#Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
Text
The new hateful anti-transgender regulations of Missouri show us that it was never about the kids
New regulations make it practically impossible for transgender people to get gender affirming medical support in Missouri.
Republicans have for a long time covered their transphobia under concern for the kids. In accordance with this a lot of their anti-trans laws and regulations have been there to “protect the kids”.
For sure , the bathroom laws and the attacks on trans participation in sports have proven that their ultimate goal is to exclude trans people from society, but they could always hide behind the idea that trans people would still be allowed to be trans people.
Missouri directive proves that the end goal is the eradication of trans people
The new emergency regulations in Missouri prove beyond doubt that this is no longer the case. Sure, it presents a set of regulations that on paper contain some loopholes that might, theoretically, allow for sanctioned hormone replacement therapy and corrective surgery. Still, there are so many barriers that this is practically impossible.
The underlying logic is the old medical paradigm of gatekeeping (psychiatric therapy, long waiting periods, constant review ensuring that you are living up to the standards of a conservative society). However, they are taking this to a new level.
So, if you are suffering from anxiety and depression (most likely caused by transphobia), that would stop you from getting relevant health care. If they can document that you are affected by “social media addiction” or “social contagion”, that will be used against you. Following Transgender World is probably enough.
So this is really about stopping trans people from showing the world that they are trans. Trans people who have already transitioned can no longer get hormones in Missouri. They will have to detransition or move to a sane state.
Note that the Missouri attorney general issued this new state directive citing a consumer protection law normally used to prosecute fraudulent business practices. These regulations have not even been discussed by lawmakers.
Misleading presentations of science
In the regulations the Republicans have the audacity to cite the World Professional Association for Transgender Health in support of their policy. WPATH is totally against this kind of transphobia. The text is full of biased and selective misrepresentations of relevant research.
The Republicans try to make people believe that transitioning medically is a risky procedure. So keep in mind that the regret rate for trans people who have transitioned using hormones and surgery is less than 1 percent.
The use of puberty blockers is not “experimental”. Drugs in the class have been FDA approved since the 1990s to treat early puberty
Most of the negative findings associated with trans people is caused by lack of proper health care and the rhetoric of Republicans and other transphobes. The Republicans are basically creating the conditions that lead to the suffering they use as an excuse to persecute trans people.
These are the requirements of the transphobic regulations
Any person or health organization that provide a covered gender transition intervention to a patient will have to:
Assess (at least annually) whether the patient continues to have gender dysphoria.
Disclose conspicuously—on its website, physically in writing, and orally in person by the prescribing provider—to the patient and (if the patient is a minor) to the patient’s parents or legal guardians, [anti-trans propaganda arguments listed in the regulation].
Ensure that for at least the 3 most recent consecutive years, the patient has exhibited a medically documented, long-lasting, persistent and intense pattern of gender dysphoria.
Ensure that the patient has received a full psychological or psychiatric assessment, consisting of not fewer than 15 separate, hourly sessions (at least 10 of which must be with the same therapist) over the course of not fewer than 18 months to explore the developmental influences on the patient’s current gender identity and to determine, among other things, whether the person has any mental health comorbidities.
Ensure that any psychiatric symptoms from existing mental health comorbidities of the patient have been treated and resolved.
Ensure that the patient has received a comprehensive screening to determine whether the patient has autism.
Ensure that the patient has received a comprehensive screening (at least annually) for social media addiction or compulsion and has not, for at least the six months prior to beginning any intervention, suffered from social media addiction or compulsion.
Ensure (at least annually) that the patient is not experiencing social contagion with respect to the patient’s gender identity.
Track all adverse effects (both expected and unexpected) that arise from any course of covered gender transition intervention for all patients beginning the first day of intervention and continuing for a period of not fewer than 15 years.
Maintain data about adverse effects in a form that can be accessed readily for systematic study.
Obtain and keep on file informed written consent from the patient and (if the patient is a minor) from all parents or guardians who have authority to consent to medical intervention, as to each requirement [listed in this section of the regulation9. Such written consent shall be obtained for each intervention.
For medical personnel these restrictions are so wide that trying to help trans people will lead to a too high risk for legal persecution. We would guess this means an end of gender affirming medical healthcare in Missouri.
The rules take effect April 27.
Missouri rules part of rapid push to limit trans health care
Missouri to Restrict Medical Care for Transgender Adults, Citing Consumer Protection Law
Below, Video by the Young Turks on Missouri Attorney General Bans Gender-Affirming Care by "Emergency Rule"
youtube
Photo: Protester wearing a transgender pride flag at the Missouri State House. From the New York Times, Charlie Riedel, Associated Press
243 notes
·
View notes
Text
Erin Reed at Erin In The Morning:
On Tuesday, Gov. Janet Mills of Maine signed LD 227, a sanctuary bill that protects transgender and abortion providers and patients from out-of-state prosecution, into law. With this action, Maine becomes the 16th state to explicitly protect transgender and abortion care in state law from prosecution. This follows several bomb threats targeting state legislators after social media attacks from far-right anti-trans influencers such as Riley Gaines and Chaya Raichik of Libs of TikTok. An earlier version of the bill failed in committee after similar attacks in January. Undeterred, Democrats reconvened and added additional protections to the bill before it was passed into law.
The law is extensive. It asserts that gender-affirming care and reproductive health care are "legal rights" in Maine. It states that criminal and civil actions against providers and patients are not enforceable if the provision or access to that care occurred within Maine’s borders, asserting jurisdiction over those matters. It bars cooperation with out-of-state subpoenas and arrest warrants for gender-affirming care and abortion that happen within the state. It even protects doctors who provide gender-affirming care and abortion from certain adverse actions by medical boards, malpractice insurance, and other regulating entities, shielding those providers from attempts to economically harm them through out-of-state legislation designed to dissuade them from providing care.
The bill also explicitly enshrines the World Professional Association of Transgender Health’s Standards of Care, which have been the target of right-wing disinformation campaigns, into state law for the coverage of transgender healthcare.
The bill is said to be necessary due to attempts to prosecute doctors and seek information from patients across state lines. In recent months, attorneys general in other states have attempted to obtain health care data on transgender patients who traveled to obtain care. According to the United States Senate Finance Committee, attorneys general in Tennessee, Indiana, Missouri, and Texas attempted to obtain detailed medical records "to terrorize transgender teens in their states… opening the door to criminalizing women’s private reproductive health care choices."
The most blatant of these attempts was from the Attorney General of Texas, who, according to the Senate Finance Committee, "sent demands to at least two non-Texas entities."
[...]
Despite these threats, legislators strengthened both the abortion and gender-affirming care provisions and pressed forward, passing the bill into law. Provisions found in the new bill include protecting people who "aid and assist" gender-affirming care and abortion, protections against court orders from other states for care obtained in Maine, and even protections against adverse actions by health insurance and malpractice insurance providers, which have been recent targets of out-of-state legislation aimed at financially discouraging doctors from providing gender-affirming care and abortion care even in states where it is legal.
Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) signs gender-affirming care and abortion sanctuary state bill LD227 into law despite the best efforts of right-wing anti-trans extremists such as Riley Gaines, Courage Is A Habit, and Libs of TikTok who sought to thwart its passage and signature into law.
#Maine LD227#Maine#Janet Mills#Transgender Safe Refuge#Transgender Sanctuary State#Abortion Sanctuary State#Abortion#Gender Affirming Healthcare#LGBTQ+#Transgender Health#Transgender#WPATH
27 notes
·
View notes
Text
The Biden administration's Department of Justice has just charged four members of the African People's Socialist Party (APSP) for conspiring to act as agents of Russia by using speech and political action in ways the DOJ says "weaponized" the First Amendment rights of Americans.
The Washington Post reports:
Federal authorities charged four Americans on Tuesday with roles in a malign campaign pushing pro-Kremlin propaganda in Florida and Missouri — expanding a previous case that charged a Russian operative with running illegal influence agents within the United States.
The FBI signaled its interest in the alleged activities in a series of raids last summer, at which point authorities charged a Moscow man, Aleksandr Viktorovich Ionov, with working for years on behalf of Russian government officials to fund and direct fringe political groups in the United States. Among other things, Ionov allegedly advised the political campaigns of two unidentified candidates for public office in Florida.
Ionov’s influence efforts were allegedly directed and supervised by officers of the FSB, a Russian government intelligence service.
Now, authorities have added charges against four Americans who allegedly did Ionov’s bidding through groups including the African People’s Socialist Party and the Uhuru Movement in Florida, Black Hammer in Georgia, and an unidentified political group in California — part of an effort to influence American politics.
AFP reports that the conspiracy charges carry a sentence of up to ten years, with three of the four APSP members additionally charged with acting as unregistered agents of Russia which carries another five years.
