Cocktails & Popcorn: Arnold Reed, Attorney For John Conyers, Enters The Stage

I have popcorn. Want some?

I wonder if the DOJ OIG Report is about to be declassified.

Oh, and I forgot to mention that Perkins Coie Sucks.

#perkinscoiesucks

Marc Elias Of Perkins Coie Sucks & So Does The FEC

Learn more: BEVERLY TRAN: Marc Elias Of Perkins Coie Sucks & So Does The FEC http://beverlytran.blogspot.com/2017/10/marc-elias-of-perkins-coie-sucks-so.html#ixzz5Kiw2nDU6
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare 

Arnold Reed, 'lawyer on the side of the people'

When his beloved father fell ill, Arnold E. Reed didn't hesitate. He swapped the cloistered halls of law school for Chicago's south side, where his dad owned a barbershop. To keep the business going, Reed, who'd learned the craft from his father, spent the next few months cutting hair.

Meanwhile, a classmate would mail Reed homework, and he studied when he could.

In the end, not only did the University of Iowa College of Law student graduate, he did so on time.

"I read the books and taught it to myself," said Reed, 54, whose Dad lived to see him graduate.

"Really, there was never a question that I would finish. Some things ought to be a given."

That kind of decisiveness, devotion and determination would mark his career as one of the state's pre-eminent trial lawyers, specializing in criminal, personal injury, civil litigation, medical malpractice and entertainment law, plus damage control for high-profile clients, such as now-retired Congressman John Conyers and Aretha Franklin. This year, he was cited by Michigan's Lawyers Weekly as one of 30 Leaders in the Law Class of 2018.

While the widely respected trade newspaper is mum on how it culls from a pool of nominees, its website says winners are honored for significant accomplishments in law practice; outstanding contributions to the practice of law in Michigan; seeking improvements to the legal community and their communities at large; and setting an example for other lawyers. In its current form, the award has existed for the last decade.

In many ways, it's an improbable achievement for the Southfield-based legal firebrand, known for dogged representation and an outsize courtroom presence.

In his office, attorney Arnold Reed, founding partner of Arnold E. Reed & Associates, P.C., talks about notable cases, awards and being the "smartest S.O.B. (Son of a Barber)" in Southfield. (Photo: Brandy Baker / Special to the Detroit News)

Reed was the first in his family to graduate college, let alone law school. While his father operated the barbershop, his mother took two trains and a bus each way to a factory job to help support the family, which included Reed and his older brother.

At age 9, Reed saw someone gunned down on the street. While fleeing, the killer had looked right at Reed, too petrified to move. That’s when Reed decided he needed to be fearless, a mindset that defines his approach to law.

Wayne County Circuit Judge Deborah Thomas described Reed's courtroom manner as a cross between a bulldog and a chihuahua.

"I've watched him since he was a baby lawyer," Thomas said. "He is always prepared, and he will not let go. He is always focused, and he will work that case. He's also a good family man, and what you would like to see in the community and in the profession."

While his childhood community had its share of scofflaws, most of his neighbors were honest blue-collar types. Time and again, he’d see them falsely accused by police, or unable to retain proper representation. Reed decided that knowledge was power and he needed to get it.

In the sixth grade, he ran for class president — and lost. “That made me angry, so I started learning about the Constitution and how to impeach somebody,” said Reed, who is married to a lawyer, has a son in law school and a daughter pursuing graduate studies.

Reed received his undergraduate degree in journalism and political science from Indiana University in Bloomington. After law school at Iowa, he worked as chief law clerk for former Michigan Supreme Court Justice Conrad Mallet Jr., who remembers him as being the strongest member of his team.

"He would consistently present their work in a way that allowed for uncomplicated digestion of whatever argument they helped craft," said Mallet, now chief administrative officer for the Detroit Medical Center. "He's a very, very, very good lawyer."

Attorney Arnold Reed speaks about Congressman John Conyers' health and the latest accusations of sexual harassment in front of the congressman's home in Detroit. Daniel Mears, The Detroit News

That stint as a law clerk was followed by corporate work and a job in Detroit with the public defender's office. Because the fledgling lawyer couldn't convince his boss to give him a capital case, Reed, with no money to speak of, went out on his own, setting up a law practice in Detroit and winning his first multimillion-dollar verdict, in a police misconduct case, at just 29 years old.

Since then, the member of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity Inc. has represented former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, Conyers, Franklin and an upstart vocalist named R. Kelly in the mid-'90s.

Reed recalled meetings early on with the Queen of Soul, who he successfully represented about five years ago in a case involving misappropriation of her name and likeness.

"She's a woman who tends to be formal with people she doesn't know or have a relationship with, so it was always, 'Ms. Franklin' and 'Attorney Reed.' After I won the case for her I said, 'Now can I call you Aretha?' She didn't say anything, so I took that to mean she was still 'Ms. Franklin,'" he said, chuckling.

As for Conyers, Reed represented him last year after the congressman became embroiled in allegations of sexual harassment. Conyers ultimately retired.

Reed remembers encountering Conyers years earlier after a particularly long community event. Reed had asked him why he devoted so much time and effort to so many causes when he could find more lucrative work elsewhere.

