Showing posts with label russia. Show all posts

Friday, August 30, 2019

John Conyers, Sr. - Forefather of the UAW - Detroit & GM

I remember when he told me of how his father was beaten and bloodied trying to form the union by GM in Detroit.

Since this his legacy has been omitted from the history books, I believe we shall have a few fun projects coming up.

John Conyers, Sr.

Published: January 4, 1986

Image may contain: 1 person, smiling, closeup

John Conyers, Sr.
Forefather of the UAW

DETROIT, Jan. 3— John Conyers Sr., a retired union official who was the father of Representative John Conyers Jr., Democrat of Michigan, died Wednesday at his Detroit home. He was 80 years old. Mr. Conyers had been an international representative for the United Automobile Workers.

In addition to his son John, Mr. Conyers is survived by his wife, Lucille, and another son, Nathan.

Black history, labor history intertwined in Detroit

March 1, 2010 11:58 AM CDT BY JOHN RUMMEL

DETROIT – Between the two World Wars, the groundwork was laid in this city’s Black community that culminated in the 1941 organizing of the world’s most powerful corporation: the Ford Motor Company.

That piece of Detroit’s rich labor and civil rights history was brought to life by professors Beth Bates and Quill Pettway in a Department of Africana Studies Black History Month celebration at Wayne State University here.

Bates’ research has focused on political, social, and economic developments within the 20th century African American community. Pettway is both a student and maker of history. He was helped organize the huge Ford Rouge plant and continued working there for 27 years before becoming a professor. Now almost 90, he continues to teach math at Wayne County Community College.

The two traced the origins of Detroit’s Black population. Escaping what for many was life as a Southern sharecropper, Black migration north took place at record levels in the early part of the last century. From 1916 to1917, Black migration to Detroit averaged 1,000 a month. “Simply put, they came looking for a better life, better education, security and to escape lynching” said Pettway.

By the early 1920s, 45 percent of Black men in Detroit worked at Ford.

Bates said those jobs at Ford gave hope to Blacks, but Henry Ford “extracted more than his pound of flesh in speed-ups.” She quoted the late autoworker Dave Moore who said “there was nothing liberal in the bastard – Ford’s strategy was simply different than GM or Chrysler,” where cleaning rest rooms and mopping floors was the best Blacks could expect.

Interwoven in Ford’s strategy was a paternalistic philosophy. Bates said Ford imagined Blacks might be “the perfect workers for his open shop movement, what he called his American Plan.” However, Bates said, Blacks also had their own American Plan, one that grew more incompatible with Henry Ford as time went by. Contrary to what many scholars have written, it was Black workers who paved the way for unionization at Ford, she said.

Throughout the 1930s the old AFL autoworkers union missed opportunities to support the Black community in their fight for civil rights and against police brutality, and did not work to develop a broader-based union organizing drive. “Black workers not initially signing union cards had less to do with allegiance to Ford than wanting to be treated as equals” by the union, said Bates.

She credited the role played by the Communist Party and other radicals in organizations like the unemployed councils and the International Labor Defense (which led the fight to save the Scottsboro Boys) because they facilitated a “cross-fertilization” and politicalization within the Black community, between workers at Ford and community members, on issues like racism, civil rights and jobs.

“By 1935, Black Detroiters considered Communists friends you could count on,” said Bates.

Unlike the old AFL union, the CIO’s United Auto Workers had a policy of racial equality that gave it an advantage, Pettway said.

He noted the role played by white Ford worker and lead union organizer Bill McKie. McKie’s job in Ford’s maintenance department allowed him to circulate amongst different workers. The fact that McKie was a known Communist did not hurt his ability to organize. He was “second to none, highly respected by everyone. Elected as a trustee his first year,” said Pettway.

The CIO saw to it that a broad base of union support was built within the Black community and on three occasion organized rallies with Paul Robeson.

Pettway said the last rally, in Detroit’s downtown Cadillac Square, drew 60,000 people. “Regardless of race, creed or color, they came to hear Robeson, Walter Reuther, former City Council President Erma Henderson,” among others.

On May 21, 1941, Ford workers overwhelmingly voted for the union.

The vote shook the automotive industry and shaped it for decades to come.

During discussion, retired UAW activist General Baker pointed to the “high level of solidarity” still seen within UAW Ford Local 600. At its peak there were 17,000 Black workers and even today, most top UAW national leaders come out of Local 600 he said.