“Russia’s foreign intelligence service allegedly weaponized our First Amendment rights – freedoms Russia denies its own citizens – to divide Americans and interfere in elections in the United States,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen in the DOJ's press release regarding the indictments, adding, “The department will not hesitate to expose and prosecute those who sow discord and corrupt U.S. elections in service of hostile foreign interests, regardless of whether the culprits are U.S. citizens or foreign individuals abroad.”
Looks like the United States has decided to dispense with those freedoms as well.
The superseding indictment containing these charges consists of a lot of verbal gymnastics to obfuscate the fact that the DOJ is prosecuting US citizens for speech and political activities in the United States which happen not to align with the wishes of the US government. The grand jury alleges that the aforementioned Ionov "directed" these Americans to "publish pro-Russian propaganda" and "information designed to cause dissention in the United States," which is about as vague and amorphous an allegation as you could possibly come up with.
For the record Omali Yeshitela, the founder and chairman of the African People's Socialist Party and one of the four Americans named in the indictment, has adamantly denied ever having worked for Russia. Earlier this month before charges were brought against him, the Tampa Bay Times quoted him as saying, "I ain’t ever worked for a Russian. Never ever ever ever. They know I have never worked for Russia. Their problem is, I’ve never worked for them.”
But it's important to note that this should not matter. Under the First Amendment the government is forbidden to abridge anyone's freedom to speak however they want and associate with whomever they please, which necessarily includes being as vocally pro-Russia as they like and promoting whatever political agendas they see fit, whether that happens to advance the interests of the Russian government or not. The indictment alleges that the four Americans engaged in "agitprop" by "writing articles that contained Russian propaganda and disinformation," but even if we pretend that's both (A) a quantifiable claim and (B) a proven fact, propaganda and disinformation are both speech that the government is constitutionally forbidden from repressing.
It's not reasonable for the government to just dismiss the First Amendment on the grounds that it is being "weaponized". You can't have your government dictating what speech is valid and what counts as "agitprop" and "disinformation", because they'll always define those terms in ways which benefit the government, thus giving more power to the powerful and taking power away from the people. You can't have your government dictating what political groups are legitimate and which ones are tools of a foreign government, because you can always count on the powerful set such designations in ways which benefit themselves.
There's also the brazen hypocrisy of it all. The US government is constantly engaging in foreign influence operations with outfits like the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up to help foment coups and color revolutions and advance US information interests overtly in ways the CIA used to do covertly.
As commentator Brian Berletic noted on Twitter, "The US through the National Endowment for Democracy has created armies of organizations carrying out malign influence operations around the world including here in Thailand. When the Thai government attempts to stop this activity, the US embassy shouts 'free speech.' Thailand's government and others around the world could easily cite this move by the US Justice Department to target and uproot US-funded organizations doing exactly this and worse."
So for the US government to now claim it's legitimate to start throwing US citizens in prison for a decade because they published "propaganda" for another country is absurd, and more than a little scary. The most powerful government in the world needs more political dissent at home, not less, and here they are trying to turn it into a crime.
When they claim the members of the APSP published "propaganda" and promoted "dissention", what they really mean is that they engaged in speech and political activism that the US government does not like. The spinmeisters will try to spin it, the legal mumbo-jumbo will try to obfuscate it, but that's what's happening. Don't let them conceal this from you. They're not worried about Russian propaganda, they're worried you'll stop listening to US propaganda.
#us propaganda#caitlin johnstone#African people's socialist party#us censorship#first amendment#russia#new cold war
138 notes
·
View notes
Text
Kansas City, Missouri is now a “sanctuary city” for trans people following a 12-1 vote by the Kansas City Council to declare itself one. The move comes in response to the state’s Republican-led legislature passing two bills aimed at limiting the rights of transgender Missourians.
As the Associated Press reports, on Wednesday, Republican lawmakers sent two bills to Missouri Gov. Mike Parson (R). One would ban gender-affirming healthcare like puberty blockers and hormone therapy for trans youth as well as some adults. The other bans trans athletes from participating in girls’ and women’s sports at all grade levels and in college at both private and public schools. Parson is expected to sign both bills.
In response, the Kansas City Council on Thursday voted 12 to 1 to approve a resolution to declare the city a sanctuary for people seeking or providing gender-affirming care. As a result, city officials will not prosecute or fine individuals or organizations under the state’s new anti-trans laws. City staff are also instructed to make enforcing the ban on gender-affirming care “their lowest priority.” The Kansas City Police Department has also been encouraged to adopt a similar policy, The Los Angeles Blade reports.
“Kansas City government is committed to ensuring Kansas City is a welcoming, inclusive, and safe place for everyone, including our transgender and LGBTQ+ community. After the Missouri state legislature introduced several bills criminalizing access to gender-affirming healthcare across Missouri, I am proud City Council took action and approved the ‘safe haven’ resolution to take steps, within our legal power, to protect our transgender community and anyone seeking gender-affirming care,” Mayor Quinton Lucas (D) said. “For decades, Kansas City has been at the forefront of our region, ensuring we have equality for all, and we will continue to do everything in our power to fight for equal rights for all in our city, no matter what happens at our state capitol.”
Councilwoman Andrea Bough, the resolution’s sponsor, said that the measure was a reiteration of Kansas City’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.
“As a woman and a mother, I strongly feel that personal health care decisions should be reserved for individuals, families, and their physicians without influence from politicians,” Bough said. “Public service should be about helping the community not harming individuals. Today we are proclaiming to our transgender and LGBTQ community that you are safe with us.”
The city’s LGBTQ Commission previously sent a letter to city council members urging them to pass legislation to make Kansas City a “safe haven” for transgender people, following an “emergency regulation” issued by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (R) in April to severely restrict access to gender-affirming healthcare in the state.
The rule would require both minors and adults in Missouri to receive 15 hourly sessions with a therapist over at least 18 months before receiving gender-affirming care such as hormone therapy or puberty blockers. They would also have to be screened for autism and “social media addiction,” and any mental health issues would have to be treated and resolved before they would be eligible for treatment for gender dysphoria.
Critics described the move as a “power grab” by Bailey, who is campaigning for reelection. A Missouri judge temporarily blocked the rule late last month.
#us politics#news#lgbtq nation#lgbtqia+ positivity#lgbtqia+ representation#lgbtqia+#lgbtqia+ rights#kansas city#Missouri#2023#the associated press#gov. mike parson#ap news#Kansas City Council#Kansas City Police Department#The Los Angeles Blade#gender affirming healthcare#gender affirming care bans#Quinton Lucas#Andrea Bough#Andrew Bailey#puberty blockers#hormone therapy#gender dysphoria
19 notes
·
View notes
Note
I still find it incredible the AMA has not made any statement. Is the organization by nature conservative? Are they putting political ideology over the health and life of patients? I expected the Republican party to be indifferent to the suffering of women, but to realize that the medical establishment is equally as indifferent is infuriating. What about their oath as doctors?
Anonymous asked: the response of the medical establishment after the fall of roe is what I find most alarming. when hospitals and doctors are normalizing delaying necessary treatment and risking the lives of pregnant women, we are really in hell. why don't we hear more pushback from doctors and hospitals? is it because of political ideology?
So yeah, for one thing, the American Medical Association is much more Republican than one might expect like look at the open secrets page for the org: in 2020 and 2022 thus far they contributed more to Republican members of the House and Senate than Democratic ones.
I really just think that a lot of doctors (and pharmacists!) don't want to risk their medical licenses for patients, like in Michigan pre-Dobbs and pre-Whitmer (and in CVS' and Walgreens all over the country now), pharmacists didn't fill Misoprostol because it can technically be used as an abortion pill even if the OBGYN explicitly writes "for IUD insertion." It's just such a grim situation. And, I don't trust red states to not prosecute. Like Missouri law technically bans IUDs, and the St. Louis DA says they won't prosecute, but what doctor is going to insert an IUD when the state constitution expressly bans IUDs?
"Life of mother" is really the most bullshit caveat to abortion bans though, like aside from the fact that women should be able to get abortions even if their lives aren't in danger (within reason and not at 28-weeks obviously), how does a doctor know at the exact moment a woman's life is in mortal peril and outside the realm of prosecution? I don't trust Ken Paxton, the Attorney General of Texas, for instance to not prosecute doctors and their patients! That's why doctors will wait until it's almost too late to save the woman's life so there's no room for contention but of course, when you get that close to death, the women in question often die anyways.
This situation is just so horrific like Bill Clinton said it in 1992, before I was even born: "I do not want to return to the time when we made criminals of women and their doctors," and now we're back to that time in half the country.
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
Missouri Governor - Five Judicial Appointments - 07/07/2023
Missouri Governor Parson Announces Five Judicial Appointments to the 3rd, 15th, 21st and 45th Judicial Circuits.
