An inquiry by Sheriff's candidate Thomas F. Reynolds this week revealed that there is NO BRADY LIST in the Seventh Judicial Circuit State's Attorney's office, presided over by corrupt State's Attorney Ralph Joseph Larizza, who helped to cover up the September 2, 2010 murder of Michelle O'Connell in the home of St. Johns County Deputy JEREMY BANKS.
LARIZZA's office has filed at least one motion to bar defense lawyers from asking about the Michelle O'Connell case.
TARNISHED BRASS
Hundreds of police officers have been labeled liars. Some still help send people to prison.
Across the USA, prosecutors aren't tracking officer misconduct, skirting Supreme Court "Brady" rules and sometimes leading to wrongful convictions.
Steve Reilly, and Mark Nichols, USA TODAYUpdated 3:26 p.m. EDT Oct. 17, 2019
Revat Vara should not have gone to prison.
One night in 2006, Houston police pulled him over for a missing license plate and told him to walk a straight line.
Vara said that he hadn’t had a drop to drink and that he passed the sobriety test. Officer William Lindsey said otherwise.
At trial, jurors were told about Lindsey’s expertise evaluating drunken drivers. They were told about Vara’s two previous DWIs.
What jurors weren’t told: Officer Lindsey had been found guilty of misconduct by his department 35 times. He was investigated for padding his overtime – by manipulating DWI arrests so he would have to be called to testify – among many other violations.
Revat Vara spent 11 years in prison because of a missing front license plate and prosecutors' failure to disclose the disciplinary history of the officer...SCOTT DALTON FOR USA TODAY
In a case that came down to one man’s word against another’s, jurors believed the police officer. Because of his prior offenses, Vara was sentenced to 25 years in prison.
What happened to Vara has been unconstitutional for more than 50 years.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1963 that prosecutors must tell anyone accused of a crime about all evidence that might help their defense at trial. That includes sharing details about police officers who have committed crimes, lied on the job or whose honesty has been called into doubt.
A USA TODAY Network investigation found that widespread failure by police departments and prosecutors to track problem officers makes it impossible to disclose that information to people whose freedom hinges on the integrity of law enforcement.
Reporters for USA TODAY and its partners, including the Chicago-based Invisible Institute, spent more than a year gathering Brady lists from police and prosecutors in thousands of counties to measure compliance with the landmark 1963 ruling in Brady v. Maryland.
The investigation found:
Thousands of people have faced criminal charges or gone to prison based in part on testimony from law enforcement officers deemed to have credibility problems by their bosses or by prosecutors.
At least 300 prosecutors’ offices across the nation are not taking steps necessary to comply with the Supreme Court mandates. These places do not have a list tracking dishonest or otherwise untrustworthy officers. They include big cities such as Chicago and Little Rock and smaller communities such as Jackson County, Minnesota, and Columbia County, Pennsylvania.
In many places that keep lists, police and prosecutors refuse to make them public, making it impossible to know whether they are following the law.
Others keep lists that are incomplete. USA TODAY identified at least 1,200 officers with proven histories of lying and other serious misconduct who had not been flagged by prosecutors. Of those officers, 261 were specifically disciplined for dishonesty on the job.
The inconsistent compliance with the Brady requirements comes amid a nationwide debate over law enforcement tactics. A string of killings by police over the past five years in Ferguson, Missouri, Baltimore, Chicago and elsewhere have sparked unrest and a reckoning that put pressure on cities and mayors to crack down on problem officers.
The revelations also come as reversals of wrongful convictions pile up. The National Registry of Exonerations shows that cases overturned because of perjury and official misconduct by prosecutors or police have more than doubled from 2008 to 2018.
0:00
2:41
AD
Houston man spends 11 years in jail studying law to prove his innocence
Revat Vara was sentenced to 25 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. He spent 11 years in jail studying law to overturn his conviction.
USA TODAY
USA TODAY talked to dozens of prosecutors and police officials across the nation.
Two county prosecutors promised to alter their policies or procedures for complying with Brady’s requirements in response to inquiries from USA TODAY.
“Now that you have raised this issue, we will consult with our corporation counsel and our circuit court supervisor about creating and maintaining a list,” Maui County Prosecutor John Kim told the newspaper.
Most prosecutors who don’t keep a Brady list said they don’t need one because they know all of their police officers well.
"I do not have a so-called Brady list. I do not have a written policy," said Steve Giddens, the district attorney in Talladega County, Alabama. "I do not need one to follow the law.”
Others raised concerns about unfairly jeopardizing law enforcement officers’ jobs by placing them on a list based on minor or unfounded accusations.
Unions representing law enforcement officers have been especially outspoken opponents. In California, the union representing Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies went to court to stop the department from disclosing 300 deputies with misconduct histories. The state Supreme Court ruled against the deputies in August.
The lists are not designed to track people who should not be officers. Rather they are a tool prosecutors use to identify those whose past conduct might raise questions about their fairness or truthfulness as a witness in a trial – and require disclosure to defendants.
The argument about maintaining the lists or making them public has led to political battles, especially in cities where newly elected prosecutors have made fighting police misconduct part of their platform.
A training manual for Brady disclosure in the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office states that the general rule is “Disclose. Disclose. Disclose.”
The tack has put the prosecutor’s office at war with the Philadelphia police union, which called the office’s maintenance of a Brady list a "witch hunt."
In Baltimore, State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby started forcing officers who could be witnesses to disclose their internal affairs investigations.
Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby wants police officers' records.STEVE RUARK/AP
Mosby appointed a “criminal discovery liaison” to review all court-related requests for officers’ internal affairs information and send detailed records to prosecutors and other parties within 48 hours.
Mosby said the effort was necessary to increase trust and transparency in the city’s criminal justice system after years of scandal around corrupt police units and the increased tension between residents and police since the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody in 2015.
Last year, the state’s attorney’s office started reviewing court cases involving at least 25 Baltimore police officers because of misconduct charges against them.
Prosecutors recently began asking the courts to vacate nearly 800 convictions that involved testimony or investigations by these officers – and more could be coming as the office continues to gather information.
More than 530 Baltimore police officers have been added to an internal notification system, and defense attorneys are contacted if those officers are considered by prosecutors as witnesses. That list includes 183 officers who, because of their backgrounds, are automatically disclosed to the defense.
For Vara, who spent a decade behind bars for a crime he said he didn’t commit, an easily available Brady list could have changed his life.
At the time of his trial, Houston police and the Harris County prosecutor’s office were aware of Lindsey’s history of misconduct. As part of its last investigation into Lindsey, the police department asked the prosecutor's office to charge him with a crime. The officer resigned rather than answer more questions – months before Vara's trial.
Vara’s attorneys said the case boiled down to Lindsey’s word against Vara’s.
It's crazy and it's scary how these guys got the power to change your life like that. The badge and that uniform gives them the power to do that.
“There's no breath test, no blood tests,” said Celeste Blackburn, who represented Vara on appeal.
Blackburn said Lindsey was the only police officer present that night to testify that Vara was drunk. In fact, court records indicate the other two officers said the smell of alcohol could have come from the passenger – a drunken buddy with whom Vara had gone out that night to give a safe ride home.
Neither Vara nor his defense lawyer knew about Lindsey’s history at the time of trial.
“It’s crazy and it's scary how these guys got the power to change your life like that,” Vara said. “The badge and that uniform gives them the power to do that.”
A police union attorney informed the Houston Police Department in 2006 that Lindsey would not respond to the allegations, department records show. At Vara's trial, Lindsey testified that he left law enforcement to pursue his love of teaching. He could not be reached for comment for this article.
How the system is supposed to work
For decades, U.S. courts have set a high standard for prosecutors when it comes to disclosing problems in police officers' pasts that might raise questions about their honesty and integrity as witnesses.
Building on Brady vs. Maryland, a landmark case that exonerated a wrongfully convicted Maryland man, courts have repeatedly held that prosecutors must tell defendants what they know about law enforcement officers' backgrounds.
In a series of separate rulings, the Supreme Court has said that means prosecutors should know the backgrounds of the officers they rely on to put people in prison – and they must tell defendants what they know, whether they ask or not.
Supreme Court Justice William Douglas wrote in the Brady vs. Maryland decision
Society wins not only when the guilty are convicted, but when criminal trials are fair.
“Society wins not only when the guilty are convicted, but when criminal trials are fair,” Supreme Court Justice William Douglas wrote in the Brady decision.
Legal scholars have generally interpreted the rulings as a requirement that prosecutors create a list of officers with credibility problems.
But there is no comprehensive rule for what kind of behavior lands an officer on a list and few repercussions for police and prosecutors who flout the requirement.
Some prosecutors include only officers who have lied in court or falsified evidence. Others list those who have committed crimes, including drunken driving, or shown racial bias on the job. USA TODAY found wide variation in the level of documentation or investigation underlying officers' inclusion on the list. Some might have been convicted criminally or flagged by judges for lying in court. Others had been found guilty in internal investigations. And many have been accused of wrongdoing and their cases are pending. In some cases, prosecutors' lists don't even say why an officer's name is there.
In Miami-Dade County, internal training presentations obtained by USA TODAY show prosecutors being taught legal tactics to avoid disclosing officers’ histories.
The documents say prosecutors don’t have to go out of their way to disclose, and the burden of proving they covered up a questionable officer’s history is on the defense.
Prosecutor training in Miami
In Miami-Dade County, internal training presentations obtained by USA TODAY show prosecutors being taught legal tactics to avoid disclosing officers’ histories. The documents say the burden of proving they covered up a questionable officer’s history is on the defense. The end of the slideshow casts disclosure as a game of strategy between prosecutors and the defense.
“Mere speculation by defense that information MAY be exculpatory is not enough to trigger state’s obligation to disclose,” the presentation states.
The end of the Miami training slideshow casts the strategy of hiding officer misconduct as a contest between prosecutors and the defense.
“You were happily playing Scrabble ... but now you’re playing Chess," one slide reads. “THAT’S A GAME CHANGER, SON.”
Ed Griffith, a spokesman for Katherine Fernandez Rundle, the elected state attorney in Miami-Dade County, contended the presentation does not provide instructions on avoiding disclosure of Brady material and said the chess game comparison in the slide was an attempt to “add a level of attention-getting levity to a very serious subject.”
“The problem with levity is that it does not always accomplish its intended goal,” he said. “This appears to be one of those situations.”
Bennett Gershman, a former prosecutor and now Pace Law School professor, said the courts have made it clear the burden is on prosecutors and leans heavily toward disclosure. Failing to disclose is not a game to be won, Gershman said, but a duty designed to protect the integrity of the court system.
“It’s dishonest if that’s the way they’re presenting the obligation of Brady,” he said.
Gershman said the lack of tracking and policies about disclosing officers’ misconduct is troubling because it’s at the heart of the legal system’s promise to provide every defendant a fair trial – a standard prosecutors are sworn to protect.
“If you're putting a witness on the stand – whoever the witnesses, but particularly a police officer – and you have doubts about his credibility, doesn't that raise a question of whether you're prosecuting a guilty or an innocent person?” Gershman asked.
Officers with misconduct in their past continue to testify
USA TODAY sought records and comments from nearly every state prosecutor in the country to compile the first national view of where Brady lists exist and don’t.
Nearly half the prosecutorial districts that responded reported not keeping an official list. More than 1,000 did not respond to the requests at all.
In Chicago, the Cook County State’s Attorney, the second biggest prosecutor’s office in the country, said it does not keep a Brady list.
Instead, the office sends individual memos to its prosecutors when it learns a police officer was convicted of a crime or was found by a judge to have lied under oath, telling them to avoid using the cops if possible or to notify defense attorneys. The system leaves individual prosecutors in the sprawling jurisdiction with America’s second-largest police force on their own to track officers with credibility issues.
We want to hear from you if you believe you’ve encountered misconduct by a law enforcement officer or agency. You can send tips and records about an officer or agency to policetips@usatoday.com.
The result: A USA TODAY analysis found that dozens of officers flagged by judges or convicted of crimes were summoned to testify at trial in recent years, with no assurance the defense was notified.
In at least four officers’ cases, criminal court judges found the cops lied under oath during a trial. Court records show those four officers alone were listed as witnesses in at least 48 cases after prosecutors began receiving notices about them.
Overall, officers who appeared in notification memos were called to testify in cases resulting in more than 100 felony convictions from 2013-2018.
Across the country, thousands of defendants have gone to trial with no clear way to know that law enforcement witnesses had a history of misconduct.
David B. Green was among the officers who continued to patrol the streets despite a history of misconduct.
In 2011, Little Rock police suspended Green after he bashed a handcuffed suspect’s face into the ground during an arrest, then lied about it.
Green claimed the suspect resisted him by trying to stand up during the encounter. A department review of body camera footage showed that the suspect didn’t try to stand. Two other officers were holding the man down while Green beat him.
Green was suspended for 30 days for untruthfulness and excessive force. His personnel file includes at least 19 suspensions and reprimands for offenses including domestic violence, excessive force and neglect of duty.
Green, who unsuccessfully appealed the charges against him, could not be reached for comment. In an interview conducted as part of an internal affairs investigation, Green did not deny the allegations against him but expressed dedication toward his job. "Even though I get to work and I may not go home, I still love this job," he said. Department records show he is a military veteran and received commendations in 2000 and 2005 for taking lifesaving actions.
Until November 2015, Green continued to patrol Arkansas’ largest city. His word was relied upon to arrest and help convict defendants.
Former Little Rock Police Chief Stuart Thomas disclosed in legal proceedings that his agency doesn’t inform anyone at the courthouse about problems with his officers.
“We don’t maintain or forward a result of every disciplinary action to either the U.S. attorney or the state court,” Thomas said in a deposition in 2013. “I’m not aware that we provide a list or a continuing update or anything like that.”
USA TODAY reviewed discipline files for Little Rock police officers going back 15 years, then compared them with court records. The analysis found officers who the department determined lied or committed crimes were witnesses in at least 4,000 cases.
Officer Kenneth Thompson filed a report falsely claiming no one was injured after he knocked a suspect off his chair in 2005, despite video evidence to the contrary. He was suspended by the police department for 30 days. His sworn testimony has been used in at least 687 criminal cases since then.
Pulaski County Chief Deputy Prosecutor John Johnson
When this office is made aware of disciplinary actions by an officer (and) they're going to testify as a witness, we disclose that to the judge and let the judge make an independent finding as far as whether or not something is admissible pursuant to Brady.
Officers James Stanchak and Michael Terry were suspended in 2011 after they were caught on body camera video conspiring to lie about using force while arresting a man at a football game. Stanchak's sworn statements have since been used in 222 cases. Terry’s have been used in four.
Officer Eugene Gray was suspended for 30 days in 2008 after he lied to internal affairs investigators about an off-duty arrest he never reported. During that arrest, he seized a cellphone that was never turned into the police department as evidence. Gray’s word has been used in 256 prosecutions since 2009, court records show.
Pulaski County Chief Deputy Prosecutor John Johnson, whose office prosecutes cases in Little Rock, said the prosecutor's office handles cases properly when it is aware an officer participating in a criminal proceeding has been disciplined.
"When this office is made aware of disciplinary actions by an officer (and) they're going to testify as a witness," he said, "we disclose that to the judge and let the judge make an independent finding as far as whether or not something is admissible pursuant to Brady."
Wrongful convictions
Failing to disclose officers’ past lies and bad acts can lead to wrongful convictions.
Since 1988, data from the National Registry of Exonerations shows 987 people have been convicted, then exonerated in cases that involved a combination of official misconduct by prosecutors and perjury or a false report by police and other witnesses. They spent an average of 12 years each behind bars.
The registry shows a rapid increase in exonerations in such cases. There were 112 in 2018 stemming from government misconduct in the prosecution – up from 48 in 2008.
Among those wrongly imprisoned was Debra Milke.
After returning from a trip to see Santa Claus at the Metrocenter mall in Phoenix, Milke’s 4-year-old son, Christopher, asked her if he could go back.
Debra Milke cries as she is embraced by Attorney Lori Voepel, right, during a news conference, March 24, 2015, Phoenix. Milke spoke out for the...MATT YORK, AP
Milke sent Christopher back to the mall with a friend, James Styers, who drove him to a nearby ravine and shot him three times in the head.
Styers and another man were convicted of the murder, but so was Milke, on the word of a Phoenix detective, Armando Saldate Jr., who interrogated Milke and concluded she plotted the killing.
During Milke’s trial, evidence was withheld from her and her attorneys: Saldate’s police personnel file, which detailed eight cases in which indictments or convictions were thrown out because Saldate lied or otherwise violated a defendants’ rights.
In 2013, Milke was freed after 25 years in prison.
For Revat Vara, the cost of 11 years behind bars has been heavy.
Vara’s father died one week after his trial. His mother contracted leukemia while he was in prison, and he was unable to care for her. Two years after his release, he struggles to pick up his life.
“Once the structure of the family goes ... pretty much everything starts falling apart,” he said.
Revat Vara, left, who spent 11 years in prison for a wrongful DWI conviction, speaks with his lawyer Maverick Ray, right, in Houston. Vara studied...SCOTT DALTON FOR USA TODAY
Vara said he grew up in a low-income community in Houston, and his formal education ended at eighth grade. He made his living before his arrest working odd jobs in a convenience store and at a plant.
Once he found himself behind bars, Vara said, he began contacting attorneys to ask for help with an appeal.
He couldn’t afford the legal help, but one lawyer sent him information about Lindsey’s history of misconduct – which was well known among local defense attorneys.
Vara researched how to file legal appeals on his own.
I knew I could never trust nobody again. The only way that I'm going to do this is I got to study the law. I've got to get in that law library and fight for my freedom.
“I knew I could never trust nobody again,” he said. “The only way that I'm going to do this is I got to study the law. I've got to get in that law library and fight for my freedom.”
Vara said he spent two hours every day in the library. He was allowed a double session on Thursdays and Saturdays. He convinced one corrections officer to spend her lunch in the library to give him an extra hour.
It worked. But Vara is still trying to put his life back to together on the outside.