"He looked at me, smiled and said, 'Arnold, money has never been my motivating factor. I have the best job in the world. I can help people.' So when he needed my help, I answered the call."

Reed's legal battles often extend into the court of public opinion. For instance, he took a lot of heat for representing Kilpatrick in a case stemming from the former mayor's conviction for lying under oath about an affair with his chief of staff.

 "It took me aback a bit," he said of the criticism. "Everyone deserves a right to representation no matter the allegation. Also, I've been in this game over 25 years, and I'd be lying if I said I weren't ever discriminated against based on my color, because I have been.

"When I put my suit and tie on every day and I go out, there are some people who look at me like I'm Kilpatrick simply because I'm African-American. I have to explain to people that when I represent Kwame Kilpatrick, I represent you, I represent your son.

 "In any case, I have a social responsibility not to shy away from cases merely because of allegations."

Reed's brazen style, however, leaves some cold, said Solon Phillips, in-house counsel for Southfield Public Schools.

"I have a great deal of respect for his zeal and tenacity in terms of what he does for his clients, but he is aggressive, so I can see how he could rub people the wrong way," said Phillips, who has known Reed for about 15 years.

"In his younger years, for example, he would press opposing counsel when he saw them by asking them why they weren't working, asking them whether they were working as hard as he was.

 "If you're on the receiving end, I can see where he might make some folks uncomfortable."

 His high-profile client roster notwithstanding, Reed is a self-described "lawyer on the side of the people." Everyone, he says, deserves representation under the law.

"I'm always around rich and powerful individuals, but I know my upbringing," said Reed, who often rides to work on his motorcycle, the back of his leather jacket emblazoned with "Not Guilty."

The voracious reader prides himself on going all out for his clients, often spending days and nights with them. He leans on his journalism background to do his own investigative work and visualizes courtroom plans.

“The major thing is having belief in your cause,” Reed said. “If you don’t believe, you’re not going to convince 12 others.”

He has a fan in Donna Pope, for whom Reed won a $4.2 million judgment in an unlawful termination whistleblower case in 2009.

“He’s very thorough and very patient, very poised and convincing,” said Pope, who lives in western Michigan. “This was one of the hardest things I had to go through in life, and he made it manageable to survive it.”

Mary Chapman is a Detroit-based freelance writer.

Arnold E. Reed: “The major thing is having belief in your cause. If you don’t believe, you’re not going to convince 12 others.” (Photo: Brandy Baker / Special to The Detroit News)

Arnold E. Reed

Age: 54

Occupation: Owner, Arnold E. Reed and Associates, Southfield

Education: Bachelor's degree, Indiana University; Juris Doctorate, University of Iowa College of Law

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cummings and Nadler Seek Subpoenas for Trump Campaign Consultants Refusing to Deny Foreign Contacts During Election

Washington, D.C. (Dec. 14, 2017)—Today, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, sent a letter, below, asking their respective Chairmen, Reps. Trey Gowdy and Bob Goodlatte, to issue subpoenas for documents from two Trump Campaign data consultants—Cambridge Analytica and Giles-Parscale—after they refused to deny any communications with foreign actors during the 2016 presidential campaign.

“We understand that you declined to join the original request for documents from these companies, but this is a matter that directly affects our citizens and their exercise of their right to vote,” Cummings and Nadler wrote.  “We owe the American people robust and meaningful oversight of matters affecting the integrity of our electoral process.”

On October 26, 2017, Ranking Members Conyers and Cummings sent a letter to five data consultants—Cambridge Analytica, Giles-Parscale, Target Point, Deep Root, and Data Trust—requesting documents relating to their possible engagement with foreign actors such as WikiLeaks, communication with foreign governments, or the use of misappropriated data.

Cummings and Nadler disclosed today that three of these companies—TargetPoint, Deep Root, and Data Trust, below,—sent responses on the same day, using language that was nearly identical and apparently coordinated, denying any foreign contacts.

In contrast, a letter from Brad Parscale of Giles-Parscale notably failed to deny that his company had contacts  with or received information from foreign actors or governments during the 2016 campaign. 

Recent press accounts have reported that Donald Trump, Jr. emailed Parscale about his correspondence with WikiLeaks.

In addition, Cambridge Analytica refused to respond at all and thus did not deny that the company had contacts and communications with foreign actors or received any stolen or misappropriated data. 

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange confirmed that Cambridge Analytica approached WikiLeaks during the campaign to coordinate the release of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails. 

Alexander Nix, CEO of Cambridge Analytics, also confirmed this outreach.

“Because the first three companies have asserted unequivocally that none of their employees had contacts with any foreign agents during the presidential campaign, we are willing to delay any further inquiry unless or until evidence to the contrary emerges,” Cummings and Nadler wrote.  “However, neither Giles Parscale nor Cambridge Analytica have denied these contacts.  We therefore request that our committees issue subpoenas to these companies to compel the production of the information they are withholding from Congress.”

