then, the statement went into Barr’s performance. The organization did not give him a passing grade:
‘MR. BARR’S ACTIONS IN OFFICE HAVE FAILED IN PRECISELY THE ROLE THAT HE DESCRIBED WITH ELOQUENCE WHEN NOMINATED.  THAT FAILURE HAS JEOPARDIZED THE CONFIDENCE THAT THE PUBLIC CAN REASONABLY HAVE IN THE DOJ AS THE PLACE “WHERE THE RULE OF LAW, NOT POLITICS, HOLDS SWAY.” ‘
The statement continued, noting that he has expressed “loyalty to the president:”
‘HIS ACTIONS DURING HIS BRIEF TENURE IN OFFICE HAVE DEMONSTRATED TO US THAT, CONTRARY TO THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF HIS OFFICE, HE APPEARS TO VIEW HIS PRIMARY OBLIGATION AS LOYALTY TO THE PRESIDENT INDIVIDUALLY RATHER THAN TO THE NATION.  IN SERVING THE PRESIDENT, HE HAS BEEN WILLING TO TAKE OR COUNTENANCE ACTIONS THAT ARE CONTRARY TO THE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS OF THE DOJ, HIS OATH OF OFFICE AND HIS OWN OBLIGATIONS AS AN ATTORNEY.’
However, what sealed the deal for the organization was:
‘MR. BARR’S FAILURE TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM THE DOJ’S REVIEW—ITSELF OF UNCERTAIN PROPRIETY—OF THE ONGOING “WHISTLEBLOWER” COMPLAINT WITH RESPECT TO THE PRESIDENT’S EFFORTS DURING HIS JULY 25, 2019 TELEPHONE CALL TO REQUEST THE REPUBLIC OF UKRAINE TO INVESTIGATE MR. TRUMP’S ALLEGATIONS OF UKRAINIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 U.S. ELECTIONS AND FORMER VICE-PRESIDENT BIDEN AND HIS SON (THE “UKRAINE MATTER”).’
Then, the NYC Bar gave its evidence:
‘AS WHITE HOUSE RECORDS MADE CLEAR, THE PRESIDENT TOLD HIS UKRAINIAN COUNTERPART, VOLODYMYR ZELENSKY, THAT MR. BARR “WOULD BE IN TOUCH WITH HIM” TO FOLLOW UP ON THE PRESIDENT’S REQUESTS. THE WHISTLEBLOWER FOUND THIS TELEPHONE CALL TO BE OF “URGENT CONCERN” BECAUSE OF THE PRESIDENT’S APPARENT INTERMINGLING OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY INTERESTS WITH HIS PERSONAL POLITICAL INTERESTS IN APPARENT VIOLATION OF U.S. LAW.’
Following that, the statement read that Barr should have “recused himself from any participation, direct or indirect.” It encouraged:
‘ATTORNEY GENERAL TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM ANY PARTICIPATION, DIRECT OR INDIRECT, IN DOJ’S REVIEW OF THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT.  REGARDLESS OF WHETHER MR. BARR WAS IN FACT AWARE OF OR PART OF THE PRESIDENT’S PLANS, EITHER BEFORE, AT THE TIME OF, OR AFTER THE JULY 25, 2019 TELEPHONE CALL, IT IS CLEAR THAT MR. BARR WAS OBLIGATED TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM ANY INVOLVEMENT IN DOJ’S REVIEW OF EITHER THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT OR THE SUBSTANCE OF THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS ONCE THE PRESIDENT OFFERED MR. BARR’S SERVICES TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKY. ‘
The statement continued, going in to further evidence detail for its case:
‘FEDERAL REGULATIONS (28 CFR 45.2) FOR DOJ PROSECUTORS REQUIRE RECUSAL WHENEVER A LAWYER “HAS A PERSONAL OR POLITICAL RELATIONSHIP WITH ANY PERSON . . . SUBSTANTIALLY INCLUDED IN THE CONDUCT THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE INVESTIGATION.”  THE DOJ MANUAL FOR U.S. ATTORNEYS REQUIRES (SECTION 3-2.170, 2.220) RECUSAL OF U.S. ATTORNEYS AND ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEYS WHERE “A CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS OR THERE IS AN APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR LOSS OF IMPARTIALITY.”  EXECUTIVE BRANCH ETHICS RULES ALSO PROVIDE (5 C.F.R. 2635.502) THAT RECUSAL IS APPROPRIATE IF “A REASONABLE PERSON WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE RELEVANT FACTS WOULD BE LIKELY TO QUESTION THE EMPLOYEE’S IMPARTIALITY IN THE MATTER.”’
The Mueller Report Adventures: In Bite-Sizes on this Facebook page. These quick, two-minute reads interpret the report in normal English for busy people. Mueller Bite-Sizes uncovers what is essentially a compelling spy mystery. Interestingly enough, Mueller Bite-Sizes can be read in any order.