JEFFERSON CITY, MO (STL.News) Friday, Missouri Governor Mike Parson announced five judicial appointments to the 3rd, 16th, 21st, and 45th Judicial Circuits.
The Honorable Steven Hudson of Trenton, Missouri, was appointed as Circuit Judge for the 3rd Judicial Circuit.
Judge Hudson currently serves as an associate circuit judge in Grundy County. He holds a Bachelor of Science in business administration from William Jewell College and a Juris Doctor from the University of Missouri—Kansas City. He will succeed the late Honorable Thomas R. Alley.
Lauren D. Barrett of Kansas City, Missouri, was appointed as Associate Circuit Judge for the 16th Judicial Circuit.
Ms. Barrett is currently the chief trial assistant in the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office. She holds a Bachelor of Journalism and a Juris Doctor from the University of Missouri. She will fill the vacancy created by the retirement of the Honorable Twila K. Rigby.
The Honorable Jeffrey Medler of Ballwin, Missouri, was appointed as Circuit Judge for the 21st Judicial Circuit.
Judge Medler currently serves as an associate circuit judge in St. Louis County. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in economics and philosophy from Boston College and a Juris Doctor from Saint Louis University. He will fill the vacancy created by the resignation of the Honorable Joseph S. Dueker.
Natalie P. Warner of St. Louis was appointed as Associate Circuit Judge for the 21st Judicial Circuit.
Ms. Warner is currently an assistant attorney general in the Missouri Attorney General’s Office. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in economics and business administration from Bellarmine University and a Juris Doctor from Washington University in St. Louis. She will fill the vacancy created by the appointment of the Honorable John R. Lasater as Circuit Judge.
Rebecca A. Richardson of Moscow Mills was appointed as Associate Circuit Judge for Lincoln County in the 45th Judicial Circuit.
Ms. Richardson is currently an assistant prosecuting attorney in Warren County. She holds a Bachelor of Science in paralegal studies from William Woods University and a Juris Doctor from the University of Missouri—Kansas City. She will fill the vacancy created by the appointment of the Honorable James Back as Circuit Judge.
SOURCE: Missouri Governor
Read the full article
0 notes
Video
youtube
Reach out to Tony R. Miller Call (816) 221-6006, or visit https://ift.tt/L1JMhnK Tony R. Miller is a Co-Founder of Troppito + Miller, LLC, and is Currently a Named Member of Troppito Miller Griffin, LLC, Focusing His Missouri and Kansas Law Practice on: Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) Criminal Law Traffic Defense Legal Honors Received: Tony has been recognized as a “Super Lawyer” in Kansas and Missouri. To be recognized as a “Super Lawyer”, Tony was voted by his lawyer peers and then selected by Super Lawyers as one of the top 5% of all lawyers in Kansas and Missouri. Tony has been recognized by the “Kansas City Business Journal” in the “Best of the Bar” list. Tony is an Ex-Prosecutor: In 2001, Tony served as an Assistant Prosecutor before the City of Kansas City, Missouri Municipal Court immediately after law school. In 2003 and 2004, Tony served as an Assistant Prosecuting Attorney in the Prosecutor’s Office of Jackson County, Missouri. In 2013, Tony was appointed by the Presiding Judge to serve as a Special Prosecuting Attorney in the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit of the State of Missouri (Jackson County, Missouri). Additional Professional Experience: Tony was selected to be the law clerk to The Honorable Marco A. Roldan of the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit of the State of Missouri (Jackson County, Missouri). Tony practiced law with the Kansas City firm of Yonke & Pottenger, LLC where he focused in the legal areas of plaintiff’s personal injury, criminal defense, and claimant’s worker’s compensation. Educational Background: Tony Miller Attorney Super Lawyers He graduated from the University of Missouri – Kansas City School of Law in 2001 with a Juris Doctorate. He graduated from Baker University in 1998 with a degree in Political Science. Educational Honors: He was on the Dean’s List, which means he maintained a 3.5 grade point average or higher in law school for each semester that he was recognized. Law Licenses: Licensed to practice law in Missouri in 2001. Licensed to practice law in Kansas in 2002. Awards/Volunteer Best of the Bar Super Lawyers Memberships Missouri Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (MACDL) Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys (MATA) Kansas City Metropolitan Bar Association (KCMBA) Eastern Jackson County Bar Association UMKC Law Alumni Association (Past President / Member) Missouri Bar – YLS Council Political Career and Professional Positions: Tony was elected to the Jackson County, Missouri Legislature (3rd District – At Large) in November of 2014 and has since been re-elected to a second four-year term beginning January 1, 2019. In 2015, Tony was appointed to serve as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Little Blue Valley Sewer District. He served from 2009 to 2013 as the representative from the legal profession on the Jackson County Drug Commission; spending the last two years as the Chairperson. In 2011, he was named to the Jackson County Prosecutor Advisory Committee to assist the County Executive in the selection of the Prosecuting Attorney due to a vacancy in the office. Tony served on the Law Alumni Board of the University of Missouri – Kansas City School of Law as President for the 2017-2018 term. He is a member of the Kansas City Metropolitan Bar Association, the Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys, the Committee for County Progress, and served as an elected representative of District 3 to the YLS Council of the Missouri Bar. In 2013, Tony served as a Co-Chair for the Calvary Community Outreach Network’s Holiday Harvest fundraising drive. In 2014, Tony Co-Chaired the Carnival Fundraiser for CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates). In 2018, he fundraised for the Christo Rey High School through his participation in Dancing with the KC Stars. For a good laugh: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdlzfK4n-I0. Personal: Tony is married to Bethany Miller, a local attorney, and they live in Jackson County with their daughters.
1 note
·
View note
Text
Missouri prosecutors, legalization advocates spar over public safety impact of marijuana vote
Missouri prosecutors, legalization advocates spar over public safety impact of marijuana vote
Prosecuting attorneys and marijuana legalization advocates are battling over the public safety impact from Missouri’s potential approval of recreational marijuana in November.
The Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, in a statement Thursday, warned the measure would make it harder to prosecute people for driving under the influence of marijuana. They also said drug dealers under the age…
View On WordPress
0 notes
Text
Missouri: Man Gets 3 Years Prison for $6 Million Synthetic Marijuana (K2) Scheme
Shakeel Khan, 42, and co-defendants Mohammed Saleem, 46, and Asif Saddiq, 61, also pleaded guilty to laundering money to Pakistan.
Must Forfeit Over $2 Million Seized by Law Enforcement
KANSAS CITY, Mo. – A St. Joseph, Missouri, man was sentenced in federal court today for his role in a conspiracy to distribute nearly $6 million of synthetic cannabinoid products, also known as K2.
Shakeel Khan, 42, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Roseann Ketchmark to three years in federal prison without parole. The court also ordered Khan to forfeit to the government $2,005,239 that was seized by law enforcement during the investigation and to pay a money judgment of $4,750,000, which accounts for all K2-related deposits associated with his bank accounts.
Co-defendants Mohammed Saleem, 46, of Diamond Back, California, and Asif Saddiq, 61, of Fullerton, California, each were sentenced in December 2019 to four years in federal prison without parole. The court also ordered both Saleem and Saddiq to pay a money judgment for which they are jointly and severally liable with Khan.
Khan, Saleem, and Saddiq each pleaded guilty to participating in a conspiracy to distribute misbranded drugs across state lines from March 1, 2011, to April 30, 2014. They also each pleaded guilty to participating in a money-laundering conspiracy that involved payments totaling nearly $500,000 to bank accounts in Pakistan.
Khan, Saleem, and Saddiq admitted that they distributed synthetic cannabinoid products, a controlled substance analogue. The synthetic cannabinoid products had false and misleading labeling in that they were labeled in a manner indicating they were not fit for human consumption when, in fact, the synthetic marijuana products were intended for human consumption. This labeling caused the synthetic marijuana products to be misbranded in violation of federal law.
Saleem began producing synthetic cannabinoids in Kansas City, Missouri, in 2009, where he met Khan. Saleem’s company was MNZ WHOLESALE AND DISTRIBUTION. The following year Saleem moved to Texas to continue producing synthetic cannabinoids, while Khan continued to assist him with his operation in Kansas City. Saleem met Siddiq at a trade show in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2011, after which he moved his operation to Los Angeles, California, and partnered with him. They ran a company called S&S Memon, Inc., DBA LA BLAZE. An affiliated company of LA BLAZE was S&S MEMON DBA LAWORLD SPICE. Another affiliated company was called LA PARADISE and MNZ WORLD SPICE. They were producing synthetic cannabinoids and during this time were producing 50,000 bags of K-2 six days a week.
In the fall of 2011, Khan traveled to Los Angeles to operate a K-2 business and opened K BROTHERS IMPORTS, INC. Saleem then put his business MNZ WHOLESALE AND DISTRIBUTION in Khan’s name.