If the Chairmen decline to issue these subpoenas, then Cummings and Nadler request they place this matter on the agenda for the next regularly scheduled business meeting so Committee Members may vote on motions to subpoena these documents.

Cummings & Nadler to Gowdy Goodlatte Regarding Cambridge Analytica and Giles-Parscale 12-14-2017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Giles-Parscale Response to Conyers Regarding Russian Interference 11-3-2017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

TargetPoint Response to EEC Conyers Re Russian Interference 10-30-2017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

DeepRoot Response to Conyers Regarding Russian Interference 10-30-2017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

DATA TRUST Response to Conyers Re Russian Interference 10-30-2017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Statement of Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler for the Hearing on “Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation”

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  Welcome to the House Judiciary Committee, Mr. Rosenstein. 

For the better part of a year, my colleagues and I have implored this Committee to conduct real oversight of the Department of Justice. 

On January 24, 2017, we wrote to Chairman Goodlatte insisting that “the Committee hold hearings on President Trump’s conflicts of interest, at home and abroad.”  Citing to experts across the political spectrum, we showed that “[t]he Administration’s attempts to address its ongoing conflicts of interest are, so far, wholly inadequate.”  Six weeks later, Attorney General Sessions was forced to recuse himself from the Russia investigation—but we have not held a single hearing on the question of conflicts of interest.

On March 8, we wrote again to the Chairman, encouraging him to call hearings on “Russia’s alleged interference in the U.S. election.”  Again, no such hearings were ever held.

In fact, this Committee—which during the Obama Administration held half a dozen hearings around Operation Fast & Furious, received testimony from FBI Director James Comey three times in 13 months, and detailed staff and resources to a Benghazi investigation that cost the public almost $8 million—this Committee, from Inauguration Day until four weeks ago, was largely silent in terms of oversight.

We haven’t lifted a finger on election security.  Attorney General Sessions told us on November 14 that he has done nothingto secure the next election from threats at home and abroad. 

We have not once discussed the President’s abuse of the pardon power.  While the hurricane bore down on Houston, President Trump sidelined the Office of the Pardon Attorney to pardon a serial human rights abuser who bragged about running a concentration camp in Arizona. 

And we have not held a single hearing on allegations of obstruction of justice at the White House—not for lack of evidence, but because, in the Chairman’s words, “there is a special counsel in place examining the issue,” and “several other congressional committees are looking into the matter,” and the Committee “does not have the time” to conduct this critical oversight.  I ask my colleagues to keep those excuses in mind.

Now, with the year coming to a close, with the leadership of the Department of Justice finally before us, what do my Republican colleagues want to discuss?  Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Let me repeat that:  With all of these unresolved issues left on our docket, a week before we adjourn for the calendar year, the Majority’s highest oversight priority is Hillary Clinton’s emails and a few related text messages.

As we saw in our recent hearings with the Department of Justice and the FBI, my Republican colleagues seem singularly focused on their call for a second special counsel—and, failing that, on the need to investigate the investigators ourselves.

The White House has now joined the call by House Republicans for a new special counsel to investigate the FBI.  The President’s private lawyers have done the same.  I understand the instinct to want to change the subject after the Flynn and Manafort indictments—but this request is grossly misguided, for a number of reasons.

First, it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the special counsel regulations work.  

Some criminal investigations pose a conflict of interest to the Department of Justice.  The Russia investigation is such a case—because of the Attorney General’s ongoing recusal and because Department leadership assisted in the removal of Director Comey, among other reasons.  In cases like these, the Attorney General may use a special counsel to manage the investigation outside of the ordinary chain of command. 

But the key here is the criminal investigation.  That’s what special counsel does.  The Department cannot simply assign a special counsel to look at things that bother the White House.  There has to be enough evidence to have predicated a criminal investigation in the first place.  Then, and only then, if the facts warrant, can a special counsel be assigned to the case.

So far, there has been no credible factual or legal claim that anybody at the Department of Justice violated any law by deciding not to bring charges against Hillary Clinton or by attempting to meet with Fusion GPS.  In other words, there is no investigation to which the Department could even assign a new special counsel. 

Second, the list of grievances raised by the Majority for review by a new special counsel also seems wildly off the mark.

For example, there is nothing unlawful about Director Comey’s sitting down to draft an early statement about the Clinton investigation—nor would it have been unethical to outline his conclusions before the investigation was over, if the clear weight of the evidence pointed in one direction.

Nor is there anything wrong with FBI agents expressing their private political views via private text message, as Peter Strzok and Lisa Page appear to have done in the 375 text messages we received last night.  In fact, Department regulations expressly permit that sort of communication.

I have reviewed those text messages, and I am left with two thoughts. 

First, Peter Strzok did not say anything about Donald Trump that the majority of Americans weren’t also thinking at the same time.  And second, in a testament to his integrity and situational awareness, when the Office of the Inspector General made Mr. Mueller aware of these exchanges, he immediately removed Mr. Strzok from his team.

To the extent that we are now engaged in oversight of political bias at the FBI, this Committee should examine evidence of a coordinated effort by some agents involved in the Clinton investigation to change the course of the campaign in favor of President Trump by leaking sensitive information to the public, and by threatening to leak additional information about new emails after the investigation was closed.