Still living in Houston after his release from prison, Vara said he hopes to attend law school or start a nonprofit group to educate youth in his community about the law. He said he is not angry at the officer whose testimony put him in jail, but he is frustrated that the criminal justice system allowed the cop’s misconduct to go on in secret for years.
“It wasn’t Mr. Lindsey’s fault, it was the public’s fault,” Vara said. “Mr. Lindsey was allowed to do what he did because they allowed him to do it.”
The team behind this investigation
REPORTING AND ANALYSIS: Mark Nichols, Eric Litke, James Pilcher, Aaron Hegarty, Andrew Ford, Brett Kelman, John Kelly, Matt Wynn, Steve Reilly, Megan Cassidy, Ryan Martin, Jonathan Anderson, Andrew Wolfson, Bethany Bruner, Benjamin Lanka, Gabriella Novello, Mark Hannan
FROM THE INVISIBLE INSTITUTE: Sam Stecklow, Andrew Fan, Bocar Ba
EDITING: Chris Davis, John Kelly, Brad Heath
GRAPHICS AND ILLUSTRATIONS: Jim Sergent, Karl Gelles
PHOTOGRAPHY AND VIDEOGRAPHY: Phil Didion, Christopher Powers, David Hamlin, Robert Lindeman
DIGITAL PRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT: Spencer Holladay, Annette Meade, Craig Johnson, Ryan Marx, Chris Amico, Josh Miller
SOCIAL MEDIA, ENGAGEMENT AND PROMOTION: Anne Godlasky, Alia Dastagir, Felecia Wellington Radel, Elizabeth Shell
There are some 150,000 fewer homes built each year, and at higher prices, due to shared monopoly (oligopoly). Our antitrust laws must be enforced. That's one of two leading reasons why there's not enough "affordable housing." The other reason is ditch digger wages, empowered by union busting going back to the maladministration of President RONALD WILSON REAGAN.
Here in St. Johns County, supported by corrupt Sheriff DAVID BERNARD SHOAR, who legally changed his name from "HOAR" in 1994, developers own our County government and County Administrator.
The Wall Street oligarchy of Temple Destoryers is here.
A cartel of blundering housing oligopolists is here in St. Johns County, "God's country":
inflating home prices,
deflating resale prices,
refusing to hire local contractors,
bringing in their own favored firms,
contributing to political campaigns,
hiring crooked lawyers,
destroying our forests,
destroying our wetlands,
denuding wildlife habitat,
leaving out affordable housing,
deleting affordable housing requirements after projects are approved.
These devious Wall Street corporations have the effrontery to call themselves "developers."
The only thing they seem to "develop" is human misery, as people can't afford to own their own homes because of economic concentration.
We need antitrust and environmental crimes enforcement. Now.
Economists conclude that there are 150,000 new homes built every year due to economic concentration. As the ingenue said in Garson Kanin's play (and movies), Born Yesterday, "It's a cartel!"
When the smoke cleared after the Great Recession, the home builders who survived were in a surprisingly strong position. They had fewer competitors and more power in their local markets. They have since built on that advantage, consolidating until many markets are controlled by just a few builders. Their power has exacerbated the country’s affordable-housing crisis, some economists say.
U.S. housing debates rarely involve the “O” word. But oligopolies, a cousin of monopolies in which a few powerful players corner the market, are emerging everywhere. From 2006 to 2015, the number of builders who controlled 90 percent of a typical market dropped by a quarter, according to a recent working paper by economists Luis Quintero and Jacob Cosman of Carey Business School at Johns Hopkins.
The economists find this dwindling competition has cost the country approximately 150,000 additional homes a year — all else being equal. With fewer competitors, builders are under less pressure to beat out rival projects, and can time their efforts so that they produce fewer homes while charging higher prices.From 2013 to 2017 home prices grew more than twice as fast as they would have if the market hadn’t consolidated, the economists found.
To be sure, industry experts note that the creeping oligopolies that have come to define the housing market are often a symptom of deeper problems with scarcity of land, cost of labor, restrictive zoning, NIMBYISM (also known as not-in-my-backyardism) and the financial markets.
On a national scale, mergers among building behemoths, such as Lennar’s 2017 union with CalAtlantic, have increased the market share of the top 20 builders from 21 percent in 2008 to 29 percent in 2018, according to the National Association of Home Builders. But a casual observer still might not consider the housing market as an oligopoly. After all, there are still thousands upon thousands of builders across the country.
But oligopolies in housing are fundamentally different due to three simple factors, which we will list for the first time here: location, location and location.
Consumers are shopping for homes in a narrowly defined town, suburb, neighborhood or other market, and the only competitors that matter are those within the same market, Quintero said.
To understand the difference, consider the cardigan sweater. They are easy to ship, and — if we’re being honest — one wool sweater is about as good as the next. Consumers who could not afford something knitted in Virginia could still get an affordable sweater from a supplier in Alaska or Arkansas.
But land is not like sweaters. It is harder to ship across state lines, for one thing. A beautiful shovel-ready plot in Alaska is useless to a federal worker who’s being priced out of the market in Northern Virginia. A wealth of competitors in Anchorage would do little to intimidate a developer in Arlington.
Quintero and Cosman evaluated data from Metrostudy, a housing-data firm whose representatives pore over local records and visit sites to track construction progress. They analyzed data from 137 local markets stretching from the southern suburbs of D.C. to the northern suburbs of New York City. They extended their analysis to the rest of the country using federal data.
To exclude less-competitive markets, they limited their analysis to Census Bureau-defined places with at least 25,000 residents.
By 2015, most of the 137 housing markets they studied were concentrated in the hands of just a few builders, according to a metric government regulators use for antitrust calculations. That’s a large increase from 2006, when the economists’ analysis begins, and enough to raise red flags among regulators if it happened at the national level.
Oligopolies are theoretically linked with higher prices, but Robert Dietz, chief economist for NAHB, said it is difficult to disentangle consolidation from the other forces making housing expensive in the United States.
Housing and land costs could be a cause of consolidation, not an effect. As land prices and other costs rise, developers sometimes acquire smaller competitors to gain access to their inventory of lots, Dietz said. “Market concentration is occurring in many markets, but it is often due to a lack of land and a lack of builder loan availability.”
Ali Wolf is an economist with Metrostudy’s sister company, Meyers Research. She agreed land availability, along with the costs of labor, regulation and materials, is driving the lack of affordable housing as well as the consolidation in the industry.
“Land is a scarce resource, and once you use it, it’s gone,” Wolf said, adding later that “it’s not like we have those huge tracts of land in the most desirable cities that are available to be built on today like in the past.”\
The largest builders are national publicly traded companies that have thrived even as new-home construction remainsfar belowhistorical levels, but success in real estate is local. Relationships with city or county officials, which oligopolies have used to cement their advantage since the recession, are often decisive.
Brookings Institution affordable-housing expert Jenny Schuetz praised Cosman and Quintero’s analysis and said that while market concentration helps explain part of the housing shortage in high-cost regions, the debate always comes back to expensive regulation and its cousin, NIMBYISM.
NAHB estimates that from 2011 to 2016, regulatory costs rose 30 percent to $84,671 for a typical new U.S. single-family home. That is a high bar for smaller builders to clear.
“Most of the ordinances and rules under which the county building and zoning departments operate are so convoluted and confusing that they don’t mean anything,” local developer and Washington Post columnist Justin Pierce wrote in April. “The entire system benefits the large developers who pay huge impact fees to the county and strike deals to get a project passed,” he added later.
Big firms’ advantages are compounded by their access to capital and credit, Schuetz said. They can hoard land for years and try to time the market, which further restricts the supply of new housing.
“If zoning and other local permitting processes are complicated, land is expensive, and the time needed to develop a project is long, then only large, well-capitalized, politically savvy developers will be able to build,” the Brookings fellow said.
Delightful use of Latin by one of my favorite "sensation-seeking columnists," as Dwight David Eisenhower would have called Dana Milbank. Or as we say in Latin, "Quo vobis videtor?" (What do y'all reckon?
Mick Mulvaney’s bombshell briefing on Ukraine, in 2 minutes
Here are key moments from acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney's remarks to reporters about Ukraine on Oct. 17. (Zach Purser Brown/The Washington Post)
Three weeks ago, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unveiled the impeachment inquiry with a Latin phrase spoken by Julius Caesar when he crossed the Rubicon. “Alea iacta est,” she said. The die is cast.
Since then, President Trump has absolved himself by repeating — ad infinitum — some Latin of his own: “There was no quid pro quo.” No this for that.
Enter Mick Mulvaney, deus ex machina, to destroy Trump’s defense. The president’s (still) acting chief of staff briefed reporters Thursday and, in flagrante delicto, admitted Trump committed the sine qua non of a quid pro quo.
Mulvaney said there was “no question” that one of the reasons Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine was to force Ukraine to investigate “corruption” related to the Democratic Party. “And that is absolutely appropriate,” Mulvaney argued. “We do that all the time with foreign policy.”Thus did the White House admit — ipso facto — to the exact crime Trump is accused of in the impeachment inquiry. “No quid pro quo” became “quid pro quo — so?” (a.k.a. quid apropos).
Mulvaney’s modus operandi is clear enough: The White House must be in extremis realizing that depositions to Congress by administration officials are proving a de facto quid pro quo. Trump needs a new defense.
To be fair, Mulvaney didn’t admit a quid pro Joe (trading military aid for dirt on the Democratic front-runner) but a quid pro down-low (trading military aid for dirt supporting a conspiracy theory about Democrats). Still, the transcript of Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president makes clear it was a quid pro combo.
In a sense, Mulvaney is correct when he says “we do that all the time.” Trump’s tenure has been one big quid pro. He decreed Thursday that next year’s Group of Seven gathering of world leaders must be at the Doral resort he owns in a clear quid pro cash flow for the Trump Organization. His funneling of government business to Mar-a-Lago has been a quid pro chateau. Having the U.S. military patronize his Scotland property is a quid pro Glasgow, and Vice President Pence’s hawking of Trump’s Ireland property is a blatant quid pro brogue. Trump’s Washington hotel rakes in lobbyists’ and foreign governments’ cash in a quid pro dough, and government funds paid to his New York and New Jersey properties complete the quid pro portfolio.
This benefits not only Trump but his sons, in what might be called a quid pro slow (or a quid pro I dunno). Donald Trump Jr.’s protests about Biden family nepotism this week, while ignoring his own, can only be termed a quid pro bozo. Trump’s national security adviser, Robert O’Brien, last week, floated a quid pro whistleblow: He’s clearing out career professionals (prospective whistleblowers) by slashing the NSC staff. The administration also tried to block cooperation with the inquiry, in a quid pro Pompeo. And then there’s Trump’s decision to let Rudy Giuliani take over U.S. foreign policy: a quid pro schmoe.
Mulvaney, in his appearance Thursday, attempted a quid pro John Doe, pretending that he didn’t know the names of the officials testifying to Congress. The attorney general, William Barr, has trashed his principles to give Trump a quid pro ego.
Trump has been doing this sort of thing since a quid pro big toe kept him out of Vietnam. He abandoned gun-safety plans after meeting with the NRA, a quid pro ammo. His voter-suppression efforts are a quid pro Jim Crow. In a quid pro Kudlow, he convinced free-market conservatives to embrace a trade war. His tax cut, a quid pro CEO, ballooned the debt in a quid pro borrow. Evangelical Christians tolerate his immorality in exchange for his judicial nominees, a quid pro Roe . He paid hush money to Stormy Daniels, a quid pro lie low. Much of his presidency has been a quid pro Moscow.
Hetrades in false claims(quid pro Pinocchio) and plugs for friendly Fox News hosts (quid pro puppet show). And his requiring of constant flattery from underlings (quid pro braggadocio) has turned the West Wing into a quid pro freak show.
Because impeachment has made us all Latin speakers, I asked my longtime classics consultant, Vanessa, to translate into genuine Latin some of Trump’s trade-offs:
Quid pro impendio (this for payment).
Quid pro deverticulo (this for a resort).
Quid pro luto (this for dirt).
Quid pro vitio (this for a crime).
Quid pro reo (this for a sinner).
Quid pro imperio (this for power).
Giving Giuliani responsibility for anything? A blatant quid pro asino (this for a fool). But that’s pro forma for a president who sold his soul (quid pro animo) and made his office a quid pro mimo: this for a farce.
Good for James Hare, the Watworth County, S.D. State's Attorney for issuing a warrant for the arrest of a county auditor who repeatedly fails to make public documents available for public meetings. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "Secrecy is for losers." This is a persistent problem in St. Johns County, where corruption is secrecy is rampant and where:
St. Augustine City Manager JOHN PATRICK REGAN, P.E., withheld candidate names and applications until after the only public comment period at the meeting where former state legislator, Upchurch Bailey and Upchurch partner and current Flagler College Law and History Professor Tracy Upchurch was duked in as interim Mayor of St. Augustine March 4, 2019 in a Triple Crown of Lawbreaking. REGAN's criminal Grand Theft of our democracy in Our Nation's Oldest and Oddest City was aided and abetted by Assistant City Attorney John Cary, who issued a patently false legal opinion that current Commissioners could not be considered because it was an "election" and not appointment, invoking the resign-to-run law, a proposition at which St. Augustine Beach City Attorney, and former St. Augustine City Attorney, James Patrick Wilson literally laughed when I told him that night.)
St. Johns County Administrator MICHAEL DAVID WANCHICK and County Attorney PATRICK FRANCIS McCORMACK repeatedly make promiscuous use of "red files" to sneak stuff on agendas, including rubber-stamping a secret one-year-old MOU with FBI for a St. Johns County shooting range;
St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District NEVER provides backup material on its website.
Enough.
As Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis said, "Electric light is the best policeman. Sunlight is the best disinfectant."
From Gannett's Sioux Falls, S.D. Argus Leader, which printed my letter about our beloved neighbor, former South Dakota U.S. Senator George Stanley McGovern, our 1972 Democratic Presidential nominee, while Senator McGovern was reported to be in hospice there:
County auditor arrested on charges of breaking public meeting law
The Walworth County auditor faces charges of violating South Dakota law after she was arrested and charged with failing to follow state public meeting laws.
Walworth County Auditor Rebecca Krein is accused of violating a law that requires government entities to make documents available to the public when they are used during official meetings. Walworth County State's Attorney James Hare issued a warrant for her arrest last week after he received a complaint that Krein failed to make documents available for an Aug. 6 meeting.
Krein declined to comment on the advice of her lawyer.
David Bordewyk, the executive director of the South Dakota Newspaper Association, said Krein’s arrest is likely the first time a public official has been arrested in South Dakota for violating open meeting laws. Those laws were first drafted in 1965.
“I don’t think it’s ever happened,” Bordewyk said. “This would be a first.”
Hare said the county has had a chronic problem of failing to follow public meeting and record laws. Agendas haven’t been posted on time, nor have meeting minutes. This has bred a lot of mistrust about county government among some residents there.
“This is why we have all these problems with government these days,” Hare said.
“It was chronic,” he added. “You don’t want the people coming into meetings with pitchforks and torches creating havoc. Give the people what they want.”
Krein is accused of violating a law that requires government bodies to make printed materials available to the public when those materials are distributed to the body or its employees for use during meetings. The material can be posted to the government’s website 24 hours in advance of a meeting, or available in printed form at the official business office.
If materials aren’t posted to the web site, it must be available for public inspection during the meeting.
Hare said his office deals with confidential information such as child and neglect cases.
“Other than that, everything in this building is public information,” he said.
Krein is charged with a class two misdemeanor, punishable with a maximum 30 days in jail and $500 fine.
Cool article from School Library Journal about the influence of librarians on the life of the late U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings.
Mr. Louis W. Caccesse, the first Library Director of Camden County College in Blackwood, N.J. was one of my mentors as a teenager.
My mom was the purchasing secretary there, and he encouraged my reading and research. He would always give fair consideration to suggestions to order books that my mom and I \read about in The New York Times Book Review. I fondly remember watching the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings on a TV in the Library staff lounge and talking about it with the librarians. He wrote one of nine letters of recommendation filed with Georgetown University, whose interviewer told me in 1973, "We've never heard of your high school."
My high school librarian, Ms. Gould, kicked out of the high school library for six (6) days in 1974 or talking (about impeachment and Watergate, natch).
Thank you, Mr. Caccese!
I forgive you, Ms. Gould.
From School Library Journal:
"The People Who Helped Me the Most Were the Librarians"— Rep. Elijah Cummings
Congressman Elijah Cummings, in this brief clip, recalls the time he spent as a child at the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore.
"The people who helped me the most were the librarians," Cummings told Steve Kroft in a 60 Minutes interview broadcast in January of this year, adding that the public library was the only integrated institution in his neighborhood.
Speaking about the librarians, whom he credited with staying past their regular working hours to help him with his schoolwork, enabling him to get out of special ed, the longtime Baltimore congressman, who was also chair of the House Oversight Committee, got emotional.
"There are a lot of good people who really care," he said.
The complete interview with Cummings, who died Thursday, is available from CBS News.
There's St. Johns County Commissioner Jeb Smith, Vice Chairman of the SJC BoCC, in the blue shirt.
The FBI has your fingerprints on file, boys and girls. From those misguided misanthropes at our St. Augustine Tea Party website, which claims support from St. Johns County Commission Vice Chairman Jeb Smith. SATP satraps also preaches hate against our St. Augustine City Manager, John Patrick Regan, P.E., of whom it says he should have been a social worker or a priest:
October 9, 2019
Gun Safety First
Photos by TCCR Staff
The Tea Party went WEST for October 8th Open Meeting, to the very edge of St. Johns County. Yes, there's lots of land out there and people packing 'heat'. To hone skills, there’s a 1000 yard gun range were you can sight your rifle.
"In times like this, when shootings happen every night in Jacksonville, just north of St. Johns County, it is smart to pack 'heat'”, says Lance Thate, St Augustine Tea Party (SATP) Chairman, "However remember to have a valid concealed permit for your hand piece".