Saleem travelled to China to purchase the chemicals needed to produce the synthetic cannabinoids. Court documents cite 16 wire transfers, totaling $1,725,250, to purchase chemicals from individuals in China from November 2011 to March 2012. Some of the chemicals that were used in the production of synthetic cannabinoid products constituted analogues to banned chemicals and were thus illegal to distribute or sell by the defendants.
This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph M. Marquez. It was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration and IRS-Criminal Investigation.
h/t @causingfitna
11 notes
·
View notes
Text
Oil Pipelines: is it as easy as turn the valves? Activists in Action
Companies decry ‘valve turners’ who shut down pipelines
BISMARCK, N.D. — As Enbridge prepared to move climate-damaging tar sands crude through a 40-year-old pipeline in eastern Canada in 2015, environmentalists and indigenous peoples including Vanessa Gray thought about what happened in Michigan just five years earlier: Another of the company’s lines had burst, sending oil into a river in one of the largest spills in U.S. history.
With that in mind, Gray and others decided they needed to do more than just speak out. In December 2015, three activists from Montreal entered Enbridge property near the Quebec-Ontario border and turned an above-ground emergency pipeline shut-off valve. About two weeks later, Gray and two others did the same at a different site, drawing even more attention because authorities levied charges that could have landed them in prison for life.
They ended up with no jail time and accomplished their goal of raising awareness.
“I hope it inspires others,” Gray, 26, a member of an Ojibwe tribe, said in a recent interview.
It already has, by activists in the U.S. who believe fossil fuels are precipitating a global warming crisis. Just last month four activists targeted an Enbridge oil pipeline in northern Minnesota. But pipeline companies say so-called valve turners are dangerous — to themselves and the public — and many energy industry officials and advocates say they should be treated as domestic terrorists. Several states are considering increasing fines and prison terms for such attacks and holding associated organizations legally accountable as well.
“It’s reminiscent of a number of years ago when environmental groups were spiking trees to interfere with the timber industry,” said Alan Olson, executive director of the Montana Petroleum Association. “When environmental groups go out to cause physical harm or to harm infrastructure, in my mind that is domestic terrorism.”
To Michael Foster, it’s a wake-up call to a world quickly approaching “a life-or-death moment.”
“We must stop the flow of fossil fuels as a society,” said the mental health counsellor from Seattle who spent six months in jail for turning a pipeline shut-off valve in North Dakota in October 2016. “You can argue about the best, or better, ways to do it, but we haven’t done it yet, and we’ve run out of time.”
Foster was part of a loose-knit group of 11 climate change activists who dubbed themselves Climate Direct Action and simultaneously turned shut-off valves on five pipelines in North Dakota, Minnesota, Montana and Washington state that carry Canadian tar sands crude into the U.S.
“We were committed to nonviolence. We were committed to safety and making sure no communities were impacted or damage occurred. We weren’t interested in damaging equipment,” Foster said. “That’s where we took the cue from Canada.”
In response to that action, federal regulators issued a bulletin warning that tampering with pipeline valves can result in “death, injury, and economic and environmental harm.” None of the valve-turning incidents has led to an injury or a spill, but critics say the protest tactic is at the very least hypocritical.
“What eco-extremists fail to recognize is that their own reckless actions risk seriously harming the same environment that they claim to be trying to protect,” said Craig Stevens, spokesman for Grow America’s Infrastructure Now, a pro-pipeline coalition.
Enbridge spokesman Jesse Semko said tampering with pipelines is no different than targeting railways or power lines, and the company “will support the prosecution of those individuals to the fullest extent of the law.”
But some think the law doesn’t go far enough. The valve-turning protests all have been prosecuted under state laws, and the punishments have varied. No protester other than Foster has spent more than two days in jail.
A group of bipartisan lawmakers, led by Colorado Republican Rep. Ken. Buck, asked the U.S. Justice Department in October 2017 whether protesters could be prosecuted under federal domestic terrorism laws. The response in February 2018 from Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd, provided by Buck’s office, didn’t give much clarity. Boyd said pipeline protest incidents “may or may not qualify as ‘domestic terrorism,”‘ and he wouldn’t comment on whether any federal investigations were happening. The department didn’t respond to an Associated Press request for comment.
Some states aren’t waiting for federal action. The American Legislative Exchange Council has created a model bill that carries stiff penalties for protest incidents targeting “critical infrastructure” such as pipelines. It’s inspired by a 2017 Oklahoma law that carries penalties of up to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.
Louisiana last year passed a law similar to the model, and the legislatures in North Dakota , Illinois, Missouri, Ohio, Mississippi, Indiana and Wyoming are considering similar bills this year, according to Grant Kidwell, the council’s energy policy expert.
The oil and gas industry also is acting. The Energy Equipment and Infrastructure Alliance in October 2017 launched an online database to catalogue attacks on pipelines, including valve-turning.
“I hope it doesn’t spread,” Alliance President and CEO Toby Mack said. “I think it’s pretty obvious that it’s just kind of a stupid way of making a point.”
Activists believe the stupidity lies in ignoring a climate change crisis.
“The state of the movement for climate justice in the United States is in need of more boldness,” said Jay O’Hara, co-founder of the Climate Disobedience Center.
——
Follow Blake Nicholson on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/NicholsonBlake
Published at Sat, 09 Mar 2019 15:34:07 +0000
Read the full article
1 note
·
View note
Text
It’s a New Day in American Politics - Ferguson Is No Exception by Zak Cheney-Rice
Democratic candidate for St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell speaks during a campaign rally, in Bridgeton, MoPhoto: Jeff Roberson/AP/Shutterstock
The year 2019 marks a sea change in American politics. More than 100 new members of Congress were sworn in on Capitol Hill on Thursday, including 67 freshman Democratic representatives, introducing President Donald Trump to divided government for the first time in his tenure. The new House majority will seek to obstruct key parts of his agenda, most immediately by refusing funds for his U.S.-Mexico border wall. Just as Trump’s election in 2016 was seen as a rebuke of the Obama era, the blue wave that engulfed the November midterms can be understood as rejecting his first two years in office and curbing his heretofore unchecked power.
But locally, a different sea change has been underway for years. Voters dissatisfied with their local prosecutors — who in several high-profile cases have shielded police from accountability by declining to charge them for killing unarmed black boys and men — have sent old officials packing in favor of more reform-minded replacements. New top prosecutors in places like Cook County, Illinois, and Orange and Osceola Counties, Florida, have taken office on vows to curtail their predecessors’ more punitive practices, especially concerning black and brown people. Nowhere was this more apparent than in St. Louis County, Missouri, where former Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch guided a grand jury into declining charges against Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for killing Michael Brown, a black teenager, in 2014.
In August, McCulloch was primaried into early retirement by Wesley Bell, a fellow Democrat and black former Ferguson city councilman. Bell ran on a reformist platform that included ending cash bail and the death penalty, and “[resisting] the Trump administration” by limiting local cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Since his swearing in on Tuesday, he has wasted little time demonstrating his intentions to fulfill his promise to “fundamentally change the culture” of the office that his predecessor held for 27 years. On Wednesday, he suspended two McColluch-era veterans, Ed McSweeney and Jennifer Coffin, pending termination hearings, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. He also fired Kathi Alizadeh, the main prosecutor who presented evidence to the Wilson grand jury, and who famously submitted to jurors an old statute asserting that police are justified in killing unarmed suspects who flee the scene of a felony. The statute had been ruled unconstitutional in 1985. “Despite Mr. Bell’s rhetoric about building bridges with career prosecutors, he has apparently decided to suddenly discharge three dedicated public servants in his first hours in office,” Ed Clark, president of the St. Louis Police Officers Association, the union that represents two of the impacted attorneys, said in a press release calling for their reinstatement.
Bell’s shake-up seems practical as well as symbolic. Though the ex-councilman has not made public why he chose to take action against these three prosecutors specifically, McSweeney claims his suspension is retaliation for a Facebook post he wrote criticizing the incoming prosecuting attorney. “County voters will soon regret what they did,” McSweeney reportedly wrote after Bell’s victory and McCulloch’s ouster. Alizadeh’s seems more symbolic, given her involvement in the case that threw Ferguson into chaos and cemented its residents’ lack of trust in the prosecutor’s office. But both send a message. The speed and intentionality of Bell’s moves herald his desire to show the public that St. Louis County is entering a new era of criminal justice.