On Monday, Ranking Member Cummings and I sent a letter to the Department asking for additional materials related to these leaks, as well as to claims that these efforts may have been coordinated with former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, and other senior figures in the Trump campaign.

Third, the President’s call for an investigation of the investigation is, at best, wildly dangerous to our democratic institutions.

On the one hand, the President’s old “lock her up” cheer seems quaint after a couple of guilty pleas by Trump associates.

On the other, as former Attorney General Michael Mukasey—no fan of Hillary Clinton—has said: the President’s continued threats to prosecute his political opponents is “something we don’t do here.”  If the President were to carry out his threat, “it would be like a banana republic.”

Finally, and most important, this investigation into the investigation cannot credibly be a priority for this Committee at this time.

I understand the instinct to want to give cover to the President.  I am fearful that the Majority’s effort to turn the tables on the Special Counsel will get louder and more frantic as the walls close in around the President.  But this Committee has a job to do.

President Trump has engaged in a persistent and dangerous effort to discredit both the free press and the Department of Justice.  These are the agencies and institutions under our jurisdiction.  Every minute that that our Majority wastes on covering for President Trump is a minute lost on finding a solution for the Dreamers, or curbing a vicious spike in hate crimes, or preventing dangerous individuals from purchasing firearms, or stopping the President from further damaging the constitutional order.

I hope my colleagues will use today’s hearing as an opportunity to find their way back to the true work of the House Judiciary Committee.  I thank the Chairman, and yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

NADLER AND CUMMINGS TO JUSTICE DEPARTMENT: “YOUR FAILURE TO TREAT US AS AN EQUAL PARTICIPANT IN THIS INVESTIGATION IS UNACCEPTABLE”

Washington, D.C.—Today, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, and Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent a letter, below, to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein expressing concerns about the Department of Justice’s failure to provide documents to Democrats as part of the joint investigation initiated by Chairmen Bob Goodlatte and Trey Gowdy into last year’s review by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) into Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails.

“We write concerning the Justice Department’s longstanding commitment to equal treatment of the Minority and Majority in Congress with respect to document production in connection with committee investigations.  We are disappointed that the Department has not honored this tradition with respect to the joint investigation initiated by Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Gowdy on October 24, 2017. 

“As you know, on November 3, 2017, Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Gowdy wrote to you to request certain documents related to the FBI’s handling of its investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.   On December 6, 2017, Chairman Goodlatte wrote an additional letter to the Department referencing this investigation and requesting information involving a reported FISA warrant involving Carter Page and relating to Russian interference in the 2016 election.  In between, the Department of Justice appears to have engaged in extensive correspondence with our Majorities, produced 1,100 pages of documents to our committees, and promised to provide 1.2 million additional records to the committees by January 15, 2018

.   

“Unfortunately, we did not learn of your interactions with the Majority until after Chairman Goodlatte mentioned his efforts at last week’s Judiciary Committee hearing with FBI Director Christopher Wray.  Your failure to treat us as an equal participant in this investigation, to simultaneously provide us with copies of that correspondence, or to produce these documents to our offices directly, is unacceptable and inconsistent with House rules,” the Members wrote.

The Ranking Members requested copies of all correspondence with the Majority related to the investigation, as well as any Republican requests for documents related to the investigation. The Ranking Members also requested copies of all documents and communications related to allegations that FBI Agents in the New York office may have leaked information regarding the investigation prior to the November, 2016 presidential election.

US House Judiciary & Oversight Ranking Memebers Letter to AG Sessions and DAG Rosenstein To Release Documen... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

NADLER STATEMENT ON WIKILEAKS DOCUMENTS AND THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN

Today, CNN reports that candidate Donald Trump, his son Donald Trump, Jr., and others inside the Trump Organization received an email in September 2016 offering a decryption key and website address for hacked documents—weeks before WikiLeaks began publishing the contents of those documents online.  Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) of the House Judiciary Committee issued the following statement in response:

“This email is yet another sign that senior Trump campaign officials—including Donald Trump, Jr., and perhaps the President himself—may have accepted assistance and valuable information from the Russian government and its partners.  It is, of course, a crime to participate in a conspiracy to influence an election through the illegal misuse of various computer systems.  It is also a crime for a foreign national to give anything of value to a campaign for federal office.  At the very least, this email shows us that the Trump Campaign understood enough about these stolen documents to have immediately reported a crime to the FBI.  They did not, and now Donald Jr. refuses to answer questions about his extensive back-and-forth with WikiLeaks.

“It is unconscionable that that House Judiciary Republicans want to relitigate long-debunked Hillary Clinton conspiracy theories instead of this direct threat to our election system. This is part of a coordinated effort—spearheaded by the White House—to undermine and discredit individuals and institutions, such as Special Counsel Mueller and the FBI, which are investigating the President and his associates. I once again call on Chairman Goodlatte to begin the committee’s oversight work in this space without delay.”