Pettway said “the unity needed to organize Ford was the same unity that elected Barack Obama. This is what is necessary to move forward.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

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

Image result for happy girl eating popcorn

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.

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

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.©

Wednesday, December 13, 2017

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.©

Saturday, December 9, 2017

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.©

Friday, December 8, 2017

Day 48.2. It’s the Russians again - of Centreville, Maryland

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, December 6, 2017

CONYERS Is About To Blow The Whistle

Who said the "allegations at the hightest levels of government" had to be just about sex scandals?

Perhaps it has to do with fraud and public corruption.

Stay tuned.

Is the dam about to burst open? John Conyers' lawyer hints at allegations at the higest levels of government

Are various members of the House and Senate about to be embroiled in sex scandals of their own? According to Arnold E. Reed, an attorney for Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), the damn may be about to break when it comes to future allegations.

Daily Caller reports:

The attorney for Democratic Michigan Rep. John Conyers, who is accused of continuously sexually harassing his female staffers, defended Conyers by indicating that there are allegations against "many members" of the House and Senate.

Conyers' attorney, Arnold E. Reed, released a statement defending the Michigan Democrat and pushing back against the "disturbing allegations." The bizarre statement was written in all-CAPS and referred to both Reed and Conyers in the third person.

"Reed acknowledged that while these allegations are serious, they are simply allegations," the statement said. "If people were required to resign over allegations, a lot of people would be out of work in this country including many members of the House, Senate and even the president."

Below is Arnold E. Reed's letter in full.

As one Senate staffer admitted to the Daily Caller, "Things have gotten dark around here," in light of the Franken allegations. "Everyone is walking on eggshells, asking who's next?"

According to Axios reporter Jonathan Swan, claims against the Democrat lawmaker are the "very tip of the congressional iceberg.

"Democratic Sen. Al Franken is the very tip of the congressional iceberg. Many more stories are coming and we wouldn't be surprised if they end several careers. A Republican source told me he's gotten calls from well-known D.C. reporters who are gathering stories about sleazy members," says Swan.

The "next wave," is coming, Swan adds.

In a new report by CNN, over 50 current and former lawmakers, aides and staff say they have personally experienced sexual harassment on Capitol Hill.

As The Gateway Pundit's Cristina Laila reported, prominent Democrats are calling for Al Franken to resign after model and radio host Leeann Tweeden came forward accusing the Senator of sexual assault.

It was revealed Monday evening that one Congressman who settled a harassment suit in 2015 was Democrat Rep John Conyers. According to affidavits, Conyers used taxpayer money to fly women into D.C. to meet with him in hotel rooms.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Attorney Arnold Reed States There Is No Resignation

Nespresso What else | www.Graphicfury.com

Think once.

Think twice.

Think again.

It is not what you think.

Conyers not resigning over claims, says attorney

A lawyer for U.S. Rep. John Conyers said late Wednesday the Detroit Democrat will not resign amid an ethics probe into allegations of sexual harassment and a settlement with a former staffer.

Attorney Harold Reed, who is representing the 88-year-old lawmaker and longest-serving active member in the U.S. House, said Conyers takes the allegations “very seriously.”

However, “at this juncture, the congressman is not resigning over these allegations. They’re allegations, No. 1. And No. 2, if everybody was called upon to resign over allegations, half the House, half the Senate, including the president of the United States, would have to step down.”

“John Conyers wants individuals to know that he continues to serve and will continue to serve to the best of his ability.”

Accusations against Conyers first surfaced Monday when Buzzfeed News reported on a 2015 settlement he reached with a former staffer. On Tuesday, the site reported on a sexual harassment lawsuit a former staffer withdrew after a federal judge refused her request to seal the records to protect the congressman’s public reputation.

Conyers’ attorney also dismissed a Washington Post report Wednesday that another woman, Melanie Sloan, whom Conyers hired in 1995 as minority counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, said the congressman did not sexually harass her but acted inappropriately and abusively.

“There was nothing I could do to stop it,” Sloan said in a Post interview.

The report centered on Sloan, a high profile-lawyer and former executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Reed questioned Sloan’s timing and said he doubted her claims.

“This is the most powerful woman arguably in Washington when it comes to this behavior,” Reed said, adding her allegation was “fundamentally incongruous with the truth. ... Stories like that cast a pall over women who have legitimate claims.”