These changes, though significant, are dwarfed by the tragedies that have marked Ferguson these past four years. Brown’s death and the Wilson non-indictment sparked rioting in the St. Louis suburb in August and November 2014, the root causes of which were laid bare in a Department of Justice report published in March 2015. The report found that “Ferguson’s law enforcement practices [were] shaped by the City’s focus on revenue rather than by public safety needs” — which, in turn, drove police to generate funds by stopping, harassing, and ticketing Ferguson’s majority-black citizenry. Municipal courts augmented these efforts by issuing a staggering number of arrest warrants — 9,000 in 2013 alone — often stemming from minor infractions, like traffic tickets. Fines mounted and jail stints lengthened for those who could not pay, resulting in an environment where both blackness and poverty were functionally criminalized.
In the time since, three young St. Louis-area residents whose activism — or proximity to activism — played key roles in bringing these issues to national attention have died. Darren Seals, 29, was found shot and incinerated in his car in 2016. Danye Jones, the 24-year-old son of activist Melissa McKinnies, was found dead in October, hanged by a bedsheet in his backyard in what authorities deemed a suicide. In November, 31-year-old Bassem Masri, who broadcast many of the protests to the wider public via his storied livestream, was found unresponsive on a bus and declared dead at a local hospital hours later. His cause of death remains undetermined. The number of young people who have died in the course of this sordid saga makes optimism a tall order, even with McCulloch — arguably its greatest villain after Wilson — finally out of a job.
But the fact that McCulloch is gone at all signals the possibility of voter-driven change. Organizers have spent years mobilizing residents to pay greater attention to prosecutor elections across the country. The result, in Ferguson, is the ouster of a man who refused to hold a killer accountable in favor of one whose official policies include no longer prosecuting marijuana cases where fewer than 100 grams are involved; not prosecuting people who fail to pay child support; and not requesting cash bail on misdemeanor cases, to name three. Whether Bell’s tenure meaningfully slows the momentum of the carceral apparatus that drives law enforcement in St. Louis County and beyond remains to be seen. But shifting a dynamic once defined by powerlessness to one rooted in influence suggests that accountability to black Missourians is not a pipe dream. Residue from Ferguson’s waking nightmare may still hang over the foreseeable future — the image of Brown’s dead body lying in a hot cul-de-sac for hours, ashes from the fire tearing down West Florissant Avenue, and the protesters dead too young remain indelible. But a St. Louis County prosecutor who is accountable to black voters more than arguably anyone, who has held the office before, is worth savoring. The arc of the moral universe may not organically bend toward justice, but sometimes, it can be bent.
1 note
·
View note
Text
Join My Black City in Celebrating and Supporting Joseph Whitfield Jr.. We Shine Brighter Together. #MyBlackCity
https://myblackcity.org/joseph-whitfield-jr/?feed_id=7362
>> Joseph R. Whitfield
18th Judicial District Attorney's Office
Joseph Whitfield, Esq., is a Deputy District Attorney for the Office of the District Attorney for the 18th Judicial District. There he prosecutes felony cases in a variety of different areas including Assault, Weapons, Forgery, Drug Distribution, and Homicide. He is a member of the office's Vehicular Homicide Unit, and works with law enforcement, members of the defense bar, investigators, and victims of crime. Prior to joining the District Attorney's Office, Mr. Whitfield had a career in business and technology. He would later clerk for the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Missouri, handling a variety of cases including Human Trafficking, Intellectual Property, Organized Crime, and Public Corruption. Mr. Whitfield has served in a variety of leadership positions including as a Committee Chair for the NAACP Aurora Colorado Chapter, President of the Sam Cary Bar Association of Colorado, Vice President of the board for Highline Academy Charter Schools, as a Commissioner on the Uniform Law Commission (Colorado Delegation), and as an Instructor with the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA). Mr. Whitfield received both his J.D. and LL.M. in Intellectual Property and Technology Law from the School of Law at Washington University in St. Louis.
>> Joseph R. Whitfield
18th Judicial District Attorney's Office
Joseph Whitfield, Esq., is a Deputy District Attorney for the Office of the District Attorney for the 18th Judicial District. There he prosecutes felony cases in a variety of different areas including Assault, Weapons, Forgery, Drug Distribution, and Homicide. He is a member of the office's Vehicular Homicide Unit, and works with law enforcement, members of the defense bar, investigators, and victims of crime. Prior to joining the District Attorney's Office, Mr. Whitfield had a career in business and technology. He would later clerk for the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Missouri, handling a variety of cases including Human Trafficking, Intellectual Property, Organized Crime, and Public Corruption. Mr. Whitfield has served in a variety of leadership positions including as a Committee Chair for the NAACP Aurora Colorado Chapter, President of the Sam Cary Bar Association of Colorado, Vice President of the board for Highline Academy Charter Schools, as a Commissioner on the Uniform Law Commission (Colorado Delegation), and as an Instructor with the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA). Mr. Whitfield received both his J.D. and LL.M. in Intellectual Property and Technology Law from the School of Law at Washington University in St. Louis.
0 notes
Text
MO Governor Appoints Amy R. Ashelford as Associate Circuit Judge
JEFFERSON CITY, MO (STL.News) Friday, Missouri Governor Mike Parson appointed Amy R. Ashelford as Associate Circuit Judge for the 6th Judicial Circuit. She will fill the vacancy created by the retirement of the Honorable Dennis Eckold.
Ms. Ashelford of Platte City serves as an Assistant Prosecuting Attorney in Platte County. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in political science from the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and received a Juris Doctor from the University of Missouri–Kansas City.
Read the full article
0 notes
Link
via Politics – FiveThirtyEight
Ohio. Wisconsin. Florida. You might be watching these swing states to see how the congressional or gubernatorial races will turn out, but they’re also hosting competitive state attorney-general contests. These races don’t usually attract much national attention, but this year, Democrats are hoping to rack up attorney-general seats, which Democrats have used to fight back against President Trump’s policy agenda.
Over the past year and a half, Democratic attorneys general have sued Trump and his administration over a variety of his administration’s decisions, including those on immigration, the environment and birth control. Now, Democratic candidates are making the case to voters that their down-ballot campaigns could be the key to holding Trump accountable. “The unfortunate reality is that we have a federal government that is acting lawlessly,” said Phil Weiser, a Democrat who is running for Colorado’s open attorney-general seat. “I believe the state attorney general is uniquely situated to step in and protect people’s rights.”
Although Republicans currently control two-thirds of the country’s governors mansions, their dominance over state attorney-general offices is less complete. Republicans currently control 27 attorney-general offices, while Democrats control 22 (one is an independent).1 But that balance of power could shift if Democrats win even a handful of races. This means a “blue wave” of Democratic attorneys general is possible — and it could be one of the most important outcomes of the election.
Party control of governor and attorney general offices
State Governor Attorney General Alabama Republican Republican† Alaska Independent Independent* Arizona Republican Republican Arkansas Republican Republican California Democratic Democratic† Colorado Democratic Republican Connecticut Democratic Democratic Delaware Democratic Democratic Florida Republican Republican Georgia Republican Republican† Hawaii Democratic Democratic* Idaho Republican Republican Illinois Republican Democratic Indiana Republican Republican Iowa Republican Democratic Kansas Republican Republican Kentucky Republican Democratic Louisiana Democratic Republican Maine Republican Democratic* Maryland Republican Democratic Massachusetts Republican Democratic Michigan Republican Republican Minnesota Democratic Democratic Mississippi Republican Democratic Missouri Republican Republican Montana Democratic Republican Nebraska Republican Republican Nevada Republican Republican New Hampshire Republican Republican* New Jersey Democratic Democratic* New Mexico Republican Democratic New York Democratic Democratic† North Carolina Democratic Democratic North Dakota Republican Republican Ohio Republican Republican Oklahoma Republican Republican† Oregon Democratic Democratic Pennsylvania Democratic Democratic Rhode Island Democratic Democratic South Carolina Republican Republican South Dakota Republican Republican Tennessee Republican Republican* Texas Republican Republican Utah Republican Republican Vermont Republican Democratic Virginia Democratic Democratic Washington Democratic Democratic West Virginia Republican Republican Wisconsin Republican Republican Wyoming Republican Republican*
Show more rows
* In seven states, the attorney general is not popularly elected. In Alaska, Hawaii, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Wyoming, it is appointed by the governor. In Maine, it is elected by the state legislature. In Tennessee, it is appointed by the state Supreme Court.
†In Alabama, California, Georgia, New York and Oklahoma, the attorney general is normally popularly elected, but because of a mid-term vacancy, the current attorney general was appointed.
Sources: National Association of Attorneys General, news reports
State attorneys general have proved increasingly willing to flex their political muscle, particularly by banding together to file multistate lawsuits, which have spiked in number in recent years, according to research by political scientist Paul Nolette, who teaches at Marquette University. These efforts have also grown increasingly partisan, according to Nolette. “It’s a high-profile way to frustrate implementation of federal policy, and it’s been quite effective,” Nolette said.