House Judiciary Democrats have sent more than 20 letters to the Committee and GOP Leadership, and more than 40 letters to the White House and Department of Justice seeking oversight of Trump Administration misconduct, without any meaningful response. It is high time the House Judiciary Republicans join us in investigating obstruction of justice and related charges.

CNN offers correction, rewrite for Wikileaks-Trump story

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 49.1 Melissa Hodgman, Peter Strzok, and Andy McCabe

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Quick Question To FEC: "Why Is John Conyers Registered As Campaign Website Administrator?"

Quick question to the FEC: 

Why is John Conyers registered as the site administrator and contact?

I have alot more questions, but I am pretty sure I already know the answers.

Stay tuned.

Showing results for: JOHNCONYERS.COM

Original Query: johnconyers.com

Contact Information

Registrant Contact

Name: Conyers, John

Organization: Conyers for Congress Committee

Mailing Address: 1031 North Edgewood Street, Arlington VA 22201 US

Phone: 540-548-2988

Ext:

Fax:

Fax Ext:

Email:campaign@johnconyers.com

Admin Contact

Name: Conyers, John

Organization: Conyers for Congress Committee

Mailing Address: 1031 North Edgewood Street, Arlington VA 22201 US

Phone: 540-548-2988

Ext:

Fax:

Fax Ext:

Email:campaign@johnconyers.com

Tech Contact

Name: Inc., NameSecure

Organization: Namesecure Inc.

Mailing Address: P.O. Box 785, Herndon VA 20172 US

Phone: +1.5707088418

Ext:

Fax:

Fax Ext:

Email:support@namesecure.com

Registrar

WHOIS Server: whois.namesecure.com

URL: http://www.namesecure.com

Registrar: NAMESECURE.COM

IANA ID: 30

Abuse Contact Email:abuse@web.com

Abuse Contact Phone: +1.8888012112

Status

Important Dates

Updated Date: 2017-03-20

Created Date: 2003-11-27

Registrar Expiration Date: 2019-07-22

Name Servers

DNS2.NAMESECURE.COM

DNS1.NAMESECURE.COM

Raw WHOIS Record

Domain Name: JOHNCONYERS.COM
Registry Domain ID: Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.namesecure.com
Registrar URL: http://www.namesecure.com
Updated Date: 2017-03-20T17:26:05Z
Creation Date: 2003-11-27T12:55:27Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2019-07-22T04:00:00Z
Registrar: NAMESECURE.COM
Registrar IANA ID: 30
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@web.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.8888012112
Reseller: Domain Status: Registry Registrant ID: Registrant Name: Conyers, John
Registrant Organization: Conyers for Congress Committee
Registrant Street: 1031 North Edgewood Street
Registrant City: Arlington Registrant State/Province: VA
Registrant Postal Code: 22201
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: 540-548-2988
Registrant Phone Ext:
 Registrant Fax:
 Registrant Fax Ext:
 Registrant Email: campaign@johnconyers.com
Registry Admin ID:
 Admin Name: Conyers, John 
 Admin Organization: Conyers for Congress Committee
 Admin Street: 1031 North Edgewood Street
Admin City: Arlington
Admin State/Province: VA Admin Postal Code: 22201
Admin Country: US Admin Phone: 540-548-2988
Admin Phone Ext:
 Admin Fax:
 Admin Fax Ext:
 Admin Email: campaign@johnconyers.com
Registry Tech ID: Tech Name: Inc.,
NameSecure Tech Organization: Namesecure Inc.
Tech Street: P.O. Box 785 Tech City: Herndon
Tech State/Province: VA Tech Postal Code: 20172
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.5707088418
Tech Phone Ext:
 Tech Fax:
 Tech Fax Ext:
 Tech Email: support@namesecure.com
Name Server: DNS2.NAMESECURE.COM
Name Server: DNS1.NAMESECURE.COM DNSSEC:
Unsigned URL of the ICANN WHOIS Data Problem Reporting System: http://wdprs.internic.net/ >>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2017-12-07T06:25:22Z <<<

FEC FORM 1

STATEMENT OF ORGANIZATION

FILING FEC-1147776

---

1. Conyers for Congress

    1050 17th St NW
    Ste 590
    Washington, DC 20036
    Email: janica@pcmsllc.com

2. Date: 02/01/2017

3. FEC Committee ID #: C00409797

This committee is a Principal Campaign Committee.

Candidate: John Conyers, Jr.
Party: Democratic Party
Office Sought: House of Representatives
State is Michigan in District: 13

Affiliated Committees/Organizations

None
, ____

Custodian of Records:

Janica Kyriacopoulos
1050 17th St NW
Ste 590
Washington, DC 20036
Title: Custodian of Records
Phone # (202) 628-1580

Treasurer:

Greg Barnes
1050 17th St NW Ste 520
Washington, DC 20036
Title: Treasurer

Designated Agent(s):

Greg Barnes
1050 17th St NW
Ste 520
Washington, DC 20036
Title: Treasurer

Banks or Depositories

Amalgamated Bank
1825 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006

Signed: Greg Barnes
Date Signed: 02/06/2017
Official Committee URL: http://www.johnconyers.com

(End FEC FORM 1)

Generated Thu Dec 7 02:00:45 2017

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Why Dan Kildee & Detroit Land Bank Authority Call For Conyers To Resign

Dan Kildee & Bill Clinton

Dan Kildee & Detroit Land Bank Authority join the ranks, with Nancy Pelosi, Kathleen Rice, Mike Quigley, and Raul Grijalva for John Conyers to resign from Congress.