Shootings and stabbings are on the increase in St. Augustine, once a sleepy historical city. Today, the City has a growing night life with drunkenness, growing civil lawlessness and a police force hamstrung by ‘Social Warrior', John P. Regan the City Manager, who should have been a social worker or a priest. Regan was thrilled when he helped clean up the septic tank problems in West Augustine but neglected residences on the beach. The last straw was Regan's claim that as City Manager he could have the ' Veterans Memorial in the Plaza taken down, in secret at night, in just 8 hours bypassing public protests. Former Mayor, Nancy Shaver, resisted and stopped him. His sympathy was for the 'race baiter’, Ron Rawls, and the "Take em Down" Communists from Jacksonville.
Out here in the West is Hastings, potato farming country, where a man is a MAN, a woman is a WOMAN and where County Commissioner, Jeb Smith, lives with his family. His children say "Yes, sir", "No, Sir”, "Yes Ma'am” and “No Ma'am". There is no androgyny permitted out here. People know the difference between a bull and a heifer! Here’s Jeb, with Lance and Lucky Howe, a highly respected WW11 Marine Vet and Tea Party member.
Photos by TCCR Staff
“So remember: When holding your pistol in your hand while talking to someone, don’t keep your finger on the trigger and do not point down to your foot or you might Shoot Yourself in the Foot! Always keep your trigger finger outside the trigger guide”, Steve Moranda advised the Tea Party attendees.
Jeb's father, Wayne Smith, owns a gun shop, shooting range and a big spread and he is a man to be reckoned with. Mr. Smith hosted the Tea Party event.
"Well, Folks, we had a great time at the range. Keep your powder dry cause we’er gonna be a fussin with these Communist Democrats; the feud with the lying critters in D.C. is comin up soon. We all got guns and we know how to use em! Yes, Sireee!” Dave Heimbold, SATP Media Chairman, said in the spirit of the event.
I agree. As a teenager, I studied the Senate, reading everything I could get my hands on, studying the Senate the way Masters & Johnson once studied insects, before they met and studied sex.
As a college student, I worked for three U.S. Senators, 1974-1977. The Senate is a unique institution, which Gladstone once called "the greatest deliberative body in the world."
When the Senate sits as a court hearing TRUMP's impeachment trial, Chief Justice John Roberts will provide. We will watch our Senate transformed, once again, into a deliberative body. I still believe in a place called Hope. I believe that solons are fully capable of removing TRUMP, based on the facts and the evidence.
As John Adams said in defense of the British soldiers accused of crimes in the Boston Massacre, "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” (John Adams, Argument in Defense of the British Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials, Dec. 4, 1770).
We in the reality-based community look for a fair trial in a fair tribunal.
As the House of Representatives builds momentum to impeach President Trump, conventional wisdom holds that the constitutionally required two-thirds vote in the Senate to remove him would be impossible.
This conventional wisdom is wrong.
While getting rid of the president this way remains far from certain, it’s more likely than most observers will admit. And it’s becoming a stronger possibility day by day as Trump’s foreign policy stumbles remind GOP senators that speaking out against the president doesn’t have to be political suicide.
Historically inclined naysayers cite the acquittals of our only two impeached presidents as support for the argument that Trump won’t be removed. Those examples, both of which ended with the commander in chief beating the charges against him and serving out his full term, on first blush do appear to bolster that case.Should the House impeach Trump just over Ukraine? Or for more?
Andrew Johnson’s experience in particular astounds to this day. After that president’s egregious behavior and manifest unfitness for office got him impeached by the Republican-dominated House in 1868, the Senate failed to remove him from office — by one vote. That result came despite the GOP holding a greater-than-two-thirds majority in the Senate.
The wrong lesson, however, can be taken from Johnson’s nonconviction. Senators allowed the president to remain in place partly because they suspected the law that the president had violated to prompt his impeachment, the Tenure of Office Act, itself stood on particularly shaky ground. (It was, in fact, later ruled unconstitutional.) Other articles of impeachment against Johnson included “crimes” like speaking ill of Congress in public — which may very well have contravened a lingering norm from the early days of the republic but fell very well short of warranting immediate ejection from the presidency.
What about the most recent failed conviction of an impeached chief executive? After Bill Clinton’s articles of impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice passed the House in 1999, GOP senators couldn’t muster even a majority vote to convict him on either article, much less the two-thirds needed to kick him out of the White House.
But it’s worth recalling that Clinton’s acquittal came largely because his violations of law were intended to cover up a personal affair, not a matter of state, and were not seen as a persistent pattern of inherent unfitness. The situation now is quite different. Trump’s actions on the Ukraine scandal alone implicate the constitutional fabric itself, and they build on inappropriate activities described in detail in the scathing Mueller report. This all puts senators tasked with judging Trump in a different place than those who judged Clinton.
The Senate-will-never-convict club can discount this history, pointing instead to congressional Republicans’ sycophancy during the past two years, and credibly say, “GOP senators are in lock-step with the president and will rally around their fellow Republican.” And indeed, getting 20 out of 53 Republican senators to agree to boot him from office won’t be easy under any circumstances.Trump, however, is far from an institutional Republican. He had never run for office as a Republican before the 2016 presidential election. From the 1980s into the Obama years, hedonatedmore to Democratic candidates than to Republican ones. As late as 2004, he said heidentified more as a Democratthan as a Republican.
His party credentials contrast sharply with the most recent nearly impeached Republican president, Richard M. Nixon. By the time the Judiciary Committee voted on articles of impeachment against Nixon, he had been a steady partisan for almost 30 years: a Republican representative and senator from California from 1947 until 1953, vice president of the United States for eight years under Dwight D. Eisenhower, the party’s standard-bearer in the 1960 presidential election, Republican candidate in the 1962 California gubernatorial race and president since 1969.
So when Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.) in early August 1974 led a GOP triumvirate to the White House to tell Nixon that he’d lost the congressional support necessary to hold on to the presidency — telling him, “There’s not more than 15 senators for you” — he was addressing the man who many Republicans saw as the face of the party.
Not so now. While the GOP has largelyembraced Trump’s political programeven where it breaks with long-standing party orthodoxy, he has earned little enduring loyalty within the establishment. Republican senators remain loathe to break openly with the president, but former senator Jeff Flake last month candidly assessed that 35 of his former GOP colleagues would vote to remove Trump from office if the poll were taken in private. “Anybody who has sat through two years, as I have, of Republican luncheons,” Flake also said, “realizes that there’s not a lot of love for the president.”
Flake’s point has limited utility; a Senate trial of Trump would not end, of course, with a private vote. His observation nevertheless reveals a core truth: Republican support for Trump is highly instrumental, not fundamental. If the president’s overall approval rating sat above 60 percent (as Bill Clinton’s did during his impeachment trial), or if the majority of the American people opposed impeachment and removal as they did then, or even only if support among Republicans for Trump’s impeachment and removal remained in the single digits, fear of Trump’s tweets would probably keep GOP senators in line.
Polls now tell a different story. Trump’s aggregated approval rating has never escaped the 35 to 45 percent band, keeping it stunningly short of Clinton’s overall numbers. Plus, a new Fox News poll shows 51 percent of respondents support impeaching and removing Trump. And a Washington Post-Schar School poll reveals that 18 percent of Republicans support his impeachment and removal.
In this environment, even the small dose of political courage we’ve seen this week from Republicans on Capitol Hill matters. On the Ukraine affair, at least two GOP senators — Mitt Romney (Utah) and Ben Sasse (Neb.) — publiclyexpressed concernabout the president’s actions. Before Trump’s angry tweets responding to Romney could become a headline story, the president’s decision to expose Kurds in northern Syria to Turkish attacks spurred muchwider criticismfrom Republican senators, including firm Trump ally Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.). Talk is cheap, yes. But coming on the heels of so many instances of GOP senators’ silence in the wake of Trump’s controversies, one can forgive The Post’s Shane Harris for calling it a “Republican rebellion.” Most importantly, the president uncharacteristically refrained from lashing out at those who disagreed with him.
Political momentum has odd properties. When tides turn, they often turn quickly and harshly. While the basic math still points to a Senate acquittal, this week nevertheless brings to mind Winston Churchill’s words after the British victory at El Alamein in 1942: “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
A months-long investigation byTriad City Beat (Folio Weekly’s sister paper in Greensboro, NC) revealed that dozens of first responders, detention officers, police and enlisted military personnel joined or were added to a Facebook group where administrators and members shared content promoting violence against Muslims, undocumented immigrants, abortion doctors and Democratic politicians. The group was established by notorious militia leader Chris Hill, the Marine veteran who leads the so-called III% Security Force. Hill set up the Roll Call page as a public Facebook group in January to mobilize support for an upcoming Nov. 9 rally in Washington, DC and northern Virginia to promote the Second Amendment, Trump’s border wall, voter ID and abortion restrictions. It is now a secret group.
Given the incendiary nature of its content—Hill is a divisive figure even on the right—it’s disturbing to discover first responders among the ranks of Roll Call. Members included:
• An EMT from eastern Kentucky who publicly identified himself in a comment thread on one of Hill’s Facebook Live videos as an “armed EMT” and member of Kentucky Security Force III%;
• An EMT who has worked for multiple first-responder agencies in central Georgia, who commented, “Guns up” at the beginning of an incendiary video hosted by Hill and his militia associates, and who continues to maintain ties with Hill;
• A police officer in upstate New York who commented, “Guns up,” on the Roll Call page, uses a Medieval crusader image as his Facebook profile, and has expressed negative feelings towards undocumented immigrants on social media;
• An EMS volunteer in New Jersey who made a comment on the Roll Call page that appears to express sympathy with a Louisiana police officer fired for saying US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez should be shot;
• A lieutenant firefighter in eastern Ohio who uses a Confederate flag with the text “Support your local whiteboys” as his Facebook cover photo, and makes posts on his personal Facebook page that are disparaging towards Muslims and undocumented immigrants;
• And a volunteer with another eastern Ohio fire department whose personal Facebook page displays memes that disparage Muslims.
Our investigation of Roll Call took place against a backdrop of increasing political polarization—and increasingly violent political rhetoric. First responders are supposed to serve the public without bias, but some have come under scrutiny in recent months for their support of violent, right-wing extremism on social media.
In July, firefighter Caleb Folwell was fired from the Julian Fire Department and North Chatham Fire Department, both in North Carolina, after posting on Facebook that immigrants in detention should be “exterminated,” calling for the fantasized violence to be broadcast “over Mexican national TV to send a message that if you cross illegally you die.”
In the same month, Gretna, Louisiana police Officer Charles Rispoli was fired for writing on Facebook that Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, an outspoken Democratic lawmaker, “needs a round … and I don’t mean the kind she used to serve.” Another officer, Angelo Varisco was also fired for liking the post.
And in August, Capt. Thomas Woodword resigned after driving his truck into a group of Jewish protesters outside a Rhode Island detention facility that contracts with U.S. Immigration Customs Enforcement.
Earlier this year, an investigation by Reveal found that hundreds of active-duty and retired law enforcement officers across the country are members of anti-Islam, misogynistic or anti-government militia groups on Facebook.
***
The major thrust of the national Second Amendment rally scheduled for Nov. 9 is opposition to so-called “red flag laws,” which allow police and family members to petition the courts for the authority to temporarily remove firearms from a person deemed to be a danger to others or themselves. The chosen location of the rally—on the Arlington Memorial Bridge—is symbolic in the minds of the rally organizers of a line between the more lenient gun laws in Virginia and more restrictive laws on the books in Washington D.C.
Reflecting the tension between libertarian and authoritarian tendencies in the militia movement, the demands published on the Roll Call page read like a checklist of both traditional conservative and Trumpist causes. Members wanted the federal government to build a border wall, require photo ID to participate in elections and restrict abortion. They vaguely threatened that “if no remedies are timely available, we the people, without further notice, may seek all remedies afforded to us” under the Constitution. To diffuse the focus even further, organizers added a pro-Confederate “Heritage Not Hate” event at the Lincoln Memorial.
While the militia movement has traditionally maintained a skeptical stance towards federal power, the election of Donald Trump reordered its priorities. Last fall, Hill told a Danish reporter: “If [the Democrats] win the House and the Senate, they are going to move forward with impeachment for some bogus, bullshit reason. If they succeed in impeaching President Trump, then we will back Trump.” Asked to elaborate, Hill said, “With a use of force, if need be.”
The militia movement emerged in the early 1990s as the collapse of the Soviet Union eliminated communism as a credible threat, and paranoia about globalism, embodied in the United Nations and multilateral cooperation, became a preoccupation of the far right.
“Foundational to their ideology is the belief that virtually the whole rest of the world has been taken over by a globalist, tyrannical government,” said Mark Pitcavage, a senior researcher at the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism. “They call it the ‘New World Order.’ They see the United States as the last bastion of freedom, and they believe the U.S. government is actively collaborating with the New World Order. Their idea is that once the Second Amendment is compromised and their guns are taken away, the United States will be absorbed into the New World Order.”
Pitcavage said militia activists had gravitated to marginal political candidates like Ron Paul in the past, but Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign was the first time they aligned with anyone who was truly viable. Trump’s election effectively realigned the priorities of the militia movement.
“They strongly support Donald Trump,” Pitcavage said. “A lot of them really emphasize, from 2017, less opposition to the federal government, and they direct their anger more on immigrants, Muslims and antifa. The militia movement has transferred its anger from president as the symbol of federal government to the enemies of Trump, as they see them. Should a Democrat be elected in 2020, it will go right back to the president.”
***
The synthesis of Second Amendment advocacy with hysterical Islamophobia, xenophobia, anti-abortion sentiment and hatred of Democratic politicians was on vivid display in a Facebook Live video posted by Hill in March. Chris Pickle, an EMT who has worked for three different EMS agencies in rural, central Georgia over the past year, commented at the 2:07 mark of the video, “Guns up.” What followed over the next 54 minutes was an orgy of animosity towards various imagined foes.
“If it takes dragging a [abortion] doctor away from a table to save that unborn child that’s 15 minutes away from its birthday, then drag that f*cking doctor away from the table, and yeah, take him outside and whup his ass,” Hill said.
Skylar Steward, a militia activist from Ohio who has since broken with Hill to form the American Constitutional Elites, commented in response: “F*ck a foot in the ass. I bet a bullet in the head would pass a clear f*cking message.”
Roughly 15 minutes later, imagining a war on American soil, Hill and his cohorts conjured a sinister Muslim enemy.
“There are live targets,” Hill said. “The enemy is here and want to f*cking destroy us and our way of life. When they get froggy and jump, we’re gonna put ’em on their ass.”
As the discussion veered into a fevered clarion about Muslims supposedly imposing sharia law from bases in Dearborn, Michigan and Islamburg, New York, Hill interjected, “You saw that New Zealand shooting, right?”
Greg Scott, another militia activist, opined that Brenton Tarrant, who live-streamed a slaughter of 51 people at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand on March 15 “was provoked.”
Hill was going in a different direction, suggesting the massacre might be a false flag.
“Wait,” he said. “Within 24 hours all their semiautomatic rifles are gone, and it’s an Islamic country, like just that quick. One shooting, one false-flag operation. One psy-op. Guns are gone, and you’re Islamic overnight.”
Hank Steward, Skylar’s father, commented that he had recently proposed “Muslim community patrols” on “comms,” the voice communication channel the militia network utilizes through the Zello app. Hill enthusiastically endorsed the idea.
“Let’s do a f*cking Three Percent patrol in Dearborn, Michigan or Islamburg, New York,” he said. “We show up, kick ass, and drink cold beer when the sun goes down.”
***
Peter Simi, an associate professor at Chapman University who studies extremist groups and violence, said it’s unrealistic to think that first responders can hold bigoted views without their biases bleeding over into the performance of their professional duties.
“If you have really strongly held beliefs that bias you in favor of certain groups, that’s a problem,” Simi said. “If you have strongly held views that involve hatred and disgust, that’s even more of a problem. Disgust is important because when you feel disgust, you want to distance yourself as much as possible from that. If they’re disgusted by certain immigrant groups or disgusted by Muslims, are they going to render the same care? Is it going to delay decisions that they make? Are they going to be less sensitive? Are they going to give priority to one group or another? I think these are reasonable questions to ask an EMT or firefighter that espouses these kind of views.”
The Code of Ethics adopted by the National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians in 2013 addresses both bias and social media use. The code states that EMS practitioners should “provide services based on human need, with compassion and respect for human dignity, unrestricted by consideration of nationality, race, creed or status.” It instructs practitioners “to use social media in a responsible and professional manner that does not discredit, dishonor or embarrass an EMS organization, co-workers, other healthcare practitioners, patients, individuals or the community at large.”
The Firefighter Code of Ethics developed by the National Society of Executive Fire Officers similarly calls upon firefighters to pledge to “never discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, creed, age, marital status, national origin, ancestry, sexual preference, medical condition or handicap,” and to “responsibly use social networking… in a manner that does not discredit, dishonor or embarrass my organization, the fire service and the public.”
***
Chris Pickle, the EMT in Georgia who commented on Chris Hill’s Facebook Live video in March, declined to comment for this story. In late August, Pickle commented on Hill’s personal Facebook page to inform him that he had to leave the Roll Call page because a news reporter called him and asked him how he would treat Muslims. (“I told him to F off,” Pickle said.) Lee Conner, the director of Telfair County EMS in Georgia, said Pickle resigned from the agency for personal reasons in early August. Conner said Pickle’s social media activity “needs to be addressed,” adding that it doesn’t put the agencies where he’s worked in a good light. “Anybody showing a bias towards a race, religion or creed, we can’t do that,” he added. “You set your county up for a lawsuit. It will be brought to a supervisor’s attention. You can’t have bias in this line of work.”
Mark Pitcavage of the Anti-Defamation League cautioned that membership in a Facebook group like Roll Call doesn’t automatically prove that someone is an extremist. Considering the innocuous name of the group and the fact that the name does not reference III% Security Force, he said it’s possible that membership “might be a vague indication of support,” but equally possible that those who joined were merely “right-wing conservatives.”