For example, throughout the Obama administration, Republican attorneys general fiercely attacked its policies and notched some wins on issues like immigration and climate change. And over the past year and a half, blue-state AGs have launched a slew of lawsuits against the Trump administration and, in the process, racked up some victories on environmental protection and student debt relief. But Republican attorneys general haven’t vanished into the background now that the GOP controls the White House; in February, Republicans in 20 states filed a lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act, arguing that the law, including key provisions like protections for people with pre-existing conditions, was unconstitutional, furthering the Trump administration’s effort to dismantle the law. (A coalition of 17 Democratic attorneys general sprang into action to defend the law; the case went before a judge in September, but a decision hasn’t yet been released.)
This year, some Republican attorney-general candidates say they want to tamp down the polarization. “We shouldn’t be jousting and taking a partisan stand on every issue,” said George Brauchler, the Republican running against Weiser in Colorado’s attorney-general race. But even if some Republicans really are regretting their colleagues’ aggressive tactics (Weiser, for his part, claims that Brauchler isn’t as moderate as he seems), it may be difficult to put the genie back in the bottle.
State attorneys general have become nationally more important in a time of political gridlock, said James Tierney, a former attorney general of Maine and a lecturer at Harvard Law School. Apart from their ability to sue the federal government directly, there are other ways for AGs to influence policy — whether they believe the problem is federal overreach or underreach. They can, for example, limit how much state and local law enforcement officers cooperate with federal immigration agencies or step in to sue companies when they believe the federal government isn’t doing enough to protect citizens.
While Republicans seem to have long understood the legal importance of possessing an attorney general’s chair, Democrats may only now be trying to catch up. Lizzie Ulmer, the communications director of the Democratic Attorneys General Association, told FiveThirtyEight that the organization went from one part-time consultant working out of a Denver office building in 2016 to a fully staffed party committee this year — similar to what the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is for House races, for example. So far this election cycle, the association has raised $14 million according to disclosure forms from the Internal Revenue Service.2 That’s well ahead of the $8 million it raised in the 2014 cycle — but it’s still far behind the $31 million that its Republican counterpart, the Republican Attorneys General Association, has raised so far this cycle.
Some political sources have told reporters that as much as $100 million could be spent on attorney-general races this year (which would be a huge increase from previous years). That money is being spent on the 30 attorney-general posts that are up for election this year — 18 held by Republicans and 12 by Democrats. To see which were most vulnerable, we looked at polls of the races, fundraising numbers and the two partisan AG associations’ lists of states they are targeting.
Here are the seven states3 where we think Democrats could realistically make gains:
Polling in Arizona had shown Republican incumbent Mark Brnovich pulling away from Democrat January Contreras, but the race got a shot in the arm when progressive billionaire Tom Steyer recently poured more than $3 million into attacks on Brnovich.
For the open seat in Colorado, Democrat Phil Weiser (the former dean of the University of Colorado Law School) has outraised Republican District Attorney George Brauchler (who prosecuted the Aurora theater shooter) by almost $2 million. But the Republican AG association has bolstered Brauchler with around $3 million in outside spending, one of its biggest investments in any state.
In Florida, Democratic state Rep. Sean Shaw has promised to use the attorney general’s office to take on the Trump administration, while former judge and GOP candidate Ashley Moody is running a law-and-order campaign backed by at least 57 of Florida’s 66 sheriffs. Polling is tight, so, as with the Senate and governor races in Florida, we’re unsure which way it will go.
With his connections as speaker of the state House, Tom Leonard is probably Michigan Republicans’ strongest statewide candidate. But it just might not be their year: Polls give Democrat Dana Nessel, an LGBT-rights lawyer whose campaign video went viral as the #MeToo movement was gaining steam, a slight lead.
Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt is running for governor, and he’s anointed his Republican deputy, Wes Duncan, to succeed him. As state Senate majority leader, Democratic candidate Aaron Ford is the highest-ranking Democrat in Nevada, but his campaign has been hurt by revelations that he was arrested four times in the 1990s. Polls show lots of undecided voters, so this is another race that could follow the top of the ticket.
Ohio pits two all-star candidates against each other: Democrats have Steve Dettelbach, a former U.S. attorney with a sterling prosecutorial record, while Republicans have Dave Yost, who has already won two statewide elections for state auditor. Both candidates tout their record fighting corruption, but Dettelbach may have more credibility on the issue, given how the Ohio GOP has had to contend with two prominent local scandals. With almost $5 million in the bank at the end of September, he also has the financial edge over Yost, but polls indicate that this is still anyone’s race.
Wisconsin may be Democrats’ best chance to oust an incumbent attorney general. Republican Brad Schimel has earned the ire of some Democrats over some possibly questionable public spending choices and a backlog of untested rape kits. The Democratic AG association planned to devote $2 million to the race, while the Republican group allocated $2.5 million. The Democratic candidate — Josh Kaul, a former federal prosecutor and the son of Wisconsin’s last Democratic attorney general — trails Schimel by only 4 points in the latest Marquette University poll.
But it’s not just Democrats who could make gains. Republicans have one big pickup opportunity, too: the open seat in Minnesota. With his strong following among progressive Democrats, U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison started the race as the favorite. However, in August, Ellison’s former romantic partner accused him of physically and emotionally abusing her. The race is now neck and neck. Republican Doug Wardlow has picked up steam by promising not to mix politics with his work as AG, but the longtime conservative activist has already thrown that claim into question.
Flipping any of these offices could result in even more litigation against the Trump administration. Newly minted attorneys general may find themselves adding their names to more lawsuits than filing new ones, though, given how aggressive the Democrats have already been. But this year’s elections will undoubtedly serve as a test of whether the Democrats’ strategy of attacking Trump through the courts can also help them win elections.
1 note
·
View note
Text
How Did Republicans Do In The Primaries
New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/how-did-republicans-do-in-the-primaries/
How Did Republicans Do In The Primaries
Allegations Of Inciting Violence
Inside Texas Politics: What did Texas Republicans, Democrats do right this election cycle?
Research suggests Trump’s rhetoric caused an increased incidence of hate crimes. During his 2016 campaign, he urged or praised physical attacks against protesters or reporters. Since then, some defendants prosecuted for hate crimes or violent acts cited Trump’s rhetoric in arguing that they were not culpable or should receive a lighter sentence. In May 2020, a nationwide review by ABC News identified at least 54 criminal cases from August 2015 to April 2020 in which Trump was invoked in direct connection with violence or threats of violence by mostly white men against mostly members of minority groups. On January 13, 2021, the House of Representatives impeached Trump for incitement of insurrection for his actions prior to the storming of the U.S. Capitol by a violent mob of his supporters who acted in his name.
Who Can Vote In A Primary
Only Democrats can vote in the Democratic Primary.
Only Republicans can vote in the Republican Primary.
The last day to register to vote before the Primary is the 4th Saturday before the Primary.
The deadline to change party affiliation before the Primary is the last Friday in May.
You can register to vote and change your party affiliation after the Primary.
Results Of The 2016 Republican Party Presidential Primaries
Donald Trump
e
This article contains the results of the 2016 Republican presidential primaries and caucuses, the processes by which the Republican Party selected delegates to attend the 2016 Republican National Convention from July 1821. The series of primaries, caucuses, and state conventions culminated in the national convention, where the delegates cast their votes to formally select a candidate. A simple majority of the total delegate votes was required to become the party’s nominee and was achieved by the nominee, businessman Donald Trump of New York.
The process began on March 23, 2015, when Texas SenatorTed Cruz became the first presidential candidate to announce his intentions to seek the office of United StatesPresident. That summer, 17 major candidates were recognized by national and state polls, making it the largest presidential candidate field for any single political party in American history. The large field made possible the fact that the 2016 primaries were the first since 1968 in which more than three candidates won at least one state.
Recommended Reading: Should Republicans Vote In Democratic Primary
May 2016: Trump As Presumptive Nominee
142 delegates were awarded between the Indiana primary and the final primaries in June; however, with Trump the only candidate remaining, Washington, Oregon, West Virginia and Nebraska became essentially uncontested, although Cruz and Kasich remained on the ballot. Trump won handily in West Virginia, Nebraska and Oregon, although Kasich received one delegate from West Virginia and five in Oregon, while Cruz took five in Oregon as well. The next week, Trump won decisively in Washington State, taking 76% of the vote and 41 of 44 delegates, with the other three uncommitted.
May 1024 results 11%
After becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, Trump said regarding the Republican primaries: “You’ve been hearing me say it’s a rigged system, but now I don’t say it anymore because I won. It’s true. Now I don’t care.”
On May 26, 2016, the Associated Press announced that Trump had passed the threshold of 1,237 delegates required to guarantee his nomination, thanks to unbound delegates from North Dakota who declared their support for Trump.