While they have not called for Conyers to step down, several Democratic colleagues asked for the House Ethics Committee investigation and at least one has called on Conyers to relinquish his role as ranking member of the prestigious House Judiciary Committee.

U.S. Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-New York, said Wednesday it “would not be appropriate” for Conyers to remain in the powerful panel post given the ethics probe.

Conyers should “step down as the ranking member, with the opportunity if he defends himself and says and shows there is nothing there, that he could come back,” Meeks told CNN.

The ethics panel can examine “whether or not there’s a practice or pattern,” Meeks said, and additional considerations should be made when the committee completes its probe.

Meeks and Conyers are members of the Congressional Black Caucus, which Conyers helped found in 1971.

In a withdrawn lawsuit that surfaced Tuesday, a former staffer alleged repeated and escalating harassment by Conyers after she began working in his office as a scheduler in July 2015, saying she had been given extra responsibilities because of his “age and failing mental capacities.”

By the summer of 2016, Conyers was harassing her daily, she said in the complaint, accusing him of rubbing her shoulders, kissing her forehead and covering or attempting to hold her hand.

The Detroit News is not publishing the woman’s name due to the nature of her claims and decision to withdraw the suit. She did not return voicemails left on the phone number she listed in court records.

Buzzfeed previously published notarized affidavits from three other staffers dated 2014. The affidavits describe Conyers making advances toward female staffers that included requests for sexual favors, caressing their hands in a “sexually suggestive” way, and rubbing their legs and backs in an inappropriate manner while in the office or in public.

Conyers settled a complaint by one of the former staffers in 2015, denying her allegations but paying her through his Member’s Representational Allowance, a taxpayer-funded account that is supposed to be used for office operations.

Conyers put the former staffer back on his payroll in mid-2015, paying her $27,111.74 between June 16 and Sept. 15, according to salary data compiled by the website Legistorm.

Settlements for complaints filed with the Office of Compliance are typically approved by the Committee on House Administration. But former Rep. Candice Miller, a Harrison Township Republican who chaired the committee and now serves as Macomb County public works commissioner, said the Conyers’ settlement “did not come through the normal channels.”

“It never came through our committee,” Miller said. “He did it out of the normal channels. He paid for it through his budget.”

U.S. Rep. Ron DeSantis, a Florida Republican, said Wednesday he is preparing legislation to unseal congressional settlement records, bar use of taxpayer dollars to pay claims and prohibit members from using office budgets to camouflage payments, calling the latter “a Conyers rule.”

“Members of Congress cannot be allowed to use the American people’s money as a personal slushfund to cover wrongdoing,” DeSantis wrote on Twitter.

The House Ethics Committee said Tuesday it will probe allegations that Conyers sexually harassed his employees, discriminated against staffers based on age or used official resources for “impermissible” personal use.

Several Michigan Democrats had called for the House investigation, and Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Brandon Dillon called the allegations “incredibly serious and disheartening.”

Conyers confirmed Tuesday that his office reached a financial settlement with a former staffer but denied accusations of sexual misconduct.

“In this case, I expressly and vehemently denied the allegations made against me, and continue to do so,” Conyers said in a statement.

His office settled the complaint “in order to save all involved from the rigors of protracted litigation,” he said, calling the $27,111.74 expense “an amount that equated to a reasonable severance payment.”

Asked about the 2017 lawsuit filed by his former scheduler, a Conyers spokeswoman simply noted the accuser “voluntarily decided to drop the case.”

The withdrawn complaint alleges a long-running series of inappropriate actions by Conyers, including harassment during a car ride to and at a White House event in April 2016. The woman said he urged her to “come home with him” and continued “to touch her against her wishes the entire evening.”

In one instance, the woman said, she was able to use a camera phone on her office desk “to catch some of these events on tape.”

The woman had asked the court to seal her complaint “to protect the reputation of the high profile person” she was suing. She withdrew the suit after Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly refused her request to shield court records from the public.

In her initial complaint, the woman said she had “extreme admiration and respect” for Conyers’ legislative work “as a Civil Rights icon.”

Separate records identify the woman as a possible relative of Cynthia Martin, Conyers’ former chief of staff whose tenure ended in controversy. The News was not able to reach either woman to discuss their connection.

The House Ethics Committee is already investigating whether Conyers authorized Martin to be paid for four months in 2016 — from April 20 to Aug. 25 — when she may not have done any official work.