***
Cpl. Anthony Oswald, a school resource officer with the Marion County Sheriff’s Office in North-Central Florida, was added to the Roll Call page by a friend in January. There is no evidence that Oswald commented or liked posts on the Roll Call page, and the posts on his personal Facebook page are unremarkable.
“The old saying ‘curiosity killed the cat’?” said Oswald, a 15-year law enforcement veteran. “Hello! I’m the cat.”
Oswald, who identified himself as a Trump supporter and a Christian in a two-hour interview with TCB, said he doesn’t agree with violence against Muslims and does his best to perform his job without regard to race. Oswald said he agreed with much of the content on the Roll Call page, although he didn’t specify what.
“They sparked an interest. The people are giving their honest view,” he said. “The majority of the comments are spot-on and not racist or hateful. I thought, ‘Okay, they’re like-minded, like me.’”
Oswald indicated that he wasn’t familiar with Chris Hill or the content promoting violence on the page.
“It’s anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-abortion, right?” he asked. “When I see that crap, I scroll past. I don’t agree. I don’t comment.”
Oswald said the idea of challenging hate and bigotry brings to mind the gospel scripture about how people who live in glass houses shouldn’t cast stones.
“Here’s the thing: People whether they’re right or they’re wrong are still entitled to their opinions or their beliefs,” he said. “If someone said, ‘I’m going to shoot up the Paddock Mall [in Ocala] tomorrow,’ it is my obligation, moral and legal, to report that. If some guys are saying, ‘This person should be shot,’ that’s their opinion. Do I have to agree with it? No. Do I have to believe in it? No. In the end what makes America great is that people have the right to express their opinions.”
Sgt. Paul Bloom, the director of public information at the sheriff’s office, said he spoke to Oswald’s supervisor after TCB brought the matter to his attention.
“He is a well-respected and well-liked deputy,” Bloom said. “He works at one of our schools and does a fantastic job. They tried to move him out of that school, and there was an uproar. The parents wouldn’t let them.”
“I don’t think it rises to a level of disciplinary action just to follow a page,” Bloom said. “If he were to participate, that might warrant an investigation.”
***
Leonard Rogers, a corrections officer at the Okaloosa County Jail in the Florida Panhandle, said he joined the Roll Call page out of curiosity after seeing a documentary. Rogers told TCB that he is a member of a different militia group, the III% United Patriots.
“It’s a pro-gun, let’s-get-together, family type of thing,” he said.
As for Hill, Rogers said, “His views are extreme, very extreme. I don’t align with that.”
While describing himself as “pro border control,” Rogers said he’s trained to not allow bias to infect his treatment of inmates, most of whom he noted have not been convicted of a crime.
“Our motto is ‘firm, fair and consistent,’” Rogers said. “That’s how I live my life as a corrections officer. We do get a lot of people who are illegal immigrants arrested for driving without a driver’s license. We treat them just as I would anyone else.”
Chief Eric Esmond, who oversees jail operations for the Okaloosa County Department of Corrections, said Rogers’ social media and militia activity doesn’t violate any department policies. “My main concern as a jail administrator is how people’s ideology and morality transfers to the job,” he said. “I haven’t seen anything that suggests there’s a problem in that area.”
***
TCB confirmed that 10 current or former members of the Roll Call group are currently employed by fire departments, six by EMS agencies, three by detention facilities, and two by police departments. One is currently enlisted in the U.S. Army. One is a member of the Air Force Auxiliary Civil Air Patrol. One firefighter in upstate New York retired in August.
The roughly two dozen confirmed first responders, law enforcement, detention officers and military personnel identified were among more than 5,300 who joined or were added to the Roll Call group. Not all the public servants identified for this story actively participated in the Roll Call group. Our investigation found that roughly half of the larger group of 24 either participated in the Roll Call group or posted content on their personal Facebook pages that exhibited bias. Agency representatives or the employees themselves confirmed that a handful received counseling as a result of this inquiry.
A much larger cohort of members on the Roll Call page identified themselves as military veterans and retired law enforcement. The group has also attracted members of Bikers for Trump; the Hiwaymen, a hybrid militia-neo-Confederate group; the Proud Boys, a male chauvinist group known for street brawling; Back Woods Survivalist Squad, an anti-Muslim network; and adherents of the QAnon conspiracy movement.
Is it now time for Blue Wave Coalition, Women's March and Indivisible to join forces once again and built public support for the impeachment and removal of the illegitimate "President*", DONALD JOHN TRUMP?
From The New York Times, by Pulitzer Prize winning columnist David Leonhardt:
Want Trump to Go? Take to the Streets Another moment for public protest has arrived.
By David Leonhardt Opinion Columnist Oct. 20, 2019
CreditCreditAnna Moneymaker/The New York Times On Nov. 9, 2016, the day after Donald Trump’s election, Obamacare looked to be doomed. Millions of Americans, it seemed, were going to lose their health insurance.Trump had campaigned on a promise to repeal the law, as had many other Republicans, and their party was about to control every branch of the federal government. All Republicans had to do was pass a law that Trump would sign. Democrats had no way to stop it.Or at least they had no way to stop it using only the inside game of politics — congressional hearings, committee votes, presidential vetoes and so on.Fortunately, some progressives understood that politics isn’t only an inside game. The outside game — of public protest and grass-roots lobbying — matters, too.Even before Trump took office, activists began planning a strategy to make repeal as politically painful as possible. On the day after Trump’s inauguration, some four million Americans took to the streets for Women’s Marches (which obviously were about much more than repeal). In the months that followed, groups like Indivisible organized people to attend town halls, visit Capitol Hill and inundate members of Congress with phone calls.The efforts transformed the debate. Obamacare repeal was no longer a bloodless legislative matter, in which public opinion was measured merely with poll results and pundit analysis. The story became rawer, more human and much harder for politicians and ordinary citizens to ignore.In the end, just enough Republican senators responded to the the pressure, and Obamacare survived. The outside game had changed the math of the inside game.
The impeachment inquiry has reached the stage when it needs an outside game. We all know where the inside game is likely to lead: House Democrats will impeach Trump; Senate Republicans will acquit him; and he will claim vindication. But Trump’s presidency has become too dire for Americans to accept that outcome without trying to change it.
Consider what happened last week alone. Trump created a foreign-policy disaster in Turkey and Syria, for no apparent reason, while multiple administration officials testified that he views diplomacy largely as a way to advance his personal interests. His attitude, evidently, is: America, c’est moi. Even more so than a month ago, Trump is a national emergency, flagrantly violating his oath of office and daring the country to stop him.
Yet the chances of removing him appear as dim as Obamacare’s chances of survival did on Nov. 9, 2016. Trump even has plausible paths to re-election, some of which involve again losing the popular vote.
L.A. Kauffman, a historian of protest movements, has said that effective ones often throw “a monkey wrench into a process that was otherwise going to just unfold smoothly.” That’s the role that an outside game can now play in the impeachment saga.
It can wake up more Americans to the gravity of the situation. It can mobilize progressives to work as hard as they did during the 2018 midterms. It can confront congressional Republicans with their cowardice.
Do you remember the images showing throngs of people taking to the streets for the Women’s March? The size of the crowds, especially compared with Trump’s inauguration, reinforced the fact that most Americans rejected Trumpism. The marches also helped inspire the so-called resistance movement, which in turn created a network of dedicated activists, as the social scientists Lara Putnam and Theda Skocpol have pointed out.
And do you remember the viral moments from the save-Obamacare movement, like the disability-rights activists visiting Congress or the citizens speaking up at town halls? Jessi Bohon, a teacher in central Tennessee, created one of those moments by connecting the fight to her Christian faith. It was one of many ways that ordinary people held up for a vision of America as decent and communal as Trump is vulgar and selfish.
“Protests work,” as Kauffman has said — not always, of course, but often “when groups are willing to be bold in their tactics and persistent in their approach within the broad discipline of non-violent action.” As Vox’s Matthew Yglesiaswrote last week, public protest “serves as a powerful signal to the rest of society that something extraordinary is happening.” If anything, protest may be more important than in the past, because the elite institutions that helped bring down Richard Nixon, like political parties and the national media, are weaker today.
So it’s time for a sequel to that first Women’s March — an Americans’ March, in which millions of people peacefully take to the streets to say that President Trump must go. And it’s time for a more intense grass-roots campaign directed at his congressional enablers, one that conjures the respectful intensity of the save-Obamacare campaign. Even if the Senate still acquits Trump, a new protest movement can help galvanize people to defeat him, and his enablers, next year.
The country is in crisis. Right now, that crisis feels all too normal.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Listen to “The Argument” podcast every Thursday morning, with Ross Douthat, Michelle Goldberg and David Leonhardt.
David Leonhardt is a former Washington bureau chief for the Times, and was the founding editor of The Upshot and head of The 2020 Project, on the future of the Times newsroom. He won the 2011 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, for columns on the financial crisis. @DLeonhardt•Facebook
A version of this article appears in print on , Section A, Page 25 of the New York edition with the headline: It’s Time for An Americans’ March
Please pray and help give our Republican friends a spinal and testicular implant and the intestinal fortitude to resist the massive corruption and institutional racism flowing from the TRUMP maladministration. It only took three days for Herr DONALD JOHN TRUMP to reverse himself.
While ex-Sheriff JOHN HENRY RUTHERFORD may be beyond hope, I see real growth in Rep. Michael Waltz, who voted for the Syria resolution last week.
But both St. Johns County Congressmen, and both Senators, deserve to hear your views.
President Trump was forced to abandon his decision to host next year’s Group of Seven summit at his private golf club after it became clear the move had alienated Republicans and swiftly become part of the impeachment inquiry that threatens his presidency.
In a round of phone calls with conservative allies this weekend, Trump was told Republicans are struggling to defend him on so many fronts, according to an administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters.
Democrats, meanwhile, continued to blast Trump for awarding the massive government contract to his own company and said they might add the alleged “emoluments” violation to the articles of impeachment they are preparing.
The White House has been struggling to explain Trump’s G-7 decision since it was announced Thursday. The president’s opponents quickly seized on it as another example of Trump abusing his office for personal gain. Even many Republicans seemed reluctant to offer political cover.
Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney tried to defend the decision during a news conference but caused a new controversy when he was asked about Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president that sparked the impeachment inquiry. Mulvaney told reporters that Trump had held up nearly $400 million in aid to push the foreign government to investigate Democrats, comments that undercut Trump’s central defense in the inquiry. When a journalist followed up, saying that Mulvaney seemed to be describing a quid pro quo, Mulvaney said “we do that all the time with foreign policy.”
On Sunday, Mulvaney expressed regret about how he handled the two issues.
“It’s not lost on me that if we made the decision [to move the G-7] on Thursday, we wouldn’t have had the news conference on Thursday regarding everything else, but that’s fine,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.”
Mulvaney’s acknowledgment of a mistake — he also said Sunday that the news conference had been less than “perfect” — comes as Trump has privately expressed displeasure with his acting chief’s job performance and as some White House officials are seeking to replace him, according to several people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal private discussions. Several officials said Trump’s aides and allies are considering options for a new chief of staff.
On Friday, White House press officials said Trump continued to support Mulvaney. “Mick Mulvaney’s standing in the White House has not changed,” White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham said.
But the chief of staff may have damaged that standing with his Fox News interview, in which he explained Trump’s desire to host the G-7 at his property by saying the president “still considers himself to be in the hospitality business.”
While several Trump allies said the comment was accurate, they said it was a bad idea for Mulvaney to make it in public. Other top Republicans, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, have begun to distance themselves from Mulvaney, who released a statement Thursday denying his admission of a quid pro quo.
Trump blamed his G-7 reversal on critics, saying on Twitter that his decision to scrap plans for a summit at the Doral club was “based on both Media & Democrat Crazed and Irrational Hostility.”
But behind closed doors, several aides and allies said, Trump changed his mind in response to pressure and frustration from his own party.
In the month since Democrats announced their impeachment inquiry, Republicans have struggled to offer a coherent response. With no White House war room, GOP lawmakers have seized on process-related responses.
At the same time, they’re being asked to defend the president’s erratic approach to policymaking, including his abrupt decision to withdraw U.S. troops and abandon Kurdish fighters in northeastern Syria. That announcement was roundly condemned by Republicans, including some of his staunchest defenders. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), in a rare public rebuke of Trump, wrote a withering op-ed in The Washington Post on Friday, just days after 129 House Republicans backed a resolution criticizing the president’s move.
Trump’s decision to host next year’s G-7 meeting at his private golf club only increased the anxiety among GOP lawmakers, some of whom have grown weary of having to develop new talking points almost daily.
Privately, and occasionally in public, several Republicans said they were not prepared to defend the president from charges that he was engaged in self-dealing on the G-7 site selection.
Rep. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.) said Friday that Trump should avoid even the appearance of impropriety that comes with holding a global summit at his private property. “I think that would be better if he would not use his hotel for this kind of stuff,” he said.
Rooney, who announced his retirement the day after his comments, also said he was considering backing Trump’s impeachment over his handling of Ukraine policy.
Trump has been closely watching Republicans and their comments about impeachment, according to one administration official. The president was told repeatedly his G-7 decision made it more difficult to keep Senate Republicans in a unified front against impeachment proceedings, the official said. Before he changed course, Trump had waved off concerns from advisers who said hosting world leaders at his club would not play well.
“There was very little support for this in the building even before Mick went out there and did what he did,” an official said.
Before he took office, Trump made the unprecedented decision to keep ownership of his businesses — but he promised that he would never use his new power to help them. The Trump Organization’s lawyers promised to avoid even the appearance of “any advantage derived from the Office of the Presidency.”
But in practice, Trump has continued to boost his businesses — by talking them up and by visiting them repeatedly, with aides and fellow Republicans in tow.
Trump has visited his properties more than 130 times while in office. As of this summer, those visits had brought him more than $1.6 million in payments from the federal government and Republican campaign groups, which rented Trump’s ballrooms for fundraisers.
In the past 18 months, Trump has made even more expensive visits to his properties in Ireland, Scotland and South Florida — visits that took him far out of his way from the official business of his trips. He also suggested Vice President Pence do the same: Pence built his own detour into an official trip and spent extra hours commuting so he could stay at Trump’s club in remote southwestern Ireland. These trips bring attention to Trump’s properties, and they bring revenue.
Democrats and good governance groups have said Trump is violating the Constitution’s ban on receiving “emoluments” from foreign or domestic sources while president. The decision to host world leaders and U.S. officials at his Doral club during the G-7 was particularly controversial because it would have put Trump at the center of those alleged violations.
“It shouldn’t have been done in the first place,” Chris Christie, the former Republican governor of New Jersey, said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.” “This was just an unforced error.”
Christie said Trump should not be antagonizing Republicans at a time when he will need their votes to protect him in the impeachment process.
“We have to be in friend-making mode,” he said.
Trump, who has been able to rely on near-unanimous Republican support during his 33 months in office, appeared chastened by the lack of support.
“I thought I was doing something very good for our Country by using Trump National Doral, in Miami, for hosting the G-7 Leaders,” he tweeted Saturday.
One former senior administration official said Trump would regularly brag about his properties and ask visitors their opinions while boasting of their amenities.
“It’s true that he really just thinks his properties are the best,” said a longtime adviser to the president. “He does not understand in his mind why he would have something at someone else’s property.”
The president’s critics were less charitable, accusing Trump of trying to make money for his private business by awarding himself a lucrative federal contract.
“This is why he ran in the first place,” said Tim O’Brien, a Trump biographer and critic. “He never thought he’d win. It was free marketing.”
Mulvaney, who claimed Thursday that the White House had chosen the president’s Doral resort after a nationwide search, said Sunday on Fox that Trump was surprised by the backlash he had received.
“Could we have put on an excellent G-7 at Doral? Absolutely,” he said. “Will we end up putting on an excellent G-7 someplace else? Yes, we will.”
Ashley Parker, Robert Costa and Jackie Alemany contributed to this report.
Global warming and ocean level rise are real. Grateful that some nineteen Florida Mayors, including St. Augustine Mayor Tracy Upchurch, are in Washington, D.C. with former Mayor Nancy Shaver this week at the American Flood Coalition.
When I was a teenager, my mom and I took a boat for $5 from Chatham to the barrier island on Cape Cod, in Massachusetts, lunching on delicious tuna fish sandwiches. That barrier island is gone at that point, and the once-enclosed Chatham harbor is open to the ocean.
Interesting take on TRUMP from University of Florida adjunct journalism professor Darlena Cunha. "The plural of anecdote is not data." -- Rick Sincere
I think stringing a few street and bar encounters in Gainesville into a New York Times Op-Ed column is a waste of space, lacking in academic rigor, and self-indulgent.
There are better approaches to this schtick, see Angela Denker, Red State Christians -- Understanding the Voters Who Elected Donald Trump (Fortress Press 2019), with more interviews in more places across America.
But is Ms. Cunha failing to ask followup questions and failing to engage the voters in moral reasoning?
I find that onetime TRUMP voters here in St. Augustine, Florida are disappointed in his crazy angry tweets and abandoning the Kurds in Syria, his attacks on human rights and the environment, and essentially all of his works and pomps.
As the Watergate whistleblower says in the parking garage in All The President's Men: "I hate shallowness."
How Florida Republicans Are Talking About Impeachment
Working-class Republicans see Donald Trump as a white businessman who made a lot of money. The investigations only strengthen their kinship with him.
By Darlena Cunha
Ms. Cunha is a freelance journalist and an adjunct professor at the University of Florida.
Image
Supporters of President Trump greeting his motorcade in West Palm Beach earlier this year.CreditCreditSarah Silbiger/The New York Times
GAINESVILLE, Fla. — A few weeks ago, I sat on a park bench, watching my 11-year-old twins pass a soccer ball and push their friends on a tire swing. I turned to the mother of my daughters’ classmate to talk about the second whistle-blower coming forward about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.
“Oh, I don’t care about that,” she said. “I’m just glad he’s standing his ground during this witch hunt.”
I’ve been in this state for almost a decade, yet its politics still surprise me. Fox News tag lines come out of real people’s mouths. “I work hard. I don’t want the government giving my money away to people who don’t,” another mother added.