Dan Kildee was the one who spearheaded the creation of the land bank in Michigan.

And now we know why Dan Kildee & Amy Hovey want Conyers to resign.

Conyers steps down from committee post amid harassment claims

Congressman John Conyers has stepped down from his powerful perch as Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee. His colleague in the House, Representative Dan Kildee, reacts to this development 

What is a Land Bank? Dan Kildee, Co-Founder and President Amy Hovey, Co-Founder and Senior Vice-President... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Amy Hovey is the Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President of Capacity Building for Community Progress. Prior to helping launch the organization, Amy founded The Protogenia Group LLC in 2002, after working with the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) for six years. At the consulting firm, Amy provided technical assistance in several areas including organizational development, leadership development, board governance, administrative management, and program and real estate development. She also provided support to Genesee County in the creation of the Genesee County Land Bank Authority. In addition to technical assistance, Amy has extensive training and meeting facilitation experience including an annual fifteen-day training program on comprehensive real estate development.

Prior to Protogenia, Amy was a Program Director with the Michigan State office of the Local Initiative Support Corporation. During her time with LISC, Amy worked with local community development corporations, government agencies, and for profit business, promoting collaboration among community organizations, to revitalize urban neighborhoods. Amy worked closely with several non-profits engaged in commercial corridor revitalization utilizing the Main Street approach. She completed analysis of organizations requesting loans, grants and training. Amy created and facilitated several group trainings to build capacity of non-profit staff and boards. In addition, she provided technical assistance to non-profits on a variety of topics.

Amy joined LISC after four years in private business, working in management, finance and community relations with First of America Bank.

Amy is also part of the Western Reserve Land Conservancy and it seems so is Quicken Loans.

It also seems that there are many U.S. Representatives and Senators who are part of these land bank organizations.

It also seems Dan Kildee & his Land Bank "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) are the ones behind the Flint Water Crisis.

But, hey, what do I know?

Stay tuned.  We are just getting started.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Someone Said Sources Said Conyers Will Not Run Again

Any wagers on the next angle of attacks?

People are working really hard, knowing indictments are coming down, to prevent asset forfeiture and incarceration.

They already threw in a pinch of senility, but I did not feel like posting it.

Stay tuned.  This is just getting started.

Sources: Rep. John Conyers won't seek re-election in wake of sexual harassment claimsSources say Conyers will not resign



DETROIT - The controversy swirling around Michigan Rep. John Conyers has intensified this week as former staff members accused him of sexual harassment.

 Sources told Local 4 that Conyers will not seek re-election for a new term in the wake of the scandal, which continues to grow. Two sources close to the Conyers situation told Local 4's Rod Meloni that the congressman won't resign.

It's his intent to announce in January that he won't run for re-election in 2018.

 His attorney said the allegations are not true, but Conyers is under increased scrutiny, and his family is rallying around him.

 Conyers caught a bit of a break Wednesday as the Congressional Black Caucus met in Washington and Chairman Cedric Richmond disputed the stories saying he is pushing for Conyers to resign. 

Among the former staffers accusing Conyers of sexual harassment is Deanna Maher, who claimed Conyers sexually harassed her three times, including undressing to his underwear in her bedroom while she was in a nightgown.

 The Michigan Democratic Party has not yet responded to a request for comment about the sources' information that Conyers won't run again.

The situation could change depending on the pressure brought to bear in Washington.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

I Know What You Did Last Summer, Nancy Pelosi

I know what you did last summer, Nancy.

I know you have been plotting with your minions to strip Mr. Conyers of his chairmanship for quite some time.

I know you have been plotting to take Mr. Conyers out of congress, for quite some time, also.

I know how your tried to do it.

I know why you tried to do it.

And I know who you did it with.

Perhaps, it is time you retire, gracefully, Nancy.

I know you shall do the right thing.

http://nancypelosiforcongress.com

CHUCK TODD:
Joining me now is House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California. Leader Pelosi, welcome back to Meet the Press.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Morning. My pleasure to be here.

CHUCK TODD:

Happy Thanksgiving weekend.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Thank you. Happy Thanksgiving to you, and congratulations on 70 years.

CHUCK TODD:

Thank you. Thank you for that. We're now 71. I'm going to go back into our wayback machine here. Here's you on Meet the Press, asked specifically about allegations against President Clinton. Here's what you said back in 1998.

(BEGIN TAPE)

TIM RUSSERT:

Why the silence when there have been these allegations, serious ones, about President Clinton?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Well, I'd like to say that I think that the women of America are speaking out about what they think about this whole situation. And the women of America are just like other Americans in that they value fairness, they value privacy, and do not want to see a person with uncontrolled power, uncontrolled time, uncontrolled, unlimited money investigating the president of the United States.