Martin had pleaded guilty in April 2016 to a misdemeanor charge of receiving stolen property after initially refusing to return $16,500 mistakenly transferred into her Congressional Federal Credit Union bank account. Martin agreed to pay $13,000 restitution, according to court records.

The withdrawn complaint from Conyers’ former scheduler alleged sexual harassment, a hostile work environment, retaliation and wrongful termination, and reckless infliction of emotional distress.

The woman claimed Conyers’ wife, former Detroit City Council President Monica Conyers, called her a “whore” when she was hired and pushed staff to fire the woman after she did not provide a medical certificate when requesting medical leave in July of 2016.

The complaint referred to Monica Conyers as a “known brawler” and said the staffer felt threatened anytime the congresswoman’s wife was in Washington D.C. The woman allegedly told a colleague the situation was a “time bomb waiting to happen.”

Monica Conyers, who spent time in federal prison for bribery, filed for divorce in late 2015. The complaint suggests the congressman’s decision to hire the scheduler was a “partial cause.” John and Monica Conyers later reconciled and remain married.

The woman who filed the complaint said she has known Conyers since 2006. She previously worked in his campaign office, traveled with him to campaign events and worked as a House Judiciary staffer at his “behest” from 1997 to 1998.

She said Conyers did not “make an inappropriate advances or touch” her inappropriately until she worked in his office.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

U.S. Representative Gregory Meeks Calls For Conyers To Step Down From Judiciary

They give you immunity yet? meme - Kevin Hart The Hell

Gregory, my dear, did Lil' Miss Nancy and her minions get to you?

Does Imran have other things on you?

Are you wearing an orthopedic boot, yet?

You must be scared.

Are you going to retain Perkins Coie?

Oh Gregory!

You are so correct.

Anyone who has ever touched Mr. Conyers should be intensely investigated, and I mean everyone.

If anyone wishes to find out if they have already been put under Alice's looking glass, you can just enter your name in a basic google search, along with my name, or go to the "Go Find It" widget, in the right sidebar. ===>

In the spirit of fuchsia, I must note that CNN failed to provide any investigative research into the credibility of U.S. Representative Gregory Meeks, which is why I have provided the gentlman's ethical background from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

And as for the Congressional Black Caucus, well, just be patient. Your time is coming.

Congressional Black Caucus member: Conyers should step down as top Dem on House panel

Washington (CNN)Rep. Gregory Meeks, a New York Democrat and a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, said Wednesday that his colleague Rep. John Conyers of Michigan should leave his post as the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee as he is the subject of a House Ethics Committee investigation.

"No one is exempt from bad behavior, and I think that he's agreed and I clearly see where Leader (Nancy) Pelosi has said there will be an immediate ethics committee, a review," Meeks told CNN's John Berman and Poppy Harlow. "I really think that probably the appropriate thing right now is that he should step down as the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee and be subject to this ethics investigation."

Getting rid of John Conyers won't be easy

The House Ethics Committee announced on Tuesday that it had opened an investigation into allegations that Conyers, the longest-serving active member of the House, settled a wrongful dismissal complaint in 2015 after allegedly sexually harassing a staffer, according to an explosive report published by BuzzFeed News.

Conyers said he is "expressly and vehemently" denying any wrongdoing.

"In our country, we strive to honor this fundamental principle that all are entitled to due process," Conyers said in a statement. "In this case, I expressly and vehemently denied the allegations made against me, and continue to do so."

Pressed later in the interview, Meeks said that it would "not be appropriate" for Conyers to remain the top Democrat on the committee given the multiple allegations against him.

"If he defends himself and says and shows there is nothing there, then he could come back," he said. "But you can't, in my estimation, just in the scenario that we're in to be the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee at this time. I think that he should step down."

Reports of another allegation that Conyers had sexually harassed a former staffer emerged Tuesday, based on court documents filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in March 2017. The lawsuit, which the woman later dropped after an unsuccessful attempt to seal it, was first reported by BuzzFeed News.

Meeks' call for Conyers to step down from his committee post goes farther than members of House Democratic Leadership, who have not, so far, called for Meeks to abandon that role.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday that "any credible allegation of sexual harassment must be investigated by the Ethics Committee." Similarly, Rep. Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat in the House, called the report "very disturbing" and said that an ethics investigation is an "appropriate next step."