My acquaintance agreed with her. “It’s one thing to need help, but so many people scam the system. Why should they get away with that? Having kids just for the welfare, using food stamps for steak and beer, finding every excuse not to work, and then I have to carry them with my tax dollars?”
As the impeachment inquiry marches on, several polls show more American support for impeachment than not. Of course, we learned in 2016 that polls can sometimes mislead, and in this particular case, digging a little shows a deeply partisan divide. While nearly 50 percent of people polled now support impeachment, that number is made up of nearly 85 percent Democrats. Just 12 percent of Republicans support impeachment and upward of 70 percent of Republicans believe the president’s dealings with Ukraine are within typical presidential limits. Most Republicans think he meant to stop corruption and protect American interests, according to a CBS News poll.
With a damning reconstructed phone call transcript, a detailed whistle-blower report, several high-ranking Trump surrogates being subpoenaed and testimonies well underway, how can such a seemingly cut-and-dry issue be read in an oppositional way? With farmers left in the dust, discrimination against pre-existing conditions returning to insurance coverage and taxes rising for millions, how can Republicans continue to support the president?
Simple. They identify with him.
Working-class Republicans in Alachua County see Donald Trump as a white businessman who made a lot of money. They like to think that could be them. The only thing standing in the way of achieving that dream, they tell me, are policies that elevate people of color, immigrants and poor people without health care. My neighbors misidentify what is holding them back, but they don’t want to correctly identify the actual problem — corporations, billionaires, white privilege, late-stage capitalism — because they hope to be part of that world someday. They think they have rightfully earned it.
On a recent Saturday night, while sitting outside a bar with a friend, a man with just a few teeth started a conversation with me. The first thing he uttered was an apology for his lacking dental work. Like so many other Americans, he couldn’t afford to get them fixed.
The conversation took an unexpected turn when he went on to rail against universal health care. He didn’t want to pay for other people to get help. He didn’t have health insurance and told me he once duct-taped a cut on his arm because he couldn’t afford stitches.
“I’d rather take care of my own self with tape than be stuck in a system where I pay for everyone else,” he said.
He didn’t want to be helped because that meant he might have to help other people he didn’t think of as deserving.\
Out at dinner last month with my husband, we had a discussion with a group of Trump-supporting women. Three of them had abortions in their younger years and admitted that without that service, their current lives would have been unattainable. But they continue to support the president because they feel their cases were different from the women needing these services today.
“When I was younger, we didn’t use abortion as birth control like these girls now. It wasn’t like sending back a coffee; we put time and thought and tears and strife into that decision. Now it’s easy peasy.”
The women we talked to felt they had more of a sense of responsibility and work ethic than the women currently facing these decisions. They don’t want to help others with their tax money because they think helping others will hurt themselves.
Florida Republicans appreciate a man who has helped himself, who can boil talking points down to the black-and-white, easy delineations of fair and unfair. The more investigations and allegations leveled against Mr. Trump, the more fiercely they cling to him. He is being treated unfairly, they think, just like they are. He will understand their plight and help them.
In their eyes, Mr. Trump is a patriotic man doing the best he can, and those who go against him are traitors to the country. They see the Democratic Party as desperate, willing to do anything to take the president down. They fully believe the conspiracy theories Mr. Trump spins on Twitter — from the birther movement to wind turbines causing cancer and everything in between. They subscribe to the “witch hunt” mentality he pushes forward.
What Democrats see as self-pity and grandiose posturing, working-class Florida Republicans see as a man outspokenly demanding his rights in a way they wish they could.
Republicans here can equate these “witch hunts” to things that have happened to them in their own lives. Just like they, unfairly, have not been able to move up in the world, so too is Mr. Trump, unfairly, being hunted down, his words and motives twisted to suit the needs of that same enemy. The investigations only strengthen their kinship with him.
So, will Republicans come around to the idea of impeachment? The answer in Florida is probably not.
Darlena Cunha (@parentwin) is a freelance journalist and an adjunct professor at the University of Florida.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
Is this marina the legal voting residence of a local elected official, while others were told they could not vote or run for office without a bona fide residence on land?
Are you kidding me?
The Florida Secretary of State Division of Elections states
A business address is not a satisfactory legal residential address. However, although not the rule, if the person is able to prove residence there despite the zoning ordinance, a fact-finding body could determine that the business address is the person’s legal residential address.
Is St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District Chairman BARRY MARK BENJAMIN illegally serving as a member of the District?
Was BENJAMIN elected illegally?
BENJAMIN claims he resides at a marina, 65 Lewis Blvd. where he once worked.
BENJAMIN may still have a boat there, but he does not live on board.
BENJAMIN resides with his mother and wife at homestead property in Jacksonville.
At least two other live-aboard boat owners were told by the Supervisor of Elections that they had to live on land
Was BENJAMIN treated differently by the Supervisor of Elections office, which told two other candidates that they must
and then-Governor CHARLES CRIST, whose staff blessed a dubious affidavit filed with the Clerk of Courts, swearing that BENJAMIN lived at commercial property, 65 Lewis Blvd., after he applied for homestead status for his then-residence in Palencia?
Does BENJAMIN live with his wife and mother in Jacksonville, at an address where he receives his voter information?
Did BENJAMIN break the law when he used 65 Lewis Blvd., a marina where he once worked and sold yachts, as his "residence" address when he admits he "lived" in Palencia until 2013?
I've obtained documents, requested more, and referred the matter to several prosecution agencies, and the St. Johns County Supervisor of Elections.
I've asked for the SoE to investigate and make referrals for civil, criminal and administrative investigations.
Read. my October 21, 2019 letter to St. Johns Supervisor of Elections Vicki Oakes and Deputy Wayne Fusco, here:
Dear Ms. Oakes and Mr. Fusco:
Pursuant to F.S. 98.045(1)(h), may I urgently ask you, Ms. Oakes and Mr. Fusco, to inquire about a putative "live-aboard" boat voter's alleged voting residence on commercial property at a marina?
Please investigate St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District Commissio Chairman BARRY MARK BENJAMIN, who implausibly and illegally claims "residence" at 65 Lewis Blvd. pursuant to F.S. 98.045(1)(h).
After your investigation, I believe that you will be persuaded to determine that Respondent BARRY MARK BENJAMIN "hhas provided an address of legal residence that is not his or her legal residence," and revoke his voter registration in St. Johns County, and make any appropriate referrals for civil, criminal and administrative investigations.
65 LEWIS BLVD. IS NOT BARRY BENJAMIN'S RESIDENCE -- IT IS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT BARRY BENJAMIN DOES NOT OWN.
Our Florida Secretary of State Division of Elections states in DE Reference Guide 0003 (Updated 07/2018): "A business address is not a satisfactory legal residential address."
How long has Respondent BARRY MARK BENJAMIN been improperly registered to vote in St. Johns County, Florida at a "business address?" Ten (10) years? Three (3) years? Please investigate.
Respondent BENJAMIN currently encumbers the elected position of Commissioner and Chairman of the St. Augustine, Port, Waterway and Beach District but lives at 3374 Waverly Dock Road in Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida with his wife and mother. That is outside the Port District by more than twenty (20) miles. It is outside St. Johns County.
This 3374 Waverly Dock Road, Jacksonville, Duval County address is the "mailing address" he provided to the St. Johns County Supervisor of Elections on June 2, 2016 (attached) in Florida Ethics Form 1 financial disclosure, adding the word "only" in hand lettered printing in parentheses.
On October 15, 2019, Respondent BENJAMIN stated in a public meeting, response to Commissioner Sandy Flowers at the monthly meeting of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach Commission District that he lives "part-time" on his boat at 65 Lewis Blvd.
This is a binding, tape-recorded, admissible admission.
The audio tape is a government record of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District.
BENJAMIN's statement about being a "part-time" resident is a declaration against penal interest.
Is Respondent BARRY MARK BENJAMIN's putative part-time "residence" a valid voting address -- on a boat, on commercial property, which he does not own, where he does not work any longer? No.
The 65 Lewis Blvd. address is commercial property under St. Augustine City zoning law.
Have other persons who claim to be live-aboard boaters required by the SoE to have a residence on land to vote? Yes.
Was Sandy Flowers told she must live on land in order to vote? Yes.
Does the City of St. Augustine deny live-aboard boat residents in-County reduction in mooring ball fees without a bona fide residential address on land? Yes.
Does Florida law and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment require that BENJAMIN be treated equally with people who actually live aboard boats? Yes.
In truth and in fact, BARRY MARK BENJAMIN does not live at 65 Lewis Blvd.
Since at least 2016, BENJAMIN no longer receives any mail from the St. Johns County Supervisor of Elections (SoE) at this address
SJC SoE records reflect Mr. Benjamin's mail is sent to an address in Jacksonville, 3374 Waverly Dock Road, in Duval County, where he resides with his wife and mother, 3374 Waverly Dock Road.
BENJAMIN has no residence at the 65 Lewis Blvd. address.
BENJAMIN has no business at the 65 Lewis Blvd. address.
BENJAMIN formerly did business at the 65 Lewis Blvd. address as a business owner.
BENJAMIN no longer owns the marina at 65 Lewis Blvd..
BENJAMIN was formerly a yacht broker at the 65 Lewis Blvd. address.
As a formerly licensed Florida yacht broker, Respondent BENJAMIN was the subject of several boat owner complaints.
In 2013, Respondent BENJAMIN's Florida yacht brokerage license expired.
HISTORY OF COVERUPS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND UNETHICAL GOVERNMENT INACTION: There is a history of government coverups in Tallahassee involving BENJAMIN's residence status, since 2009, involving both Governor Charles Crist and the Florida Elections Commission. There is a history of conflicts of interest and unethical government inaction on BENJAMIN's residence status.
An "investigation" involves taking sworn testimony under oath, in-person, and visiting the location in quo.
No investigation ever occurred, 2009-date.
In 2009, Florida Governor Charles Crist's maladroit and incurious staff resolved the matter based on a self-serving affidavit from Respondent BENJAMIN. No investigation.
In 2012-2013, the Florida Elections Commission claims it "investigated" but it administratively dismissed -- without any kind of hearing -- three (3) sworn complaints about BENJAMIN's residency.
In 2012, three (3) sworn complaints were filed by Messrs. Jay Bliss, Charles Thomas Meide and Brendan Burke, alleging that BENJAMIN really lived in Palencia, outside Port District boundaries.
The three (3) complaints were closed after a few unsworn, untranscribed telephone interviews with information taken by an incurious Florida Elections Commission investigator, who neglected his duty and never checked local zoning laws. The "investigator" acted as an amanuensis, not a real investigator.
This sloppy investigative work resembles the approach by OSHA in performing phone/fax investigations, even of life safety hazards, despite Congressional and Government Accountability Office (GAO) findings that phone/fax investigations are inappropriate in cases of imminent life safety hazards.
Where the integrity of our democracy itself is threatened by illegal voter registration of an elected official, the Florida Elections Commission has a duty to investigate, and not telephone and rely on self-serving assertions by the wrongdoer.
The Florida Elections Commission investigator never visited the 65 Lewis Blvd. property to view the purported "mail slot" through which BENJAMIN allegedly received mail from Bank of America, Wells Fargo, AT&T, Residential Finance Corporation and that the business address was used for his 2007 Toyota automobile registration and driver's license address.
There is no proof that such "mail slot" ever even existed.
The Florida Elections Commission's inept investigator relied on self-serving affidavits procured by Respondent BENJAMIN, or his conflicted counsel, JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE (Florida Bar No. 500194), also the lawyer for the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District.
The Florida Elections Commission General Counsel, Eric Matthew Lipman (Florida Bar No. 958247) ended his FEC staff's incomplete, telephonic investigation without examining the facts or the law, including the fact that City of St. Augustine zoning for 65 Lewis Blvd. is for commercial property, and there is no residence on the structure.
The Florida Elections Commission utterly failed and refused to enforce our Florida election laws.
FEC violated the rights of St. Johns County and Florida residents to honest, fairs elections, blowing off three (3) reasoned and documents filed by three (3) respected actual electors of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District, one of them a Port Commissioner.
The three (3) sworn, verified complaints against Respondent BENJAMIN were filed with the Florida Elections Commission, bearing complaint numbers FEC12-174 (Jay Bliss, filed August 3, 2012), FEC-12-259 (Charles Thomas Meide, filed September 17, 2012), and 12-260 (F. Brendan Burke, September 7, 2012).
Oddly, no hearing was ever held by either the Florida Elections Commission or by any any administrative law judge from the Department of Administrative Hearings in any of the three (3) complaints.
The three (3) complaints were kept secret from the public during the putative "investigation," pursuant to Florida election law. The moribund, do-nothing Florida Elections Commission voted 6-0 on May 14, 2013 to find that there was no probable cause on the three (3) complaints, at a meeting that routinely, rubber-stamped dozens of staff recommendations. (See attachment).
BENJAMIN was represented by counsel in those three (3) complaints.
BENJAMIN was not represented by a private attorney, but by Port District counsel JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE, who had no written engagement letter until October 15, 2019, after ten (10) years of serving as the Port District Attorney.
BEDSOLE wrote the Florida Elections Commission and informed it that the Office of Governor Charles Crist had "investigated" in 2009 and that the "investigation" somehow approved his boat voting residence.
No "investigation" was ever performed by Governor Crist's office, which refused to take action based upon a self-serving September 15, 2009 declaration affidavit filed by BENJAMIN. (See attached document from St. Johns County Property Appraiser, withdrawing BENJAMIN's previously approved homestead exemption for his homesteaded property outside the District boundaries, at 145 Oak Common Drive, indicating that once the declaration was received, Governor Crist's appointees dropped the matter. No other records have been located by our Florida State Library and Archives. In short, it appears that Commissioner Jay Bliss's complaint to the Governor was not investigated, and that this case was "fixed" by the office of then-Governor Crist, then a Republican. That office performed no "investigation."
Was JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE's dual legal representation in 2009 or 2012-2013 properly approved by the Port District?
Did BEDSOLE ever obtain any legal opinion from the State Attorney General or State Bar that his dual representation was ethical and authorized?
Was BEDSOLE's dual representation in an Elections Commission complaint against one member of the District, of both the member and the Port District itself, a conflict of interest prohibited by Florida Bar Rules?
At the time of the complaints, BENJAMIN admitted on the Port District's website in that he and his wife resided in Palencia, stating inter alia that "Barry enjoys meeting and maintaining contact with meeting and members of foreign port authorities. They reside in Palencia." (Emphasis added).
BENJAMIN later blamed an unknown, unnamed staff member of the SOE for his moving outside the territorial limits of the Port District.
Then BENJAMIN filed his affidavit of residency with the Clerk of Courts, implausibly asserting that he lived on his boat.
Emboldened by the inaction, sloth and torpor of the Florida Elections Commission in 2012-2013 and the Office of Governor CHARLES CRIST in 2009, BENJAMIN now lives in Jacksonville, more than 20 miles from the northernmost boundary of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District.
BENJAMIN on October 15, 2019 at the Port District meeting now claims to live on a boat in St. Augustine "part-time."
BENJAMIN is currently under investigation by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) for possible unlicensed activity,
DBPR is investigating whether BENJAMIN has retained advertising on the Internet as a yacht brokerage.
DBPR mailed its first inquiry letter to its address on file for BENJAMIN. The letter came back unclaimed.
DBPR sent its second inquiry letter to the Jacksonville address listed on the SoE website, 3374 Waverly Dock Road, where BENJAMIN lives with his wife and mother.
Did BENJAMIN filed an inaccurate or misleading affidavit of residency with the St. Johns County Clerk of Courts before he moved to Jacksonville? Yes.
Has BENJAMIN corrected or revoked that 2009 declaration affidavit? No.
Is BENJAMIN relying on that affidavit in a continuing illegal effort to vote from a boat in St. Augustine? Yes.
Is BENNJAMIN relying on that affidavit in encumbering a seat on the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach Commission? Yes.
Is BENJAMIN relying on that affidavit to continue encumbering a seat on the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District Commission? Yes.
Is BENJAMIN relying on that affidavit to continue serving as Chairman of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District Commission? Yes.
BENJAMIN asserted in the affidavit that 65 Lewis Blvd. was his residence, based on assertions of living aboard a boat.
BENJAMIN does not live aboard a boat at 65 Lewis Blvd.
Yet BENJAMIN swore to SOE in his statement of candidacy on May 18, 2016 that his residence address was at 65 Lewis Blvd. (See attachment).
BENJAMIN gave the Jacksonville, Duval County, address where he resides with his wife and mother, 3374 Waverly Dock Road, as his mailing address.
Investigation by the SJC SoE will confirm that BENJAMIN does not live inside the territorial limits of St. Johns County or the St, Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District and does not live at 65 Lewis Blvd. on commercial property he no longer owns and where he claims, at best, to be a "part-time" resident of his boat.
BENJAMIN did not live inside the territorial limits of the St, Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District when he filed a statement of candidacy in 2016 for his re-election.
BENJAMIN's seat is thus vacant, pursuant to F.S. 104.01(g).
BENJAMIN's election as Chairman in November 2018 was illegal, ultra vires, and void ab initio.
Does BENJAMIN's May 18, 2016 statement of candidacy contain a false statement that violates F.S. 104.11(1) in connection with a political candidacy? Yes.
Has BENJAMIN received, and voted to disburse, state and local government funds based upon his May 18, 2016 statement of candidacy, which contain a false statement that violates F.S. 104.11(1) in connection with a political candidacy? Yes.
Are some of those government funds state funds, covered by the Florida False Claims Act? Yes.
Has BENJAMIN made repeated false statements to Florida government officials in connection with his residence?
Is BENJAMIN voting illegally from commercial property at Lewis Blvd., when he receives his SoE mail in Jacksonville, where he resides with his wife and mother? Yes.
Is BENJAMIN serving illegally as Chairman of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District? Yes.
I texted BENJAMIN on October 18, 2019 and I offered to read him the complaint in draft form. He declined, asking me to text it to him. I declined, explaining that I have arthritis. He then wanted me to send him a photo of it.
The facts are irrefragable.