(END TAPE)

CHUCK TODD:

That's back then. And look, both Senator Gillibrand and Mayor de Blasio were basically making the argument that our culture's changed, and that, today, same allegations probably would have led Democrats, perhaps like yourself, to call for his resignation. You can have a debate about whether it was an impeachable offense, but whether he had the moral standing to stay in office. Do you agree with this idea that this is a generational change that we're experiencing?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Well, I think it's obviously a generational change. But let me just say the concern that we had then was that they were impeaching the president of the United States, and for something that had nothing to do with the performance of his duties, and trying to take him out for that reason.

But let's go forward. Let's go forward. I think that something wonderful is happening now, very credible. It's 100 years, almost 100 years, since women got the right to vote. Here we are, almost 100 years later, and something very transformative is happening. That is, women are saying, "Zero tolerance, no more, and we're going to speak out on it." And this is so wholesome, so refreshing, so different.

CHUCK TODD:

But why do you think the reaction was different by women on Bill Clinton? And I say that because it does seem as if, frankly, when you watch some of the reactions by the president in defending Roy Moore, or at least overlooking the allegations against Roy Moore, that, were you putting politics ahead of your personal disgust?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

No, but we're talking about a child molester. This is--

CHUCK TODD:

Okay, but--

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

We're talking about a child molester.

CHUCK TODD:

But President Clinton was accused of being a sexual predator.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Well--

CHUCK TODD:

And of even rape at one point, by one accuser.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Why don't we talk, instead, about how we go forward. Nobody is proud of President Clinton's behavior at the time. But he was being impeached--

CHUCK TODD:

But I think the reason there's a re-litigation of this is that, I think the concern is that we allowed the erosion, that the reason we're at this moment and the reason it got worse over the last 20 years is because of the way we handled it collectively then. Do you buy that argument?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

No. I buy that the election of President Trump, really, as your presenter said earlier, just evoked a response. So many women, and this is really important, I think, to note, because I've heard from so many women in the last few months, in fact, I heard, around the time of Anita Hill, so many women who've had a bad experience.

And now they're saying, "I had a bad experience, and now a person who possibly engaged in that activity is the president of the United States. I'm speaking out." So I think, as your presenter said earlier--

CHUCK TODD:

It was me, actually.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Was that your voice?

CHUCK TODD:

Yes, that is my voice. That's okay.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Then you had it right when you said Harvey didn't evoke this, the election of President Trump evoked what happened to Harvey. And now everybody is served notice.

CHUCK TODD:

Right.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Let's go forward. Let's talk about, okay, let's learn from past decisions and go forward.

CHUCK TODD:

So define zero tolerance. You said there’s now a zero tolerance.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Yes.

CHUCK TODD:

John Conyers. What does that mean for him? Right now. In or out?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

We are strengthened by due process. Just because someone is accused -- and was it one accusation? Is it two? I think there has to be -- John Conyers is an icon in our country. He has done a great deal to protect women -- Violence Against Women Act, which the left -- right-wing -- is now quoting me as praising him for his work on that, and he did great work on that. But the fact is, as John reviews his case, which he knows, which I don’t, I believe he will do the right thing.

CHUCK TODD:

Why don’t you?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Excuse me. May I finish my sentence?

CHUCK TODD:

Sure, sure.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

That he will do the right thing.

CHUCK TODD:

And is the right thing what? Resign?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

He will do the right thing in terms of what he knows about his situation. That he’s entitled to due process. But women are entitled to due process as well.

CHUCK TODD:

But he took advantage of a situation where he had a - the rules of Congress and I know you guys want to change these rules, but he got to hide his settlement, he got to - his accusers had to go through all sorts of craziness, so why is he entitled to new due process in this case?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

No, I I - we are talking about what we have heard. I’ve asked the Ethics Committee to review that. He has said he’d be open - he will cooperate with any review.

CHUCK TODD:

Do you believe the accusers?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Excuse me?

CHUCK TODD:

Do you believe John Conyers’ accusers?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

I don’t know who they are. Do you? They have not really come forward. And that gets to --

CHUCK TODD:

So you don’t know if you believe the accusations?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Well, that’s for the Ethics Committee to review. But I believe he understands what is at stake here and he will do the right thing. But all of these non-disclosure agreements have to go. By the way, some of them are there to protect the victim because they didn’t want some of it to be public. But that’s over. In other words, if the victim wants to be private, she can be -- he or she can be.

CHUCK TODD:

I guess it goes back to what is this line? What is a fireable offense? You say it’s zero tolerance.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Yes.

CHUCK TODD:

But zero tolerance -- what does that mean if you’re saying John Conyers, who already had due process, gets to stay right now.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

As I said, we’ve asked for the Ethics Committee to review that. He, I believe, will do the right thing. It’s about going forward.

CHUCK TODD:

Where are you on Senator Franken?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Well, same thing. I don't think that you can equate Senator Franken with Roy Moore. It's two different things. So, you know, let's have some discernment.