https://bipartisanreport.com/2019/10/24/bar-association-threatens-trumps-attorney-general-bill-barr/?fbclid=IwAR0Y4Pv79vvZTzpxwBfhJxWJ9YzTdE9w0gqXQgDb6XN3iHUZ2bjuIxhkg4M





Sunday, October 6, 2019

Trump just disrespected everyone who has ever served. Why do they take it?








As the President of the United States, I have an absolute right, perhaps even a duty, to investigate, or have investigated, CORRUPTION, and that would include asking, or suggesting, other Countries to help us out! — Donald J. Trump Oct 3, 2019


I served in the US armed forces for 3-½ years.  This was during the Cold War so I never saw any combat.  Nonetheless, I have an 8-inch surgical scar, a spinal fusion, constant pain, and a permanent disability due to an injury sustained while on active duty.
And I am pissed.  Trump has done plenty to piss me off in the past, but his latest tweets about colluding with other countries have made me utterly, thoroughly, 100%, over the top, unfriend me on facebook if you support Trump, pissed.
I served because I thought (and still idealistically think) that there is in our country and our constitution an idea — the “idea of America” if you will — that is worth protecting.  And that idea, despite all of the ways this country has not lived up to it, is such that I was willing to give my life for it (and I almost did). I think most of the men and women I served with did so for the same reasons (to varying degrees) and I think most still do so today (again, to varying degrees).
That has been the raison d’etre for a strong military — that there are ideals (freedom, equality, rule of law, justice) — that are so important that they have to be protected from from other countries that do not share those ideals (e.g., Russia, China).  And the military was protecting not just ideals — but actual people — Americans.  Though they have co-opted and perverted many of these ideals, this is what conservatives, republicans, the right, all espouse
And now Donald J. Trump has publicly and unambiguously opened the front door, saying it’s his duty to ask other countries to go after American citizens.  Countries that don’t share our ideals, by the way.  And from the republicans, those who are for America first, those who say America is exceptional, those who would send men and women in to harms way to protect America and Americans?  Crickets.
What. The. F.  This is a monumental slap in the face to anyone who has ever served.
Leave aside all of the aggravating circumstances around this latest episode.  We have already seen that the right have a tu-quoque non-sequitur for the nefarious (and obvious) reasons behind this betrayal.  He is going after a political opponent for political gain (“Biden is corrupt on a scale never seen!  And Hillary too!”)  There was a quid pro quo (“No there wasn’t.  And Biden is corrupt on a scale never seen!”)  He was abusing his power (“Just a perfect conversation.”) 
Leave all that aside. The simple unambiguous fact is this. Trump has publicly said he has a duty to sic a foreign government on an American citizen. And, in fact, he has done so. How can any conservative, any republican, anyone who has served in order to keep American citizens safe from foreign governments — how can anyone claim that Trump is acting in the best interest of America or Americans?
Again.  What.  The.  F.
Not that any of this is unexpected — it’s just the latest example of the hypocrisy of the party-before-country republican party.  But perhaps because I feel particularly disrespected by this latest — and because I feel my brothers and sisters should also be outraged — I am also particularly rankled.
Trump has famously said: “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” 
I had a corollary that I often used:  He could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot one of his supporters and that person would still vote for him.
But now we see.  He can publicly boast of betraying the very things his supporters love him for and he won’t lose any voters.

LINK

Monday, September 30, 2019

RSN: Marc Ash | Making the Rule of Law a Reality Show




Reader Supported News
30 September 19

This has been a very bad month for donations, one of the worst in years. It isn’t very likely we will make up the deficit on the final day.
We can however with a good effort keep it close.
We need that effort now.
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News


If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611

Reader Supported News
30 September 19

I'm truly delighted to finally send you a message voicing my thanks for a news service which provides me with information from some of the finest journalists and writers in the reporting business.
I especially am grateful for the integrity and commitment of RSN in presenting the truth and the level of intelligence in the selection of the articles we are fortunate to be able to receive.
Thank you!
Florence, RSN - Reader-Supporter


If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611




Reader Supported News
30 September 19
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News


RSN: Marc Ash | Making the Rule of Law a Reality Show
House Speaker Nanci Pelosi. (photo: Guillaume Souvant/Getty Images)
Marc Ash, Reader Supported News
Ash writes: "The problem for the Democrats is that although Ukraine-gate gives them plenty of good cause for impeachment, and it does, it is difficult to divorce from previous Trump transgressions."