Benjamin is not a lawful voting resident of either St. Johns County or the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District.
BENJAMIN has not advanced any evidence that 65 Lewis Blvd. is his current residence address.
A call to the marina at that location will confirm that BENJAMIN does not live there.
Interviews with live-aboard boat residents at that location will confirm that he does not live there.
BENJAMIN's 65 Lewis Blvd. voting residence is a sham and a legal fiction, perpetrated by SAPWB counsel JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE and tolerated by the staff of Governor Charles Crist and the staff of the Florida Elections Commission in the past.
SAPWB Chair BENJAMIN issued illegal orders to me and other citizens at the October 15, 2019 meeting, as did Vice Chair Thomas Rivers, who is also the St. Johns County Republican State Committeeman. The purpose of those illegal orders was to suppress free speech about this boat voting residence sham, and other instances of misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance, waste, fraud, abuse by SAPWB.
Those illegal orders by nonresident SAPWB Chair BENJAMIN prevented actual St. Johns County residents from discussing BEDSOLE's first-ever contract as attorney for the District.
Those illegal orders included a retaliatory request that the St. Augustine Beach Police remove Mr. Thomas F. Reynolds, a resident of St. Augustine Beach and St. Johns County, an announced candidate for Sheriff, in blatant retaliation for his asking to speak about BEDSOLE's contract. BENJAMIN has a custom, usage, practice and procedure of denying public comment before SAPWB decisions.
This violates F.S. 286.0114 and the First and Ninth Amendments to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. 1983.
Other persons calling out without being recognized were not ejected, including St. Augustine City General Services Director James Piggott, who called out information from the back of the St. Augustine Beach City Commission chambers without ever being recognized or going to the podium.
Other persons at Port meetings frequently calling out information without being recognized; all of them are representatives of law enforcement or government entities, including the Florida Inland Navigation District, the St. Johns County Sheriff, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, and St. Augustine Police, and St. Augustine General Services Director.
None are ever gaveled or ordered removed.
Hence BENJAMIN's ordering Mr. Reynolds removed was illegal viewpoint discrimination, intended to further his scheme of illegally voting from a boat and encumbering the Chairman's seat on the Port Commission.
Other illegal orders at the October 15, 2019 included Rivers' odd demand that I stop filing Open Records requests with the District.
At least one of those requests related to BENJAMIN's residence.
On October 15, 2019, one of those Open Records requests disgorged inculpatory documents on Florida Elections Commission files on complaints concerning BENJAMIN's residence, including facts set forth in this complaint.
Thus, BENJAMIN and Rivers both would appear to have both obstructed justice and violated civil rights in connection with BENJAMIN's voting status.
The SJC Supervisor of Elections is hereby respectfully requested to determine, without fear or favor, whether BENJAMIN is an eligible voter in 2019.
The SJC Supervisor of Elections is hereby respectfully requested to determine, without fear or favor, whether BENJAMIN was an eligible voter in 2016 at the time when he admitted his residence in Jacksonville, long after he ceased having any business connection or mailing address at the 65 Lewis Blvd. commercial property.
The SJC Supervisor of Elections, Honorable Vicki Oakes, is hereby respectfully requested not to accept any correspondence from or lobbying by JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE, the counsel for the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach Dstrict.
Port District Attorney JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE is now on notice about BENJAMIN's residency. Attorney BEDSOLE now has a mandatory legal duty under Rule 4-1.13 to take action concerning BENJAMIN's illegal voter registration. Rule 4-1.13(b) states in pertinent part: "(b) Violations by Officers or Employees of Organization. If a lawyer for an organization knows that an officer, employee, or other person associated with the organization is engaged in action, intends to act, or refuses to act in a matter related to the representation that is a violation of a legal obligation to the organization or a violation of law that reasonably might be imputed to the organization and is likely to result in substantial injury to the organization, the lawyer shall proceed as is reasonably necessary in the best interest of the organization. In determining how to proceed, the lawyer shall give due consideration to the seriousness of the violation and its consequences, the scope and nature of the lawyer’s representation, the responsibility in the organization and the apparent motivation of the person involved, the policies of the organization concerning such matters, and any other relevant considerations. Any measures taken shall be designed to minimize disruption of the organization and the risk of revealing information relating to the representation to persons outside the organization.Such measures may include among others:
(1) asking reconsideration of the matter;
(2) advising that a separate legal opinion on the matter be sought for presentation to appropriate authority in the organization; and
(3) referring the matter to higher authority in the organization, including, if warranted by the seriousness of the matter, referral to the highest authority that can act in behalf of the organization as determined by applicable law."
Complaints concerning an elected official-voter's residence are personal to the individual and not against the government agency board on which they may serve illegally.
BEDSOLE's October 15, 2019 engagement letter with SAPWB does not provide for representation of individual board members in election, ethics or other potential civil, criminal or administrative matters.
Sadly, there were blurred ethical lines during the 2012-2013 complaints against Respondent BENJAMIN. It was, at best, unseemly for SAPWB lawyer JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE to represent BENJAMIN before the Florida Elections Commission (or the Governor if that ever occurred).
As an elected official, BARRY MARK BENJAMIN has no right or entitlement to a "free lawyer" to represent him before the St. Johns County Supervisor of Elections, or any other government official on his voting residence. See Rules 4-1.7, 4-1.13, Rules Regulating the Florida Bar (September 19, 2019).
Respondent BARRY MARK BENJAMIN must either defend himself, or find independent counsel.
It would be an inherent conflict of interest and unethical for Port District attorney BEDSOLE to represent BENJAMIN before SoE in this matter. See Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 77-30 (Reconsideration, September 29, 2006)(inherent conflict of interest for County Attorney to represent County Commissioner charged with an ethics violation -- any County Commission waiver of conflict of interest cannot be given by the County Commissioner in quo). https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-77-30-rec/
BARRY MARK BENJAMIN cannot be represented by JAMES EDWIN BEDSOLE or any other government attorney before SoE, or otherwise, on his illegal voting address.
It would be a contract violation of public policy, unseemly and patently unjust for non-resident SAPWB Chair BARRY MARK BENJAMIN to defend his actions by abusing the services of a government attorney paid by the taxpayers of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District. See October 15, 2019 representation agreement (attached); Restatement of Contracts, 2d, Sec. 178 (Contract Violation of Public Policy)
No fact-finding body has ever actually determined that BENJAMIN is a resident of either 65 Lewis Blvd. or the St. Augustine Port Waterway and Beach District.
"Secret law" is not susceptible of precedent, administrative-judicial notice, collateral estoppel or res judicata.
"Secret law" on BENJAMIN's voting residence has allowed BENJAMIN's illegality to fester for ten (10) years without public scrutiny. Secrecy has empowered BENJAMIN to remain a member of an elected Board ten (10) years after concerns were first raised and dismissed by insouciant staffers of then-Governor Charles Crist. Enough flummery, dupery and nincompoopery on BENJAMIN's voting residency.
"Democracy dies in darkness." (Washington Post motto, coined by Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Bob Woodward).
"[J]ustice may not be done in a corner nor in any covert manner,'1676 Fundamental Laws of West New Jersey, Chapter XXIII, cited in State ex rel. Herald Mail Co. v. Hamilton, 267 S.E.2d 544 (W.Va. 1980), citing 5 F. Thorpe, American Charters, Constitutions and Organic Laws, 1492-1908 (7 Vols. 1909), at 2551. See also Jonathan Manes, "Secret Law," 106 Georgetown Law J. 803 (2018), at https://georgetownlawjournal.org/articles/260/secret-law/pdf
As John Adams said, in his closing argument to the jury in defense of the British soldiers accused of murders in the Boston Massacre, "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” (John Adams, Argument in Defense of the British Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials, December 4, 1770).
Please investigate and kindly consider appointing an administrative law judge or a special magistrate to hold an open public hearing.
Let justice be done at last, following years of coverups, ineptitude and desuetude (non-enforcement) by Florida's Governor and Florida Election Commission.
Ms. Oakes and Mr. Fusco: Pursuant to F.S. 98.045(1)(h), the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and your Florida SoE oaths of office (pursuant to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution), please comply with, enforce and uphold our Florida election residency requirements, summarized by our Florida Secretary of State Division of Elections in DE Reference Guide 0003 (Updated 07/2018):
"A business address is not a satisfactory legal residential address. However, although not the rule, if the person is able to prove residence there despite the zoning ordinance, a fact-finding body could determine that the business address is the person’s legal residentialaddress.....Please note Supervisors of Elections have a duty per s. 98.045, F.S., to determine whether a person is eligible or not. If it appears that the address is not a residential address or cannot be determined to be a residential address, a Supervisor may ask the applicant for more information to determine if the applicant is a legal resident of the county.
P. O. Box 4512 St. Augustine, FL 32085-4512 (904) 824-0113
Secretary/Treasurer: Elyse Kemper 3670 US 1 South, Ste. 290 St. Augustine, FL 32086 797-6660; Fax: 797-3009 Attn: Elyse Kemper Email: elyse@staugustineport.com Board Members: Barry Benjamin – Commissioner 65 Lewis Blvd St. Augustine, FL 32084 W/C 669-6954 H: 824-7957 Email: offshorebroker2@gmail.com Tom Rivers - Commissioner 303 Porpoise Pt Rd St. Augustine, FL 32080 C 904-347-6986 Email: tom@staugustineport.com Matt Brown - Commissioner 19 Hope St St. Augustine, FL 32084 C: 646-247-7837 Email: matt@staugustineport.com Sandy Flowers - Commissioner 40 Water St St. Augustine, Fl 32084 C: 904-429-5045 Email: sandy@staugustineport.com Chris Way - Commissioner 39 Avista Circle St. Augustine, FL 32080 C: 904-669-1339 Email: chris@staugustineport.com Engineering Mike Trudnak W) 904-731-7040 Email: mtrudnak@taylorengineering.com
Engineering Consultant: Taylor Engineering Inc 10199 Southside Blvd Ste 310 Jacksonville, FL 32256 731-7040; Fax 731-9847 C) 472-9811 Email: kcraig@taylorengineering.com District Counsel James E Bedsole Law Offices of James E Bedsole 2450 Old Moultrie Rd. Ste 104 St. Augustine, Fl 32086 W: 797-8701 Fax: 797-8705 Email: jim@bedsolelaw.com
More Russian fraudfeasing in our elections, caught and cutoff by Facebook. Now the Iranians are at it, too. Makes you wonder about the idiotic iterations coming out of the St. Augustine Tea Party, and those misguided folks on both sides who made August 28, 2017 a din of hostility about memorials to long-dead Confederate soldiers -- a "debate" The Muller Report reveals was stirred up on both sides by Russians.
From The Washington Post: Facebook takedowns show new Russian activity targeted Biden, praised Trump
The company disabled a network of accounts that posed at times as locals in swing states to post on divisive political issues and the upcoming presidential election
Add to list
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg at Georgetown University last week. (Nick Wass/AP)
Facebook on Monday said it removed a network of Russian-backed accounts that posed as locals weighing in on political issues in swing states, praising President Trump and attacking former vice president Joe Biden — illustrating that the familiar threat of Russian interference looms over the next U.S. presidential race.
Facebook said the network bears the hallmark of the same Kremlin-backed group that interfered in the 2016 election by sowing social discord, seeking to boost Trump and attacking Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The new disinformation campaign appears to follow the same playbook.
This time, a coordinated group of Russian accounts that appears to show some links to the Internet Research Agency largely took to Facebook’s photo-sharing app, Instagram, to post content this year about U.S. politics and memes targeting Democratic presidential contenders. The operation demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of the schisms within the Democratic Party as it labors to choose a nominee to face Trump in 2020. One Russian account, which portrayed itself as a black voter in Michigan, used the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag to hammer Biden for gaffes about racial issues. Some of the accounts boosted one of his rivals on the left, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
The Russian network was the subject of one of four takedowns Facebook announced Monday; it also disabled three misleading campaigns originating in Iran. Researchers said the efforts demonstrated how those seeking to interfere in U.S. politics continue to exploit radioactive topics, including racial and religious fault lines. And they said it offered fresh evidence that foreign actors are pursuing new platforms that rely on a steady stream of images, making detection more difficult despite Facebook’s heightened investments in election security.
“We are seeing again that the aim of the Russians is not exclusively to favor one candidate over another but to create divisiveness within the electorate overall,” said Paul M. Barrett, deputy director of New York University’s Stern Center for Business and Human Rights. “The reason that networks of phony accounts are drawn to Instagram is because disinformation is increasingly visual in nature, and that’s what Instagram specializes in.”
The disclosure from Facebook served as more evidence of what Trump has repeatedly questioned — that Russian actors not only interfered in the 2016 election but are continuing their efforts to interfere in American democracy. The task of safeguarding U.S. elections from interference by Russia and other foreign actors has been a source of tension in the Trump administration, with the president repeatedly calling the allegations of Russian involvement in 2016 a “hoax” and top security officials being forced to tiptoe around the issue.
Multiple U.S. investigations have confirmed the extent of Russia’s attempt to interfere in the 2016 presidential race. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III obtained multiple indictments last year of individuals affiliated with the Internet Research Agency. This month, a bipartisan report produced by Senate investigators concluded again that the Russian effort sought to boost Trump and undermine Clinton in the eyes of social media users.
Speaking to The Washington Post last week, Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg said the problem posed by disinformation has worsened since 2016, and he attributed that in part to a poor initial response by the U.S. government to the threat. “Unfortunately, the U.S. did not have a particularly strong response to Russia after 2016,” he said, “so it sent the signal to other countries that they could get in on this, too.”
Facebook’s announcements came two days before Zuckerberg is set to appear on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers are likely to press him on the company’s work to safeguard U.S. elections from foreign manipulation. Members of Congress have upbraided the tech giant for missing key warning signs of Russian interference before the 2016 election, then failing to acknowledge the Kremlin’s activities immediately after the fact.
Zuckerberg said in an interview last week that Facebook is in a “much better place now” to stop disinformation campaigns, citing the company’s investments in tens of thousands of new staff hires and artificial intelligence that can spot fake accounts and dubious posts in real time. The company further fine-tuned its policies Monday, pledging to more prominently alert users when viral content is determined to be false. Announcing the changes, Zuckerberg stressed he now has “some confidence our systems here are working.”
“Elections have changed significantly since 2016,” he told reporters, “and Facebook has changed, too.” Researchers said Facebook — in spotting and disclosing the Russian network Monday faster than it had in the past — demonstrated it had improved its digital defenses. Companies such as Facebook are “building muscle memory around understanding malicious actors on their platform,” said Graham Brookie, the director of the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab.
But Brookie said Facebook’s takedown showed that Russia’s tactics would continue to evolve as well. “To steal a phrase, a picture is worth a thousand words, and meme-based content is still extremely effective and much harder to detect,” he said.
The Biden campaign applauded Facebook for disabling the fake accounts but said Trump’s penchant for falsehoods posed just as great a challenge for the company, which has refused to fact-check political advertising placed by the president’s reelection campaign. “Unfortunately, like the Kremlin, Donald Trump continues to benefit from spreading false information, [and] all the while Facebook profits from amplifying his lies and debunked conspiracy theories on their platform,” TJ Ducklo, a Biden campaign spokesman, said in a statement. “If Facebook is truly committed to protecting the integrity of our elections, they would immediately take down Trump’s ads that attempt to gaslight the American people.”
Facebook described the Russian network as a “well-resourced operation” focused on the United States and reliant on sophisticated steps to conceal the identity and location of those behind the fake accounts. It comprised 50 accounts on Instagram and one on Facebook, all of them created this year.
The network appeared still to be in an audience-building phase when it was removed by Facebook: 246,000 accounts followed one or more of the inauthentic Russian accounts, which had collectively made just fewer than 75,000 posts, according to a report from Graphika, a social media analysis firm that examined the operation for Facebook. Only one account, which addressed environmental themes, had more than 20,000 followers. Much of the content lacked text, consisting only of memes, and the posts often drew from viral content first posted by American actors, including news organizations and prominent political figures, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
The accounts had not yet developed their own voice, which analysts say is critical to achieving a mass following.
“These accounts were trying really hard to hide,” said Ben Nimmo, Graphika’s director of investigations. “The more you try to blend in, the less you stand out. And the less you stand out, the less you’re going to attract an audience. It looks like these accounts were sacrificing engagement for security. That’s a very defensive strategy.”
Nimmo said Facebook’s action was at least the fourth takedown since 2017 of operations targeting the United States that seemed to bear links to the Internet Research Agency. The apparent connection to the St. Petersburg company and “troll farm,” owned by an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, went beyond overlap with the thematic focus and targets of past Kremlin-backed campaigns. Some of the accounts taken down Monday had posted memes already attributed to previous IRA efforts — but had sought to rebuild them from scratch, rather than simply reposting them, and had made attempts to remove the original IRA watermarks. A minority of the posts focused explicitly on the 2020 election, according to Graphika’s analysis. Among the accounts posing as backers of political and social causes in the United States, the largest cluster was conservative and in support of Trump. Numerous accounts aimed their fire at Democratic candidates — namely Biden but also Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.). Other issues included racial activism, Confederate pride, gun rights, LGBT issues, feminism, Islam and Christianity.
Nearly half of the accounts claimed to be based in swing states, with a specific focus on Florida.
Biden came under attack from accounts that positioned themselves on both sides of the political spectrum. One account reposted a tweet from a right-wing political commentator parroting a Trump rebuke of Biden, while another posted a meme showing a road diverging and a car swerving to choose the path representing “Bernie 2020” over “Joe Biden.” Four years earlier, Russian-backed Facebook accounts similarly promoted Sanders during the Democratic primary against Clinton, according to Senate investigators.
I started loathing Big Oil as a child growing up in Southern New Jersey, where refineries polluted our air, land and water.
Then as an undergraduate, I studied antitrust law, Global Reach and the power of wicked evil monopolistic corporations to distort our economy and destroy our environment and lives.
One of my high school classmates was cleaning an oil company tank in South Philadelphia a year or two after we graduated; he wound up with burns over 60% of his body, I learned at one of our reunions, the direct and proximate result of being sent into harm's way as a human Q-tip in a tank that was supposed to be empty, but where a spark set him afire. He survived and lived to tell me.