Both Pelosi and Hoyer have also called for more sweeping reforms to overhaul the way in which sexual harassment is handled on the Hill, and support legislation sponsored by California Rep. Jackie Speier targeting the issue.

Neither Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York nor Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, two senior Democrats who also serve on the Judiciary Committee, have called on Conyers to leave his leadership position.

Asked Tuesday, Nadler said it was important to have a "proper investigation" into the allegations surrounding Conyers. In an interview on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront," he stopped short of calling on Conyers to resign and said to wait for more facts as the ethics probe unfolds.

"I think it's a little too early to say that," Nadler said of resignation. "Wait a little while before you make that conclusion."

Gregory Meeks (D-NY) - CREW's Most Corrupt Members of Congress by CREW on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Another Conyers Accusation: Detroit Politics Will Do That To You

Detroit politics will do that to you.

Woman says she was called 'mentally unstable' after accusing Rep. John Conyers

For the first time, a former staff member of Democratic Rep. John Conyers Jr. of Michigan has publicly come forward to allege that the top lawmaker contributed to a hostile work environment, according to a Washington Post report published Wednesday.

Melanie Sloan, who served with Conyers from 1995 to 1998, alleged in the report that she was verbally abused by Conyers, who is now the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

Within this time, Sloan said that she saw and experienced similar claims that were made public in recent days, after allegations of sexual misconduct began to emerge.

Sloan alleged that Conyers yelled at her and was critical of her appearance, according to The Post.

She also said that at one point, she saw him in his underwear after she was summoned to his office, but said she did not believe she was sexually harassed.

"I was pretty taken aback to see my boss half-dressed," Sloan said told The Post.

"I turned on my heel and I left."

Sloan said she repeatedly sought help from her supervisors, but was ignored, according to the newspaper.

"There was nothing I could do to stop it," she said.

"I was dismissed and told I must be mentally unstable."

Conyers' attorney denied Sloan's allegations and told The Post that Conyers "has never done anything inappropriate to Melanie Sloan."

The House Ethics Committee launched an investigation Tuesday, following a BuzzFeed News report that said Conyers had settled a wrongful dismissal complaint with a former employee who alleged she was fired for refusing his "sexual advances."

Other reports soon emerged, including one employee who alleged Conyers had made inappropriate contact, such as "rubbing on her shoulders, kissing her forehead, making inappropriate comments, covering and attempting to hold her hand," the Post said.

Conyers reportedly denied settling the sexual harassment cases, but later confirmed he had, adding that he still "vehemently denied the allegations."

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Detroit Free Press Wants Conyers To Resign

Top 43 popcorn gifs compilations – funny gifs

When are those damn indictments coming down?

I truly wish these so-called editorial staffers would put their name on what they publish, unless it is Nolan Finley.

Nolan is scared of me for some reason.

I am only preserving the annals of history.

Someone has to do it because the Free Press is not.

Hurry up and pop your popcorn, this is about to be off the chain!!!!!

Editorial: U.S Rep. John Conyers must resign

His documented use of taxpayer dollars to bury allegations of sexual harassment goes too far.

John Conyers Jr. has a long and complicated legacy in southeast Michigan and the U.S. Congress.

He has been an undisputed hero of the civil rights movement, a legislator of uncommon influence and power, and an aging icon whose felonious wife and sometimes-wandering pace have confounded his place in history.

But the revelations of Conyers’ alleged sexual harassment scandal and his documented use of taxpayer dollars to bury that scandal, in violation of congressional ethics rules, is less ambiguous.

It is the kind of behavior that can never be tolerated in a public official, much less an elected representative of the people.

And it means that whatever Conyers’ legacy will eventually be, his tenure as a member of Congress must end — now.

He should resign his position and allow the investigation into his behavior to unfold without the threat that it would render him, and the people he now represents, effectively voiceless.

A voice for equality

We reach this conclusion with an incredible amount of disappointment.

The word “hero” is invoked, without much hyperbole, around Conyers’ name, dating not only to his initial run for Congress in the mid-1960s, but to the stalwart civil rights activism in the 1950s and early 1960s that brought him to that point.

His career in Congress saw him play key roles in everything from voting rights and health care reform to the creation of the Martin Luther King Holiday. And even in recent years, when he has struggled with focus and the rigor of the job, he has remained a steadfast voice for social justice and equality.