EXCERPT:
But they also have a rogue and criminal president who is emboldened by his ability to flout the law and the Constitution and strengthened by additional time to marshal the resources of the American presidency to consolidate his grip on power. This is the danger of subjugating the rule of law to public opinion and political expediency. The rule of law becomes a reality TV show, literally. 
Defending the Constitution is not guaranteed to be clean, fun, or politically convenient, but the alternatives are the stuff of fascist revolution.
It would probably be a sound strategy for the Democrats not to forgive through omission Trump’s previous illegal conduct. They may choose to focus on Ukraine-gate, which depending upon what is on the super-secret NSC server may be only be getting started, but they should not lose sight of or trivialize the conduct that set the stage for the call with Zelensky. 
The Democrats need to keep all options on the table at this stage.

Rep. Mark Amodei. (photo: Getty Images)
Rep. Mark Amodei. (photo: Getty Images)

Mark Amodei Is First House GOP Member to Show Spine, Support Impeachment Probe Publicly
Peter Wade, Rolling Stone
Wade writes: "The first member of the House Republican caucus to come out in favor of an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump is four-term Nevada congressman Mark Amodei."

EXCERPT:

In a statement issued by his office following the call, Amodei said that while he supported the inquiry, he was not in favor of impeachment, reserving judgment on whether the president violated the law.
“I’m a big fan of oversight, so let’s let the committees get to work and see where it goes,” Amodei said during the conference call. “Using government agencies to, if it’s proven, to put your finger on the scale of an election, I don’t think that’s right. If it turns out that it’s something along those lines, then there’s a problem.”
Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, who left the Republican Party in July, is the only member of Congress not in the Democratic Party to support actual impeachment, publicly announcing in May that the president has committed “impeachable conduct.”

'The abuse of presidential power to conceal the president's conduct is reason enough for impeachment.' (photo: Sarah Rogers/The Daily Beast/Getty Images)
'The abuse of presidential power to conceal the president's conduct is reason enough for impeachment.' (photo: Sarah Rogers/The Daily Beast/Getty Images)

Alexander Hamilton Warned Us About Trump and Barr
Brad Miller, The Daily Beast
Miller writes: "Trump's exercise of the powers of the presidency under a claim of right to obstruct every effort to inform the American people of the president's conduct is the single greatest danger to our democracy."

EXCERPT:
A Justice Department internal memo argues that the whistleblower’s complaint does not fall within that statutory requirement. But Barr has argued for more than 30 years that “dual reporting requirements” like the provisions of the IG statutes are an unconstitutional “encroachment on executive branch authority.” Barr was a senior official in the Department of Justice at the start of the George H.W. Bush administration. Barr argued in a militant 1989 memorandum widely distributed throughout government that “appropriate supervisors” should approve any information provided Congress. Barr said that the President had the power to “withhold in the public interest information” demanded by Congress, especially with respect to foreign relations and national security, but really with respect to all presidential action. “Only by consistently and forcefully resisting such congressional incursions can executive branch prerogatives be preserved,” Barr wrote.
Trump promised a “warlike” response to congressional investigations as soon as Democrats won control of the House in the 2018 election, and to fight all congressional subpoenas. The Department of Justice claims discretion whether to prosecute criminal charges for defiance of congressional subpoenas that the House refers, and has not prosecuted. The Trump administration denies that Congress has any power to enforce subpoenas on their own, a power recognized by courts for centuries.

Senators Mike Rounds, Shelley Moore Capito, Roy Blunt, John Hoeven, Jim Inhofe, Joe Manchin and Steve Daines in 2015. Senators are far wealthier than most constituents, and in a prime position to increase wealth via policymaking. (photo: Tom Williams/Getty Images)
Senators Mike Rounds, Shelley Moore Capito, Roy Blunt, John Hoeven, Jim Inhofe, Joe Manchin and Steve Daines in 2015. Senators are far wealthier than most constituents, and in a prime position to increase wealth via policymaking. (photo: Tom Williams/Getty Images)

Revealed: How US Senators Invest in Firms They Are Supposed to Regulate
Alex Kotch, Guardian UK
Kotch writes: "As they set national policy on important issues such as climate change, tech monopolies, medical debt and income inequality, US senators have glaring conflicts of interest."