As a young undergraduate Senate staffer in the office of Tennessee U.S. Senator James R. Sasser, I worked for horizontal divestiture, which got 30 votes in the Senate in 1977. (It would have hurt anti-competitive Big Oil extension of control into coal, solar and geothermal.).
The right-wing lobby started by President William Howard Taft, the Chamber of Commerce, diabolically opposed horizontal divestiture. So was the equally vile National Association of Manufacturers, whose Pennsylvania affiliate blacklisted my father for being a union organizer. I was delighted to hang up on NAM as they were screaming into the telephone, demanding that the junior Senator from Tennessee oppose legislation designed to increase energy industry competition.
After horizontal divestiture failed, we were ready. We wrote and got enacted into law a successful floor amendment designed to get data to make it happen. (Section 742 of the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978), the exquisitely detailed "Coal Industry Performance and Competition Study," which helped fund a study that empowered activists in Appalachian states to demand fair property tax appraisals of vast mineral wealth.
(History starts with you.)
Read this article by Rockefeller Family Fund Director Lee Wasserman -- I love irony. The Rockefeller great-grandchildren have split with the evil legacy of John Davidson Rockefeller and Henry Morrison Flagler. How cool is that?
Mr. Wasserman concludes: "The industry is based on a deceit. The companies know the planet is headed toward a climate catastrophe, but they keep drilling away, trying to squeeze the last nickel from their deadly product. It will be up to the judge overseeing the New York case, Barry Ostrager, to determine whether Exxon’s misrepresentations violated New York’s securities law, but when it comes to the moral repugnancy of the company’s climate deception, the verdict is in."
This is one of the issues I raised in questions at a Flagler College forum on ocean level rise issues, apparently leading to my exclusion from the bogus "Keeping History Above Water" Conference funded by the City of St. Augustine and badly managed by Flagler College schoolmarms who have emotional problems about academic freedom and criticism of Big Oil companies, the source of the fetid fascit fortune of Henry Morrison Flagler's hoary heirs who founded and funded the place.
From The New York Times:
Opinion Did Exxon Deceive Its Investors on Climate Change? New York’s attorney general is about to square off against the oil giant in court.
By Lee Wasserman Mr. Wasserman is the director of the Rockefeller Family Fund. Oct. 21, 2019, 3:12 p.m. ET
The New York attorney general’s office will take its case against Exxon Mobil to trial on Tuesday, arguing that one of the world’s largest oil and gas companies misled its shareholders and the public by misrepresenting the risks that climate change poses to the value of its oil and gas assets.
The lawsuit is one of several the company is facing that if successful, would force Exxon Mobil, which took in some $290 billion in revenue last year, to account for the true costs of its nature-crushing fossil fuel business, making it less competitive with wind, solar and other renewable energy sources and thus accelerating the transition to a clean-energy economy.
This is Economics 101. It’s cheap to pollute if you don’t include the costs of the damage on your books. And for the world’s oil companies, those current and future damages are nearly incalculable if you consider how climate change is leading to the collapse of the planet’s diversity, and the financial losses and human suffering that will result from rising seas and temperatures. One recent study estimates that the world’s top 20 fossil fuel companies are responsible for 35 percent of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions since 1965. Exxon Mobil was the fourth-largest contributor on the list.
What makes this especially mind-numbing is that Exxon knew for decades that its business was altering the climate but repeatedly deceived the public, just as the tobacco companies knew their cigarettes caused cancer but denied it. The attorney general’s office, now under the command of Letitia James (her predecessor, Barbara Underwood, brought the suit) argues that to mislead the investing public, Exxon “erected a Potemkin village to create the illusion that it had fully considered the risks of future climate change regulation.” But “in reality, Exxon knew that its representations were not supported by the facts and were contrary to its internal business practices.”
Exxon had denied wrongdoing and called the case politically motivated.
But in internal memos dating back to the 1970s, Exxon predicted that the effects of fossil fuel emissions could “indeed be catastrophic (at least for a substantial fraction of the world’s population).” In 1982 it estimated with stunning accuracy that the atmosphere would contain 415 parts per million of carbon dioxide this year and what that would mean for increased global temperatures. The parade of horribles foreseen by the company — sea level rise, more intense rain and snow, inundation, hotter temperatures, desertification, agricultural disruption — are now regular features of the nightly news. And it will only get worse.
But rather than warn the public, Exxon spent over $30 million on climate-denying think tanks and researchers to confuse the public about climate science — a confusion that persists to this day — while doubling down on its destructive business model. More than half of all industrial carbon dioxide emissions were produced after Exxon heard the clarion call from its own scientists to change direction.
Exxon now concedes that climate change is happening because of the burning of fossil fuels, and it has spent a modest amount on low-carbon investments. Still the company plans to increase its oil output by 25 percent by 2025 at a time when the world should be sharply reducing its greenhouse gas emissions. Actions speak louder than words.
New York is just one front in a legal struggle against the fossil fuel industry, one that the organization I direct has been involved in by financing legal advocacy groups representing plaintiffs in two other lawsuits against the oil giant. Altogether, Exxon and other oil and gas companies are facing at least a dozen other lawsuits, primarily from municipalities, including New York City and Baltimore, and one state, Rhode Island, which want help paying for the substantial climate damages the companies have already caused.
For coastal communities, the cost of defending against rising seas alone will exceed $400 billion, according to a recent study by the Center for Climate Integrity, which the Rockefeller Family Fund supports. This, of course, doesn’t include other enormous expenses. Puerto Rico, Houston and towns in the Midwest are still reeling from climate-juiced storm systems that ravaged homes and infrastructure and led to the deaths of thousands of people. The burden of these costs will fall squarely on all of us who pay taxes unless the responsible climate polluters are required to pay their fair share. Editors’ Picks
These lawsuits are an important step for society to free itself from the grasp of this lethal industry. Most directly, the suits can provide the billions necessary for communities to repair climate damages and fortify their infrastructure for the storms ahead. And if these cases are successful, Big Oil will finally be forced to assume a greater portion of the costs they have foisted on taxpayers. Their business, which significantly lagged the S & P 500 over the past five years, will take another deserved financial hit.
These cases are also teachable moments. We’re not in this mess because we heat our homes or drive our children to school, which is what the fossil fuel companies want us to think. We’re victims of a small group of gargantuan companies that recklessly and deliberately ignored the implications of their own science and unabashedly worked to deceive the public.
If you don’t believe me, then consider the words of the chief judge of the United States District Court in Rhode Island, William E. Smith, a George W. Bush appointee. In a procedural opinion in the state’s climate case against Exxon and other major oil and gas companies, Judge Smith wrote in July that those companies have “extracted, advertised, and sold a substantial percentage of the fossil fuels burned globally since the 1960s.” He continued:
This activity has released an immense amount of greenhouse gas into the Earth’s atmosphere, changing its climate and leading to all kinds of displacement, death (extinctions, even), and destruction. What is more, defendants understood the consequences of their activity decades ago, when transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy would have saved a world of trouble. But instead of sounding the alarm, defendants went out of their way to becloud the emerging scientific consensus and further delay changes — however existentially necessary — that would in any way interfere with their multibillion-dollar profits. All while quietly readying their capital for the coming fallout. That’s the case against Big Oil in a nutshell. The industry is based on a deceit. The companies know the planet is headed toward a climate catastrophe, but they keep drilling away, trying to squeeze the last nickel from their deadly product. It will be up to the judge overseeing the New York case, Barry Ostrager, to determine whether Exxon’s misrepresentations violated New York’s securities law, but when it comes to the moral repugnancy of the company’s climate deception, the verdict is in.
Lee Wasserman is the director of the Rockefeller Family Fund. Among its goals is to accelerate the transformation away from fossil fuels by opposing additional fossil fuel infrastructure, drilling, mining and exporting.
This could be achieved locally in Our Town, in our times, if the City of St. Augustine and St. Johns County restored their local cable channels to the status quo ante before 2007-2008, when there was local access programming. This was at the behest of MARK RUSSELL, a provincial Palatka manager for Time-Warner, before its takeover by Comcast. RUSSELL told Commissioners he did not like local access because it allowed Bubba Rowe and others to criticize the local governments, and some businessman might sit in his hotel room and decide not to invest here. (Of course, hotel rooms don't have cable television, they have satellite, but this shows the outrageous animus against First Amendment protected activity that underlies greedy Corporate America oligopolists. It's probably why Verizon shut down the NYC cable channel discussed in the NY Times column, below.
GANNETT and GATEHOUSE are about to merge, which means that the First Coast News tv news duopoly (ABC and NBC affiliates), the Jacksonville Florida Times-Union, and the St. Augustine Record will all be under the thumb of the same out-of-state, out-of-touch, oligopolistic corporate masters.
St. Johns County and two itty-bitty cities' cable channels are now almost exclusively government programming, with a few exceptions like League of Women voters debates, boring propaganda outside of those meetings where We, the People occasionally get to ask questions, demand answers and expect democracy.
From The New York Times:
Local News Is Dying. New York May Try to Pass a Law to Save It.
Legislators are proposing a first-in-the-nation bill to force cable companies to offer independent local news.
Vivian Wang By Vivian Wang Oct. 21, 2019 Updated 3:25 p.m. ET
[What you need to know to start the day: Get New York Today in your inbox.] Hardly a week goes by, it seems, without another death blow for local journalism. Another beloved newspaper slashes its staff; another longtime radio program goes silent.
In New York, there might now be a novel solution: government intervention.
Two state lawmakers are proposing a requirement that any cable company operating in New York offer a local news channel with “news, weather and public affairs programming,” according to a draft of the bill. The programming would have to be independently produced; companies could not simply rebroadcast others’ existing news shows.
The bill, if passed, would be the first of its kind in the country. Policymakers elsewhere have considered other forms of intervention to save local news: Earlier this year, New Jersey’s governor, Philip D. Murphy, approved up to $2 million in state funds to support community journalism, making New Jersey the first state to allocate money to the local news landscape, despite concerns about media independence. Massachusetts is considering a study of the industry’s decline; federal lawmakers are debating making it easier for news outlets to become tax exempt.
But New York’s bill would be perhaps the most aggressive attempt by government officials to sustain local news in the long term.
It also would offer a concrete example of shifting attitudes toward corporate responsibility, as public officials, voters and even business leaders acknowledge the need for firms to think not only of profits but also of their impact on society.
“These companies don’t listen when it comes to us encouraging them to keep local programming,” said State Senator Kevin Thomas, a Democrat, one of the bill’s sponsors. “So there comes a time when the Legislature has to tell them. Leaving them to self-regulate, they do things for their own profit-making schemes.”
Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and the Democrat-led State Senate have already signaled support for the idea, which stemmed from Verizon’s announcement that it would shutter Fios1 News, its hyperlocal news network that covers the Hudson Valley, Long Island and New Jersey, in November.
Verizon officials declined to give a reason for the closure, which will lead to about 150 layoffs. Around the country, plummeting profits have forced the closures of even outlets with fervent commitments to independent reporting.
After Verizon’s announcement, elected officials, including the Democratic leader of the State Senate, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, asked the company to reconsider. Some politicians accused Verizon of prioritizing profits over jobs and public interest.
Disturbed by Verizon's plans to shut down #FiOS1News, a great source of local news & a blow to the already struggling local news landscape.
I encourage all NYers to support local journalism – it’s more important now than ever.
The new bill, which legislators plan to introduce on Monday, would make that much harder.
Under the law, New York’s Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities including cable, water and natural gas, would decide what qualified as local news. It would also dictate how long and how often each channel was required to show it; smaller companies could have less stringent requirements, said Assemblyman Thomas Abinanti, the bill’s other sponsor.
Mr. Abinanti and Mr. Thomas said they were also considering whether to include online-only content providers, such as Hulu or Amazon Prime, in the rule.
There are legal and technical issues still to be worked out. The federal and state governments share oversight of telecommunications companies, which could limit the state’s ability to act alone. Cable companies could also seek to pass the cost of producing news on to customers.
“Requiring a cable company to run and staff a local news operation is a pretty audacious request,” said Jerry Ellig, a former chief economist at the Federal Communications Commission who now teaches at George Washington University. “This is pretty much a tax. It may not show up on your cable bill as a line item or anything, but if it’s a cost of doing business, they will certainly pass it on.”
Media experts also warned that such a law could effectively make the government an arbiter of news.
But supporters of the measure say that the bill is a direct response to the excessive deregulation of telecommunications companies and a declaration that companies can and should give back in exchange for the state’s permission to operate in New York.
Mr. Abinanti emphasized that while the Public Service Commission would ensure companies’ compliance with the local news requirement, it would not control the content of that news.
“We can’t tell them, ‘You have to cover what’s going on in Yonkers or Greenburgh,’” he said, naming two localities in Westchester County. “But we can give them a category, local news, and say ‘You go figure out what local news is.’”
A spokeswoman for Verizon said the company has agreed to carry News 12, the local news network run by Altice Optimum, thus maintaining subscribers’ access to a source of local news. She declined to comment on the bill.
Elected officials have often declared their support for a robust news environment, and some have even played a pivotal role in preserving it. In 1993, New York’s governor at the time, Mario M. Cuomo, helped persuade the F.C.C. to allow Rupert Murdoch to buy The New York Post, saving the tabloid from collapse. Dying Gasp of One Local NewspaperAug. 1, 2019
Federal regulators have also long set regulations for broadcast networks, including an expectation that they promote a diversity of viewpoints, and “foster public understanding” of “important problems and issues facing their local communities,” according to F.C.C. documents.
But the internet has muddled traditional ideas about government’s role in regulating the news, said Martha A. Garcia-Murillo, a professor who specializes in information regulation at Syracuse University. The emergence of blogs and other alternative news sources has made it more difficult to say whether an area truly lacks local news and therefore needs government intervention, she said.
“Where do we draw the line? Can we say with certainty that these other outlets are not competitors?” Professor Garcia-Murillo said. She said the Legislature would have to show that the market is not being served.
Representatives for both Mr. Cuomo and the State Senate said they were committed to the bill’s goals.
“We are definitely in favor of the concept,” Rich Azzopardi, a senior adviser to the governor, said, though he added that the office needed to review the specific legislation.
Likewise, Mike Murphy, a spokesman for the State Senate, said the decline of local news was “obviously an issue we care deeply about, and it’s something we look to move forward on in the next session.”
A spokesman for the State Assembly, which is also led by Democrats, said the chamber would review the bill.
Despite potential legal concerns, Professor Garcia-Murillo said the bill was a welcome — and overdue — move by government to ensure a strong news economy.
“The government to a certain extent has a responsibility to ensure that the media is fair, is vibrant,” she said. “But if that is the case, that is something that they should have protected over time. They should have been more vigilant about a multitude of voices — not at this point, when you are reacting, but prior.” Vivian Wang is a reporter for the Metro Desk, covering New York State politics in Albany. She was raised in Chicago and graduated from Yale University. @vwang3
A version of this article appears in print on Oct. 22, 2019, Section A, Page 21 of the New York edition with the headline: Lawmakers Propose Requiring Cable Companies to Offer Local News
Here in St. Augustine, the 1897 lynching marker in Orangedale was stolen by Ku Klux Klan and Tea Party types who practically bragged about it at City Commission.
We, the People have foiled them -- the lynching marker will be erected in the Plaza de la Constitucion, under 24/7 surveillance under the watchful eyes of the SAPD and FBI.
The FBI Domestic Terrorism Task Force is wise to your ways, Kluckers.
We're on the world stage now. An international tourism Mecca. And no racists or edneck peckerwood KKK, Tea Party or New Black Panther Party types are going to mess with our history.
From The Washington Post:
This Emmett Till memorial was vandalized again. And again. And again. Now, it’s bulletproof.
Add to list
The new sign marking the spot in Tallahatchie County, Miss., where Emmett Till's body was pulled from a river in 1955. This is the fourth sign erected on the site; others have been repeatedly vandalized. (Emmett Till Memorial Commission)
The cars came one by one, down a gravel road and through a cotton field, to the edge of the Tallahatchie River and the spot where, 64 years ago, historians believe Emmett Till’s lifeless body was pulled from the river. The vehicles carried Till’s relatives, including cousin the Rev. Wheeler Parker, community leaders and advocates dedicated to keeping his memory alive.
The group had gathered on Saturday at noon in the remote spot near Glendora, Miss., to dedicate yet another memorial to Till. And this time, it was bulletproof.
It took 50 years to get the first memorial to Till erected in Tallahatchie County, the site of the lynching that helped spark the civil rights movement. But then an entirely new battle began: keeping the tribute intact.
Saturday’s dedication unveiled the fourth marker the local Emmett Till Memorial Commission had installed at the site since 2008, when the original sign was stolen and never recovered. A sheriff suspected it had been thrown into the river, not far from the Graball Landing site where historians say Till’s body had been found.
AD
The sign and similar markers in the region have become a frequent target for racist vandalism and theft, with perpetrators going to deliberate lengths to deface Till’s memory.
Emmett Till Memorial Commission on the history of the memorial sign
Starting in 2009, The Emmett Till Memorial Commission began putting up signs to commemorate the 1955 murder that became central to the civil rights movement. (Matt Cipollone, Mikey D'Amico)
“This is not just driving down the highway and you see a sign and shoot it,” said Patrick Weems, director of the Emmett Till Memorial Commission. “It’s a very remote site that you’re not just regularly passing by. … Unfortunately, we have people who go all the way out of the way to vandalize it.”
But the same week the Ole Miss photo emerged, the Lite Brite Neon Studio in Brooklyn had completed a new sign for the riverside memorial, and the commission was able to install it this month.
“My attitude over the years has been, leave it there with the riddled bullet holes in it, because it’s really indicative of the fact that racism is yet alive all over the country but especially down in Mississippi,” said Airickca Gordon-Taylor, a relative of Till’s and the executive director at the Mamie Till Mobley Memorial Foundation. She traveled from Chicago to attend Saturday’s dedication with her mother, Ollie Gordon, a cousin of Till’s who knew him as a young boy.