A problem in Congress

But even the most generous interpretation of the story revealed early this week is absolutely devastating to his ability to stay in Congress.

Monday night, the news site BuzzFeed reported a former Conyers staffer’s claims that she was fired after she rebuffed the congressman’s persistent sexual advances.

Those claims were made in sworn affidavits by the alleged victim and three other former staffers, all obtained by BuzzFeed.

In the current climate of revelations about powerful men abusing their positions and committing horrific acts of harassment, abuse or assault on women, those allegations should be enough to spur a dedicated congressional inquiry. Without a doubt, Congress has a real problem, and one that the American people deserve to see resolved.

A dishonest arrangement

But Conyers’ situation gets worse — far, far worse.

After the alleged victim made a formal complaint through the U.S. Congress Office of Compliance, Conyers’ office endorsed an alternative route. If the woman dropped her complaint and signed a legal document attesting that Conyers had done no wrong, and if she agreed never to disparage him or make subsequent claims, she’d be re-hired as a temporary “no-show” employee and paid $27,111.75 over the course of three months. She accepted the terms.

Conyers’ office defended the arrangement Tuesday as a means to avoid "protracted litigation" and defended the sum as a “reasonable severance payment.” Conyers also continues to deny the woman’s claims.

But the House’s ethics rules are clear: A House member can’t retain an employee who isn’t performing work commensurate with the pay, and regardless, can’t give back pay for work that stretches further than a month.

It’s a rule Conyers has flouted before.

He continues to battle an ethics complaint alleging that he violated House rules by keeping a former chief of staff on payroll after she was fired; Conyers' lawyers contend that the representative's office has the right to pay severance to its employees at will. Nor is Conyers the only member of Congress who has come under fire for paying what they've described as severance.

What makes this payment different? It looks an awful lot like hush money.

Litigation, contrary to Conyers' statement, wasn't a certain outcome. The staffer's complaint was made through the U.S. Congress Office of Compliance, a secretive body that settles, for congressional employees, the kind of employment law violations that other businesses might hash out in court.

Employees who bring claims through the compliance office are required to sign confidentiality agreements in order for a claim to proceed, a process that seems calculated to preclude the public accounting taxpayers, and voters, are owed. There's a special congressional office that works to resolve claims out of court. An employee determined to file a lawsuit has to go through months of counseling and mediation.

Over the last two decades, the office has paid $17 million to settle 264 complaints. Legislation introduced by U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier, Democrat of California, would require the office to change its operations, including naming each member who is involved in a claim.

That’s a reform worth pursuing.

But it’s also not the point with Conyers.

This agreement disrupted the accepted process to deal with claims against members of Congress, and leveraged taxpayer funds — without the oversight of the ethics apparatus of the body itself — to make this claim go away.

That’s not acceptable, on any level.

And it’s a betrayal that breaches the most fundamental trust that exists between a public servant and the people that person represents.

Even if Conyers could prove that he did not make inappropriate advances toward his former staffer, there’s no defense for having used dollars from his congressional office to “settle” a claim. That sort of thing happens in the private sector, yes. It should never, ever happen where public dollars (and public accountability) are concerned.

It’s impossible to know how frequently this happens in Congress. Conyers’ spokesperson said the House General Counsel’s office signed off on the agreement. But even if this deceptive practice has become commonplace, the Dean of the House should know better.

A public betrayal

John Conyers Jr. must go — after 53 years in Congress, after a stellar career of fighting for equality, after contributing so much to southeast Michigan and the nation.

It’s a tragic end to his public career. But it’s the appropriate consequence for the stunning subterfuge his office has indulged here, and a needed warning to other members of Congress that this can never be tolerated.

What Do Trump & Conyers Have In Common?

Twisted Positions | Twist it up. Turn it around. Shift ...

Me eating my popcorn.

I will give you a hint:

Perkins Coie Sucks.

Stay tuned, the show is just about to start.

Dem calls for Conyers to give up top committee post

Another accusation surfaced Tuesday evening.

As first reported by Buzzfeed News, a former staffer sued Conyers in March, alleging sexual harassment in a complaint she withdrew after a federal court refused her request to seal the records to protect the congressman’s public reputation.

The woman alleged repeated and escalating harassment by the 88-year-old after she began working in his office as a scheduler in July 2015, saying she had been given extra responsibilities because of his “age and failing mental capacities.”