Professional Input Checks The Power Of Billionaires And The Media
The conventional assumption that primaries are less elite than party selection overlooks the way todays primaries actually work. Thanks to court decisions such as SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission, there is today no limit on the size of contributions to independent groups; the groups, in turn, are free to support and oppose candidates provided that they not coordinate their activities with the candidates and parties. In other words, todays campaign-finance rules funnel vast sums of unaccountable money to the political systems least accountable actors.
odays campaign-finance rules funnel vast sums of unaccountable money to the political systems least accountable actors.
That said, even if small donors were a perfectly representative group, they would still provide a pathway around gatekeepers, and that is a mixed blessing. True, candidates who rely on small donors are less beholden to big donors and special interests, which may make them more independent-minded; also true, they are less beholden to their political peers, party leaders, and important constituencies, which may make them more reckless and demagogic.
Then there are the media, whose power in influencing candidate choice has grown enormously since the McGovern-Fraser reforms. Writing as long ago as 1978, Jeanne Kirkpatrick tartly observed:
Things have only gotten worse in the transition from Walter Cronkite to Sean Hannity and todays bevy of extremist internet sites.
Also Check: What Major Cities Are Run By Republicans
Sen Josh Hawley Of Missouri
Though controversial, Hawley, 41, is a fundraising machine and hes quickly made a name for himself. The blowback Hawley faced for objecting to Bidens Electoral College win included a lost book deal and calls for him to resign from students at the law school where he previously taught. His mentor, former Sen. John Danforth of Missouri, said that supporting Hawley was the biggest mistake Ive ever made in my life.
Still, he brought in more than $1.5 million between Jan. 1 and March 5, according to Axios, and fundraising appeals in his name from the National Republican Senatorial Committee brought in more cash than any other Republican except NRSC Chair Sen. Rick Scott of Florida. Just because youre toxic in Washington doesnt mean you cant build a meaningful base of support nationally.
One Republican strategist compared the possibility of Hawley 2024 to Cruz in 2016. Hes not especially well-liked by his colleagues , but hes built a national profile for himself and become a leading Republican voice opposed to big technology companies.
Hawley and his wife, Erin, have three children. He got his start in politics as Missouri attorney general before being elected to the Senate in 2018. Hawley graduated from Stanford and Yale Law.
Statehood And Indian Removal
Defense of Florida’s northern border with the United States was minor during the second Spanish period. The region became a haven for escaped slaves and a base for Indian attacks against U.S. territories, and the U.S. pressed Spain for reform.
Americans of and began moving into northern Florida from the backwoods of and . Though technically not allowed by the Spanish authorities and the Floridan government, they were never able to effectively police the border region and the backwoods settlers from the United States would continue to immigrate into Florida unchecked. These migrants, mixing with the already present British settlers who had remained in Florida since the British period, would be the progenitors of the population known as .
These American settlers established a permanent foothold in the area and ignored Spanish authorities. The British settlers who had remained also resented Spanish rule, leading to a rebellion in 1810 and the establishment for ninety days of the so-called Free and Independent Republic of on September 23. After meetings beginning in June, rebels overcame the garrison at , and unfurled the flag of the new republic: a single white star on a blue field. This flag would later become known as the “”.
Some Seminoles remained, and the U.S. Army arrived in Florida, leading to the . Following the war, approximately 3,000 Seminole and 800 Black Seminole were removed to . A few hundred Seminole remained in Florida in the .
Recommended Reading: How Many Democrats Have Been President Vs Republicans
Anger At Past Outside Interference
The discontent over unaffiliated voter participation in partisan primaries stems from the 2016 approval of two ballot measures allowing unaffiliated voters to select one of the two partys primary elections to cast a ballot in. Before the change, unaffiliated voters had to sit on the sidelines for primaries.
From 2010 through 2016, Republican primary voter turnout outpaced that of Democrats. But in 2018 and 2020, the first two years unaffiliated voters could participate in primaries without affiliating with one of the two major parties, participation in the Democratic primaries soared.
Meanwhile, more Coloradans are becoming unaffiliated voters, reaching 43% at the end of July, while the Republican Partys share of voters is decreasing at a faster pace than the Democratic Party.
Colorado candidates can get on the primary ballot by one of two paths. They can be nominated and go through the state caucus and assembly process, where they must get 30% of the vote, or they can gather signatures from voters.
Some GOP candidates have had trouble making the ballot in the past. In 2016 and 2018, scandals over petition signatures foiled one U.S. Senate candidate and led a gubernatorial candidate, Walker Stapleton, to go the assembly route at the 11th hour after initially gathering petition signatures.
In 2020, allegations of fraud arose out of caucuses in Weld and El Paso counties. The state GOP, however, ultimately determined nothing illegal took place in either instance.
Convention And Vp Selection
Midterm elections: Do Republicans have a chance of keeping the House?
The delegates at the Republican National Convention formally nominated Dole on August 15, 1996, as the GOP presidential candidate for the general election. Dole was the oldest first-time presidential nominee at the age of 73 years, 1 month .
Former Congressman and Cabinet secretary Jack Kemp was nominated by acclamation as Dole’s running mate the following day. Republican Party of Texas convention delegates informally nominated Alan Keyes as their preference for Vice President.
Other politicians mentioned as possible GOP V.P. nominees before Kemp was selected included:
Don’t Miss: How Many Seats Do The Republicans Control In The Senate
Just How Bad Was The 2018 Election For House Republicans
On Thursday, Democrat Jared Golden beat Maine Republican Rep. Bruce Poliquin, marking the 33rd seat pickup for Democrats in the 2018 election.
There are seven races in the House left uncalled all are Republican-held seats; Democrats lead in five of the seven. If they win all the races where their candidates are winning at the moment, Democrats will net 38 seats. If they lose them all which is very unlikely they will hold at a 33-seat gain.
In an interview Wednesday with the conservative Daily Caller website, President Donald Trump insisted that by his aggressive last-minute campaigning across the country he had saved House Republicans from seat losses that could have numbered into the 70s. I think I did very well, he concluded.
So did he? As compared to history?
Not really, is the answer.
Theres no question that Trump did not suffer the massive seat loss that his immediate predecessor Barack Obama did in his first midterm election in 2010. In that election, Republicans netted an astounding 63-seat gain, the largest since Democrats lost 72 House seats in the 1938 midterms.
But more broadly, the 33 seat loss by Republicans in 2018 places this election firmly in the upper echelon of House-seat losses by a presidents party in modern midterms.
Read Thursdays full edition of The Point newsletter, and to get future editions delivered to your inbox.
What Do Party Preferences Mean When Listed With Candidates’ Names On The Ballot What Are The Qualified Political Parties And Abbreviations Of Those Party Names
The term “party preference” is now used in place of the term “party affiliation.” A candidate must indicate his or her preference or lack of preference for a qualified political party. If the candidate has a qualified political party preference that qualified political party will be indicated by the candidate’s name on the ballot. If a candidate does not have a qualified political party preference, “Party Preference: None” will be indicated by the candidate’s name on the ballot.
Similarly, voters who were previously known as “decline-to-state” voters are now known as having “no party preference” or known as “NPP” voters.
Abbreviations for the qualified political parties are:
DEM = Democratic Party
Also Check: How Many Registered Republicans In Illinois
Civil War And Reconstruction
American settlers began to establish cotton in north Florida, which required numerous laborers, which they supplied by buying slaves in the domestic market. By 1860, Florida had only 140,424 people, of whom 44% were enslaved. There were fewer than 1,000 free before the American Civil War.
On January 10, 1861, nearly all delegates in the Florida Legislature approved an ordinance of secession, declaring Florida to be “a sovereign and independent nation��an apparent reassertion to the preamble in Florida’s Constitution of 1838, in which Florida agreed with Congress to be a “Free and Independent State.” The ordinance declared Florida’s secession from the , allowing it to become one of the founding members of the .
The Confederacy received little military help from Florida; the 15,000 troops it offered were generally sent elsewhere. Instead of troops and manufactured goods, Florida did provide salt and, more importantly, beef to feed the Confederate armies. This was particularly important after 1864, when the Confederacy lost control of the Mississippi River, thereby losing access to Texas beef. The largest engagements in the state were the , on February 20, 1864, and the , on March 6, 1865. Both were Confederate victories. The war ended in 1865.
It Was An Election For A Mini
There was some talk that Democrats may have pulled their punches in the 25th district because, after all, the special election was for the remainder of Hills term and the two candidates will meet again in a more consequential rematch where conditions may favor Smith. Over-confidence probably wasnt a problem since signs of a Garcia win were abundant going into the election.