AD
But after seeing the sign, Gordon-Taylor appreciated that it incorporated the history of vandalism at the site. “The fact that it’s bulletproof speaks volumes,” she said. “I was so pleased to see how many people had come out to support the family and the efforts of the mission; that was very moving.”
During Saturday’s commemoration, Gordon-Taylor and her mother took a moment at the edge of the river where Till’s body had been found.
“We walked over and stood there for a few, and I had never been to the river there,” Gordon-Taylor said. “I saw the sign from the river site over the years. We have been to the location where Emmett’s body was tossed into the river but not where his body had been removed from the river. And so every time I stand there by the water, and I know that Emmett’s body was in there and floating in there. My mom grew up with Emmett, so imagine standing there with her.”
AD
The sign comes with protective glass and reinforced steel to prevent bullet holes, vandalism and theft, and for the first time, the site would be monitored by surveillance cameras capable of transmitting feeds over the Internet.
“We’re going to continue to be resilient to putting these markers up,” Weems told The Washington Post. “And hopefully, this will be the last marker we have to dedicate for the site.”
In 1955, Till was a 14-year-old visiting Mississippi from his native Chicago when men kidnapped him at his relative’s home after he spoke to a white woman at a grocery store and was accused of flirting with her. The woman, Carolyn Bryant, recanted significant parts of her accusations decades later.
Her husband, Roy Bryant, and John William Milam, the white men accused of murdering Till, were swiftly acquitted by an all-white jury. In 1956, the pair admitted to killing Till in an interview with Look magazine.
AD
Emmett’s mother, Mamie Till, insisted her son receive an open-casket funeral in Chicago so the world could see what had happened to him. Till’s murder and the heartbreaking images of his funeral were a major catalyst of the civil rights movement.
The new, glossy black sign, which weighs 500 pounds, is inscribed with a history of the site, from its clearing by enslaved people in 1840 until the present day, when it continued to be the site of racist attacks on Till’s memorial.
“Signs erected here have been stolen, thrown in the river, shot, removed, replaced, and shot again,” the monument reads. “The history of vandalism and activism centered on this site led Emmett Till Memorial Center founder Jerome Little to observe that Graball Landing was both a beacon of racial progress and a trenchant reminder of the progress yet to be made.”
An older sign marking the place where Emmett Till's body was discovered had been repeatedly shot in racist acts of vandalism. (Emmett Till Memorial Commission)
Historian Dave Tell, who wrote the inscription on the sign, said it was important to remind visitors of racism’s past and its very real present. He had also led the creation of an app that guided visitors to locations in the county that played an integral role in Till’s story.
AD
“I don’t think anyone on the commission sees the bulletproof sign as a cure-all,” he said. “In some ways, it just feels like a bigger target. Personally, I would not be surprised to see it vandalized again.”
But “by drawing attention to the vandalism at the place, I’m trying to say the vandalism and the bullet holes are part of Till’s story, too,” Tell said. “We don’t want to brush that story under the rug.”
The photo captions on this story have been updated to credit the Emmett Till Memorial Commission. They previously credited the Emmett Till Interpretive Center, a museum that is connected with the Commission’s work.
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.” -- Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities. I was asked recently by two visiting journalists if St. Johns County was more corrupt than elsewhere. I did not have a pat answer, but answered their question with questions. What metric does one use to answer? Indictments, or the lack of them? Investigations, or the lack of them? Transparency, or the lack of it? Corruption that is detected, deterred and prosecuted, or corruption that festers unreported and treated as unremarkable? Dead people once notoriously voted in Chicago, and elsewhere in Illinois and America. JFK once said that when he died, he wanted to be buried in Chicago because he wanted to remain active in politics. In New Jersey and in South Florida, the proliferation of governmental entities (townships and itty-bitty cities) makes it tough for journalists or citizens to follow the web of mafia corruption of their governments, because there are so darn many of them. In Tennessee, Governor Ray Blanton was selling pardons to murderers and selling liquor licenses. Nine of 95 Tennessee heriffs went to federal prison in the 1980s for drug dealing conspiracy, including Dennis O. Trotter, who called me "the most dangerous reporter I ever met in my whole life," who had me sued for libel on the morning of my first law school exam (and ended up paying me for his torts). Trotter was exposed and brought down by fifteen (15) courageous Sheriff's deputies who went to the U.S. Attorney, the FBI and a federal grand jury. The FBI conducted an undercover operation and arrested Trotter, sending him to federal prison. We were blessed in Anderson County to have a reform District Attorney, James Nelson Ramsey, whom I considered a mentor and friend. General Ramsey may have lazy, egotistical and outgunned by thugs, but he told the truth and got in trouble for it. He did not cower to power. Jim told me the facts of life about case-fixing and corruption in the South. He was the object of disdain and ridicule from a corrupt political machine, which tried to get him disbarred. One of the Bar complaints was from Johnny Ray Morgan, who complained that General Ramsey had called Sheriff Trotter a "corrupt son-of-a-bitch," stating that he was going to put him in prison. Trotter was a corrupt SOB and Jim Ramsey did help put him in prison. See Ramsey v. Board of Professional Responsibility, 771 S.W.2d 116 (Tenn. 1989). During the FBI's undercover investigation, I gave a deposition in a lawsuit against the City of Oak Ridge, in which defense counsel asked me about my news stories about Trotter, asking if he had been arrested. "Not yet," I replied. I was there on May 21, 1984 to see three FBI agents take the High Sheriff of Anderson County, Tennessee away in handcuffs. Trotter, a Democrat, was re-elected in 1982 in a race against Oak Ridge Police Captain Eugene Foust. Both wound up in federal prison for drug crimes. In East Tennessee, by far the worst corruption was by the U.S. Government, its mismanaged nuclear weapons plants, and its illegal pollution, which was long a classified national security secret by the Atomic Energy Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy. It was a federal crime to discuss mercury pollution, until our Appalachian Observer newspaper got it declassified, empowered by our Publisher, Ernest F. Phillips, whose family had lived in Appalachia for 200 years. Ernie was a reform County Commissioner who was formerly General Ramsey's Criminal Investigator. Massive illegal pollution is now being cleaned up at nuclear weapons plants in eleven states, and by 2057 (my 100th birthday) might be done, at a cost north of $300 billion. Thanks to United States District Court Judge Robert Taylor, a Truman appointee, the government was told it could not break the law, and that there was no "national security" exemption to environmental laws. Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, Inc. v. Hodel, 586 F. Supp. 1163 (E.D. Tenn. 1984). (I once interviewed Energy Secretary Donald Paul Hodel when he came to Oak Ridge. He was an imbecile, like Reagan's first Energy Secretary, a South Carolina dentist. The illegal pollution in Oak Ridge was kept secret from American Presidents and the American people, as Union Carbide raked in no-bid contracts for government-owned contractor operated facilities, with no inspections by the government until 1991.). That's corruption. In Michigan, the U.S. Attorney in Detroit, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan said that Michigan is the most corrupt state. I've heard the same trite trope about Tennessee, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Mississippi and Florida. In southeast Michigan, the number of pending investigations of local public officials (40) might reflect greater sensitivity to corruption and a greater desire to remedy it. It might reflect better FBI agents and federal prosecutors in Michigan, who are not in bed with bight crooks like Sheriff DAVID SHOAR in St. Johns County. Here in Northeast Florida, our FBI Special Agent-in-charge signed a secret MOU in 2018 for a $2 million contribution to the St. Johns County Sheriff's office for a gun range, never submitted to St. Johns County Commission until summer 2019. FBI here has covered up for corruption by Sheriff DAVID SHOAR, blowing off the deputies and the family of homicide victim Michelle O'Connell. Now that's what I call corruption. Here in Flori-DUH, our corruption is so outrageous and so amateurish that:
the 2000 Presidential Election was stolen under the maladministration of Governor JOHN EDWARD BUSH, in favor of his brother, GEORGE WALKER BUSH, with 27,000 uncounted votes in Jacksonville (Duval County), some 20,000 of them African-American.
for nine years, a Deputy, JEREMY BANKS, who apparently shot and killed his girlfriend has not been arrested, or taken before a grand jury, despite the overwhelming weight of evidence in The New York Times, PBS Frontline, ABC 20/20, NBC Dateline, et al.
an elected official who resides in Jacksonville with his wife and mother,, BARRY MARK BENJAMIN, Chairman of the St. Augustine Port, Waterway and Beach District, claims to live on a boat at commercial property and gotten away with it, with our feeble then-Florida Governor, Charles Crist, and our Florida Elections Commission staff, doing nothing to investigate him. I've asked our St. Johns County Supervisor of Elections, Ms. Vicki Oakes, to investigate.
our State Senator, now FSU President, JOHN THRASHER, claimed a beach condo as his "residence" when he lived in another county at a 5000 square foot crib.
I don't want to enter Florida in the victimization Olympics against Michigan. But here's a revealing fact: After seven years of inexplicable desuetude, David E. Gilbert, the elected Prosecuting Attorney in Calhoun County, Michigan finally bestirred prosecuted conman CHRISTOPHER ALLAN EAGLE for embezzling some nearly $22,000 from his employer, Kellogg Company, and EAGLE served 91 days in jail there. When Christopher Allan EAGLE was released on probation, with a condition to seek and maintain employment, he moved to Florida. He's running for Congress against the incumbent, former Duval County Sheriff John Rutherford, seeking the Democratic nomination to be our 4th Congressional District representative in the House of Representatives. When I broke the story last week, the Chain Gang Journalists in GateHouse owned St. Augustine Record and the Jacksonville Times-Union did not pick up the story, At least the Gannett-owned Battle Creek Enqurier is reporting on what should be local news here. At least Michigan prosecuted EAGLE, finally, maladroitly At least Michigan reporters report the news about corruption. Here in St. Augustine and St. Johns County, reporters ignore it, as if they were in pari delicto with the devious developers and corrupt Sheriff, DAVID SHOAR, who legally changed his name from "HOAR" in 1994. Since the time of Al Capone, escaping American and foreign criminals have moved to Florida, liking the louche lax lassitude of its law enforcement and the favorable laws for corporate secrecy and business ownership. The news media is dying on the vine amidst authoritarianism and oligopoly,. We need a real newspaper.
One that reports the news "without fear or favor."
One with fewer typos and fewer egos.
One with more news.
One with courage.
In the Pentagon Papers case, a new Nixon-Republican judicial appointee, U.S. District Court Judge Murray Gurfein (later an appellate judge) famously wrote, "The security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the value of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, an ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know." United States v. N.Y. Times Co., 328 F. Supp. 324, 331 (S.D.N.Y. 1971).
United States District Court Judge Murray Gurfein (later promoted to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals) From Detroit Metro Times:
US Attorney: Michigan is the nation's most corrupt state
PostedByTom Perkins on Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 2:25 pm
Sen. Debbie Stabenow and WDIV anchor Devin Scillian.
The level of corruption in Michigan is staggering. It's Democrats, it's Republicans, its the entire political establishment, which is mostly a cesspool of morally bankrupt dirtbags working on behalf of corporations and the wealthy instead of the middle and lower class.
That much is evident to anyone paying attention, and things are so bad that in 2012 the FBI organized the Detroit Area Public Corruption Task Force — which is made up of local, state, and federal law officials — to tackle the issue. The task force is still operating, and in some cases local authorities aren't informed of the feds' activities because they can't be trusted.
"Our statistics show we lead the nation in corruption cases, by far," Schneider told Scillian.
Every state has about one corruption case each year, Schneider said, while larger districts like New York City, Los Angeles, and Miami, usually see around four. In Michigan there were about 18 per year for the last five years.
"We definitely have a more significant corruption issue here in the Michigan region," Schneider said. "But we are rooting it out a lot more than other people. We have a long-term campaign here to root out public corruption."
Of course, the media has a role in all this. The Michigan press generally isn't known for challenging the power structure, which is well-represented and celebrated at the annual Mackinac Policy Conference. And the state's media elite that joins lobbyists, politicians, corporate executives, and other powerful state players at Mackinac isn't there to ask tough questions or challenge anyone — it goes to join in the celebration.
In fact, Scillian also spent part of his time at the conference on stage, singing and dancing with Debbie Stabenow, the U.S. Senator has repeatedly put lobbyist and corporate interests over that of most constituents. Scillian even strummed the guitar in front of a banner that read "On the island. Off the record."
It's access journalism at its grossest, and video of the song should be shown to journalism students as an example of what not to do. Can anyone have any confidence that Scillian will question or challenge Stabenow, as he should if he's serious about his job?
Until the state's anchors and reporters replace their lapdog instincts with a drive to to take down those working on behalf of the powerful, Michigan will remain the nation's most corrupt state.
Stay on top of Detroit news and views. Sign up for our weekly issue newsletter delivered each Wednesday.
"It is not enough to allow dissent, we must demand it, for there is much to dissent from. We dissent from the willful, heedless destruction of natural beauty and pleasures." -- Robert F. Kennedy
Here in God's country, St. Johns County, all ten constitutional officers are Republicans, who dance with developers and take their campaign CA$H.
Our St. Johns County Democratic Party has inept, maladroit leadership.
Our Blue Wave Coalition is promising.
We need more leaders.
We need more lawyers.
We need to stop clearcutting, regulate lobbying, adopt a County Charter, Ombudsman, Inspector General and stop clearcutting and development by undisclosed corporate owners who corrupt our government and destroy our way of life.
We need candidates, people like Catherine Hawkinson Guevarra, who recently moved to N.H., who was seeking signatures as a Democrat to run for County Commission in 2018. One grizzled musician said of her, "She's the only Democrat around here who makes a lick of sense."
What do you reckon?
From The St. Augustine Record:
As developers eye southern St. Johns County to build new communities, some residents fear impact on quality of life
Rock Springs Farm is currently under construction on U.S. 1 South just south of State Road 206. When completed over the next five years, it will include 202 single-family homes. [COLLEEN MICHELE JONES/THE RECORD]
By Colleen Jones Posted Oct 20, 2019 at 4:04 PM Updated Oct 20, 2019 at 4:10 PM
With the northern part of St. Johns County filling up quickly, developers are looking farther afield for parcels of land where they can build new residential neighborhoods — and increasingly they are eyeing the southern part of the county.
St. Johns County is currently the eighth-fastest-growing county in the nation, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
The school district opens an average of one new school a year just to keep up with the growth.
Over the past couple of decades, development has been concentrated in areas north and west of St. Augustine in sprawling master-planned communities like Nocatee, Palencia, World Golf Village and Beachwalk.
Now, developers are focusing on building new rooftops near St. Johns’ southern borders: along U.S. 1 South, State Road 206 and State Road 207, areas traditionally known more for tree farms and horse ranches than tractors and bulldozers.
Take a drive down U.S 1 and just past the intersection of S.R. 206 you’ll see the beginnings of Rock Springs Farm in the 100 acres that have been clearcut to make room for 202 single-family homes.
The project, which required a rezoning from Open Rural to Planned Unit Development, was approved by the St. Johns County Commission in 2017. Construction is anticipated to be done in phases over about five years.
Melissa Glasgow, St. Johns County director of economic development, said she can understand why the area is attractive for investment, such as the 11,000 acres of land the Rayonier company put on the market in 2018 and another 8,000 acres sold by local developer David Hutson.
“I think there is still strong interest to enter the St. Johns County market and people have to keep looking farther south and west to get enough acreage at the right price to be competitive. ... S.R. 207 is filling up pretty fast with projects under review or already approved, so a developer has no choice but to move a little further out to find the next available parcel,” Glasgow said.
But as developers buy up green space along the 206 and 207 corridors, some residents are afraid more and more building will take away from the rural or semi-rural character of those areas and create population density and traffic congestion.
Another challenge is laying down infrastructure such as roads, utilities and schools to serve new neighborhoods.
“Despite the cost of extending the infrastructure that the developer may choose to pay for, there is ongoing cost to maintain it once it is build, and that cost generally falls on the public sector,” said Glasgow. “That is something the county takes into consideration when considering new projects. ”
The St. Johns County Commission did consider the burden residential development proposed for a large tract of land off S.R. 206 might place on county resources when it denied Kings Grant, a 999-home subdivision planned for 772 acres, in 2015. The applicants filed a lawsuit in circuit court challenging the county’s decision. A civil trial is tentatively scheduled for Jan. 21.
In a Sept. 25 interview with The Record, Jane West, an attorney representing the South Anastasia Communities Association, said if approved Kings Grant would affect the quality of life of her clients as well as others who live nearby.
“It’s leapfrog urban sprawl, and that’s what they (SACA) are trying to stop,” West told The Record. “You’re opening up the floodgates to developing in the southern part of the county.”
Mike Roberson, interim director of growth management for St. Johns County, said the denial of Kings Grant “kind of sent a message to developers that maybe that area is not ready for the kind of scope (of growth).”
However, if Kings Grant or another large residential proposal were to be approved in that vicinity, Roberson said putting that kind of infrastructure in place could open the door to more projects in the area.
It is too early in the process to know how another proposed project will fare in the county’s application process.
Chris Shee, CEO of the Mastercraft Builder Group, wants to develop land near I-95 and S.R. 207. As proposed, Parrish Farms would encompass 3,700 homes and include elements of commercial, office and recreational space.
Shee is also proposing an I-95 interchange that would be at the southern end of the development and extend Watson Road to connect with the highway.
To Roberson’s mind, the southern end of St. Johns County is really the only uncharted territory left.
“From County Road 208 to the northwest, you have some pockets but otherwise it’s already built out or has entitlements,” Roberson said. “But in the south, you still have whole areas open.”
ayne Smith, owns a gun shop, shooting range and a big spread and he is a man to be reckoned with. Mr. Smith hosted the Tea Party event.
![Resiliency, Performance and Agility: 10 Benefits of HPE Primera [eBook]](http://ntvcld-a.akamaihd.net/image/upload/w_720,h_540,c_fill,g_auto:text,f_auto,fl_lossy,e_sharpen:70/assets/7ECAE9EF588343D280DE7AEDA4609EF0.png)