CHUCK TODD:

So you would accept an apology right now from Al Franken if there's no other accusers, or if all we know are what we know?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Well, also, his accusers have to accept an apology. The victims have some say in all of this, as well. And that has happened in the past. People have accepted an apology, as is coming forth now that I see in the press. But we didn't know, because there was a nondisclosure agreement to protect the victim. Sometimes they didn't want to be public. Sometimes they did. So now they will have their choice.

But this is about going forward. And when we go forward, we will address all of that. But we also have to address it for every person, every workplace in the country, not just in the Congress of the United States. And that's very important. And a good deal of that would be done by the Judiciary Committee.

CHUCK TODD:

Okay.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

And I know that John would take that into consideration.

CHUCK TODD:

You have one member has already, Gregory Meeks has already called for him to be withdrawn as ranking member.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

No.

CHUCK TODD:

Isn't that something in your power? Can't you decide that he should be suspended on ranking member on Judiciary, of all committees for him to be ranking on?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

You have to remember that this all happened during the Thanksgiving break. When we come together at the beginning of this week, I think John will do the right thing.

CHUCK TODD:

You're not going to unilaterally make this decision?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

I'm not sharing that with you right now. But what I am saying is this is a big distraction, and it's very, very important. Do you know that the beginning of the Women's Movement, Elizabeth Cady Stanton lived in Seneca Falls. And she would hear down below examples of family domestic violence. And that was one of the motivators for her to advance the cause of women.

CHUCK TODD:

Right.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

So this is as old as-- well, it's old as civilization, probably.

CHUCK TODD:

Right.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

But in terms of our history, in terms of the women's movement, one of the motivators. Now, 100 years after her fight for the right of women to vote, we will clear the deck on this. But I am here to talk about something also transformative in our society, and that is this tax bill that the Republicans have put forth.

CHUCK TODD:

And I want to get into this. But there seems to be a bit of a political paralysis here. I'm trying to figure this out.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

That isn't. It isn't. We're moving. This week we will pass bipartisan legislation for mandatory anti-harassment, anti-discrimination behavior, A. B) we will then take the larger issue, which has to pass both houses of the Congress for ending the nondisclosure, ending of who pays, all of the concerns that we have about this.

But I don't think that it should-- I think that we want to give people hope. This is going to be addressed. Women have spoken out. Their concerns will be addressed in a way that I think will give comfort, as well as end this behavior.

CHUCK TODD:

All right.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Because you know what? It's disgusting, it's repulsive, and it has to be zero tolerance.

CHUCK TODD:

Will you support Congress retroactively making public all of these private settlements that taxpayer dollars have been used?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Not necessarily. Sometimes the victim does not want that to happen.

CHUCK TODD:

But if the victim wants it public, will you side with the victim?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

What I have-- yes. But what I--

CHUCK TODD:

100%?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Well, here's the thing. It's really important.

CHUCK TODD:

Okay.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Because there is a question as to whether the Ethics Committee can get testimony if you have signed a nondisclosure agreement. We're saying we think the Ethics Committee can, but if you don't agree, we'll pass a law that says the Ethics Committee can, a resolution in Congress that the Ethics Committee can.

CHUCK TODD:

All right.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

But there's no-- I don't want anybody thinking there's any challenge here to our changing the law and see how people-- when we know more about the individual cases. Well, because you know what our biggest strength is? Due process that protects the rights of the victim, so that, whatever the outcome is, everybody knows that there was due process.

CHUCK TODD:

Leader Pelosi, unfortunately for time, I have to end it there. Appreciate your coming on.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

You mean we're not even going to talk about taxes?

CHUCK TODD:

I'm--

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

See, you have fallen into the place where they are doing something that's going to increase the debt enormously.

CHUCK TODD:

We're--

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

It's going to be a job killer.

CHUCK TODD:

I've been covering it a lot.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

A job killer.

CHUCK TODD:

Just finish this thought.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

And it's going to raise taxes on the middle class. And that has a big impact on individual lives of all Americans. And really, we should be spending more time on that.

CHUCK TODD:

Do you think this other issue isn't as serious as taxes?

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

I think it's eno-- look, as a woman, mother of four daughters, I think it's enormously important. But I think that we have to have a balance in how we go forward. Because this is giving the--

CHUCK TODD:

I struggle with this myself every day.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

This is giving them cover.

CHUCK TODD:

Okay.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

There are so many reasons that we should be concerned about the Republican majority in Congress.

CHUCK TODD:

I am going to be asking a Republican across the aisle some of these questions in a few minutes. Anyway, Leader Pelosi, I have to leave it there.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Yeah. Well, thank--

CHUCK TODD:

I appreciate it.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Yeah. That's disappointing. But anyway.

CHUCK TODD:

I wish I had more time.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Let me just say one more thing.

CHUCK TODD:

I'm always for more--

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

I have to say one more thing.

CHUCK TODD:

Go to my bosses, ask for two hours.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

I've got to thank--

CHUCK TODD:

I'll take it.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

--our firefighters and our first responders in California for what they did in the fires. Our Thanksgiving, we prayed for them as a blessing to us. And wishing their families the best.

CHUCK TODD:

A worthy last word. Thank you very much.

REP. NANCY PELOSI:

Thank you. Bye-bye.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©