Republicans, of course, busily spun the win into a sign of a Republican resurgence in California and possibly an omen that the GOP will retake the House even as Trump cake-walks to a second term on the strength of a rapidly rebounding economy that he championed even as Democrats pursued perpetual shutdowns. While the results may legitimately indicate that theres no continuing wave from 2018 that will crash with renewed force in favor of Democrats in November, its more likely that we are seeing a reversion to the mean rather than some new pro-Republican wave. There are enough special circumstances surrounding Garcias win to make its recurrence questionable when he appears on the ballot on Election Day with Donald Trump, who remains as unpopular as ever in California.
There is one wrinkle in Garcias special election victory worth a closer look. In 2018 a number of Republican incumbents famously led early on until later-arriving mail ballots swept Democrats into office. There were signs on Election Day that Garcias early lead might be durable, as California political observer Miriam Pawel noted:
Don’t Miss: How Many Registered Republicans In California
What Makes The 2024 Presidential Election Unique
The lead up to the 2024 presidential election is different from past years because of former President Donald Trump. Hes eligible to run for a second term, and has publicly toyed with the idea while also weighing in on other Republicans he thinks could be the future of the party. If Trump does run in 2024, hed start out with unparalleled name ID and massive support, but if he doesnt, the field could be wide open for other Republicans hoping to win over his supporters. President Joe Biden said recently he expects to run for reelection in 2024.
Related
Golden Trump statue at CPAC 2021 was no graven image, according to the artist
This early on, wannabe candidates must raise their profiles, show their commitment to the party, and raise money, one Republican strategist said, to get on peoples radars even when your candidacy is in a holding pattern.
Some of the most visible 2024 presidential candidates will surely flame out long before the Iowa caucus, and theres always the chance that the next Republican nominee isnt yet considered a serious player . Theres a million and one things that will happen between now and then that will shape the race in ways we cant now predict, but the invisible primary that comes before any votes are cast has started.
Heres your very early guide to some of 2024s Republican presidential candidates, based on early polling, interviews with Republican donors and strategists and results from online political betting markets.
The Louisiana Primary System
The Louisiana system, sometimes called the “Cajun Primary,” eliminates the primary election altogether. Instead, all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, run on the same ballot in November. If a candidate receives more than half of the votes, that candidate is elected. If no candidate wins with a majority, the top two vote-getters face off in a December runoff election. Qualified absentee voters receive a ballot for the November election and a ranked ballot for the December runoff, so that they can vote as normal in the general election and then have their ranked ballot count for whichever runoff candidate they ranked highest in the runoff election.
Although Louisiana law refers to the election in November as the “primary” and the December runoff as the “general” election, the November election takes place on the federally mandated Election Day and most candidates win office by receiving a majority vote in that election, so it is best understood as a general election, with the December election as a contingent runoff.
The Louisiana system is sometimes mistakenly equated with the Top Two system, but holding the first election in November and electing any candidate with more than 50% of the vote in that election makes it sufficiently distinct that it should not be understood as a mere variant of Top Two.
Read Also: How Many Republicans Caucused In Iowa
Trump Election Lawsuits Have Mostly Failed Here’s What They Tried
In the Senate, Democrats have so far gained one seat, but they need three with a Biden win to take over the chamber. Democrats still have a chance of doing that with two runoff elections in Georgia. That’s seen as possible, but not likely.
It wasn’t expected to be this way. Democrats had put lots of Senate races in play, ones not expected to go their way at the beginning of the 2020 cycle, places like Kansas and Montana.
To be sure, many of the Senate races were expected to be close, perhaps with razor-thin margins, and a Democrat-controlled Senate was never an assured outcome. But when you look at the average of the polls in the last week of the election versus the ultimate result, it’s clear that Republicans were underrepresented all across the country.
Loading…
All of these races, except Colorado and Alabama, were within single digits in the polls. Colorado, a state Biden won handily, wound up pretty close to the average. Alabama, a state Trump won by a lot, was an even bigger blowout than expected.
Many of the supposedly tightest races didn’t wind up tight at all. Maine is perhaps the most stunning one. Biden won the state by 9 percentage points, but Republican incumbent Susan Collins won reelection by 9 points.
Not only was Collins down by 4 points heading into Election Day in an average of the polls in the week before the election, but she led in just one poll in all of 2020. And that was back in July. That’s one poll out of almost three dozen.
Relationship With The Press
Did The 2014 Primaries Do The GOP Any Good? | Drinking And Talking
Throughout his career, Trump has sought media attention, with a “lovehate” relationship with the press. Trump began promoting himself in the press in the 1970s. Fox News anchor and former House speaker have characterized Trump as a “” who makes controversial statements to see people’s “heads explode.”
In the 2016 campaign, Trump benefited from a record amount of free media coverage, elevating his standing in the Republican primaries.New York Times writer wrote in 2018 that Trump’s media dominance, which enthralls the public and creates “can’t miss” reality television-type coverage, was politically beneficial for him.
As a candidate and as president, Trump frequently accused the press of bias, calling it the “fake news media” and “the .” In 2018, journalist recounted Trump’s saying he intentionally demeaned and discredited the media “so when you write negative stories about me no one will believe you.”
As president, Trump deployed the legal system to intimidate the press. In early 2020, the Trump campaign sued The New York Times, The Washington Post, and CNN for alleged defamation in opinion pieces about Russian election interference. Legal experts said that the lawsuits lacked merit and were not likely to succeed. By March 2021, the lawsuits against The New York Times and CNN had been dismissed.
Don’t Miss: Will Any Republicans Vote To Remove Trump
Garcia Was An Unusually Good Candidate
Republicans lucked into an unusually strong candidate in Garcia, a former Navy pilot running in a district with a significant defense presence, and a Latino in a district whose electorate has become one-third Latino. He managed to beat the previous Republican holder of the seat, Steve Knight, in the February primary in order to win a Top Two position opposite Smith, which was welcomed by Republican strategists. His campaign was well-financed.
Republican Party Primaries 2020
2020 Republican Party primary elections Battleground primaries Primaries by state Submit
Ballotpedia covered every Republican Party state and federal primary in 2020 to highlight the intraparty conflicts that shaped the party and the general election. This page is an overview of those primaries, with links to Ballotpedia’s coverage of all Republican U.S. Senate, U.S. House, and state-level primaries.
to read about Democratic Party primaries in 2020.
You May Like: What Are The Views Of Republicans
Former Us Ambassador To The United Nations Nikki Haley
Haley, 49, stands out in the potential pool of 2024 Republican candidates by her resume. She has experience as an executive as the former governor of South Carolina and foreign policy experience from her time as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
Haley was a member of the Republican Partys 2010 tea party class. A former South Carolina state representative, her long shot gubernatorial campaign saw its fortunes improve after she was endorsed by Sarah Palin. Haley rocketed from fourth to first just days after the endorsement, and she went on to clinch the nomination and become her states first female and first Indian-American governor.
As governor, she signed a bill removing the Confederate flag from the state Capitol following the white supremacist attack at the Emanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston. She left office in 2017 to join the Trump administration as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and Quinnipiac poll found she was at one point the most popular member of Trumps foreign policy team.
I think that shes done a pretty masterful job in filling out her resume, said Robert Oldendick, a professor and director of graduate studies at the University of South Carolinas department of political science.
Haley criticized Trump following the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol by his supporters, saying she was disgusted by his conduct. Oldendick said he thought her pretty pointed criticism of the president will potentially cause some problems.
‘im Going To Be In Your Backyard’: Trump Sons Threaten Primaries For Gop Lawmakers
Fox News, which had been carrying the remarks live, dropped its feed of the rally after the expletives uttered by the president’s son aired uncensored.
Donald Trump Jr. speaks Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, at a rally in support of President Donald Trump called the “Save America Rally.” | Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo
01/06/2021 11:48 AM EST
Link Copied
President Donald Trumps eldest sons threatened Republican lawmakers at a large rally outside the White House on Wednesday, pledging that their family would continue to dispute the results of the 2020 election just hours before Congress was set to certify President-elect Joe Bidens Electoral College victory.
To those Republicans, many of which may be voting on things in the coming hours: You have an opportunity today, Donald Trump Jr. told the crowd gathered for the Save America March on the White House Ellipse. You can be a hero, or you can be a zero. And the choice is yours. But we are all watching. The whole world is watching, folks. Choose wisely.
Several House Republicans and roughly a dozen senators have announced plans to object to individual states electoral vote counts when Congress meets for a joint session this afternoon. And though their effort to reverse the elections outcome has virtually no chance of succeeding, the president had applied increasing public pressure on Vice President Mike Pence who will preside over the proceedings to attempt to thwart Bidens win.
Recommended Reading: Are There Any Republicans For Impeachment
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
giga-lynn
From Stable to Stumble, Nevermore.
lisabrown711
Untitled
loopdrive
loopdrive tmbl
solsnascente
O pré-amor, que é tão mais feliz que amor.
mystically-miraculous
Miraculous