JUST A FEW EXCERPTS - SEE THE MUST READ REPORT:
Overall, the senators are invested in 338 companies – including tech firms such as Apple and Microsoft, oil and gas giants including ExxonMobil and Antero Midstream, telecom companies including Verizon, and major defense contractors such as Boeing – in the five sectors as categorized by Sludge.
Congressional financial disclosures present investments in dollar ranges, not exact amounts, so all data in this report comes in ranges, some very wide. The median stock investment range in the five sectors for the 51 senators is between $100,000 and $365,000, while the average range of the investments is between $551,000 and nearly $1,874,000.
Not only are the senators far wealthier than most of their constituents, but they’re in a prime position to increase their wealth via policymaking.
Senator Joe Manchin, the ranking member on the Senate energy and natural resources committee, owns between $1m and $5m worth of non-public stock in his family coal business, Enersystems, making him the only Democratic senator who is directly profiting from the environmentally devastating coal business.
Despite pressure from the left, the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, made Manchin the ranking member of the committee, and Manchin did not divest his coal holdings.
Senators own between $28.1m and $95.6m worth of stock in the five sectors examined by Sludge and the Guardian. They have the most money invested in the finance, insurance and real estate sector due in part to the Republican senator John Hoeven’s investment in Westbrand, Inc, a private holding company that owns multiple banks, worth between roughly $5m and $25m.
Altogether, 37 senators and their spouses own between $12.8m and $48.2m worth of stock in the finance, insurance and real estate sector. They have the most money invested in the commercial banking industry, between $8.3m and $32.9m.
Senator Richard Shelby, a Republican member of the Senate banking, housing and urban affairs committee, owns between $1m and $5m worth of stock in private real estate insurance firm Tuscaloosa Title Company. Shelby sits on the housing, transportation and community development subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, affordable housing, foreclosure mitigation and other housing matters, and the securities, insurance and investment subcommittee, which oversees the insurance industry.
Nine other banking committee members are personally invested in the financial companies they oversee including the Republican John Kennedy and the Democrats Doug Jones, Robert Menendez and Tina Smith.
Senators have between $8.3m and $22m invested in the communications and electronics sector, including up to $4.2m in internet companies and as much as $4.1m in computer software businesses. Senator Shelley Moore Capito, a member of the commerce, science, and transportation committee’s subcommittee on communications, technology, innovation and the internet and the subcommittee on manufacturing, trade and consumer protection, owns between $53,000 and $194,000 worth of Microsoft stock, as much as $99,000 of Intel stock and up to $30,000 each in AT&T and Verizon stock.
Senator Jacky Rosen, who is also on both subcommittees, owns between $310,000 and $1m worth of communications and electronics stock. Her largest potential investments are as much as $265,000 in Amazon, up to $115,000 in AT&T and $100,000 in software company Adobe.

Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive of the National Rifle Association. He has been a leader in an aggressive campaign by gun rights advocates to influence the White House. (photo: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)
Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive of the National Rifle Association. He has been a leader in an aggressive campaign by gun rights advocates to influence the White House. (photo: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)

Trump Meets With NRA Head LaPierre to Plan Impeachment Defense Strategy
Maggie Haberman and Annie Karni, The New York Times
Excerpt: "President Trump met in the White House on Friday with Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive of the National Rifle Association, and discussed prospective gun legislation and whether the N.R.A. could provide support for the president as he faces impeachment and a more difficult re-election campaign, according to two people familiar with the meeting."
READ MORE

Vice President Pence and his entourage spent two nights at the Trump International Golf Links & Hotel in Doonbeg, a small town on Ireland's southwest coast. (photo: Charles Mcquillan/Getty Images)
Vice President Pence and his entourage spent two nights at the Trump International Golf Links & Hotel in Doonbeg, a small town on Ireland's southwest coast. (photo: Charles Mcquillan/Getty Images)

Ireland Paid Trump Resort €100,000 to Host Police Protecting Him
Ben Quinn, Guardian UK
Quinn writes: "Donald Trump's resort on the west coast of Ireland was paid €100,000 by the Irish state to provide food to police officers protecting the US president during a two-night visit this year, it has emerged."
READ MORE

Teaching kids about climate change. (photo: Grist/Miyo McGinn)
Teaching kids about climate change. (photo: Grist/Miyo McGinn)

When Teaching Kids About Climate Change, Don't Be a Downer
Miyo McGinn, Grist
McGinn writes: "Life as an outdoor educator might seem like it's all fun and games - romping around outside, playing games, looking at bugs - until it comes to talking to 9-year-olds about climate change."
READ MORE