Category Archives: Lawyers

Thrivent Financial vs Perez Department of Labor Acosta DOL, Status of lawsuits, Defense of alternative dispute resolution with mandated arbitration

Thrivent Financial vs Perez Department of Labor Acosta DOL, Status of lawsuits, Defense of alternative dispute resolution with mandated arbitration

“The MDRP is the sole means for presenting and resolving grievances, complaints, or disputes between Members, insureds, certificate owners or beneficiaries and Thrivent or Thrivent’s directors, officers, agents and employees. The MDRP reflects Thrivent’s Christian belief system and strives to preserve Members’ fraternal relationship.”…Thrivent v. Perez Sept. 29, 2016

“Thrivent contends that its commitment to individual arbitration is ‘”important to the membership because it reflects Thrivent’s Christian Common Bond, helps preserve members’ fraternal relationships, and avoids protracted and adversarial litigation that could undermine Thrivent’s core mission.’”…Thrivent v. Acosta Nov. 3, 2017

“pre-dispute mandatory arbitration provisions are inappropriate in insurance policies and incompatible with the legal duties insurers owe policyholders when handling their claims.”…NAIC, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, August 15, 2016

 

From Bloomberg  Sept. 29, 2016.

“Thrivent Financial for Lutherans is accusing the Department of Labor of exceeding its statutory authority by attempting, with its new fiduciary rule, to force all disputes into federal court rather than allowing for alternative dispute resolution methods (Thrivent Financial for Lutherans v. Perez, D. Minn., 0:16-cv-03289, complaint filed 9/29/16).

Thrivent’s lawsuit, filed Sept. 29 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, takes aim at the rule’s “best interest contract” (BIC) exemption”

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/employee-benefits/thrivent-financial-joins-fray-in-challenging-dols-fiduciary-rule?context=article-related

From the lawsuit.

“Thrivent’s Member Dispute Resolution Program
42. Thrivent’s MDRP is incorporated into all of Thrivent’s fraternal insurance contracts through the open contract provision by which Thrivent’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws are incorporated into all Thrivent insurance contracts, as required under state law. The MDRP Bylaw was adopted by Thrivent’s Member-elected Board of Directors as a part of Thrivent’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws in 1999 (at which time Thrivent was known as AAL). In so doing, Thrivent’s Board of Directors determined that the MDRP is in the best interests of Thrivent’s Membership.

43. The MDRP Bylaw, which is Section 11 of Thrivent’s Bylaws, requires binding, mandatory arbitration for any Member disputes with Thrivent. Section 11 “applies to all past, current and future benefit certificates, members, insureds, certificate owners, beneficiaries and the Society. It applies to all claims, actions, disputes and grievances of any kind or nature whatsoever. It includes, but is not limited to, claims based on breach of benefit contract[.]” Bylaws, § 11(b). “No lawsuits or any other actions may be brought for any claims or disputes covered by” Section 11. Id. § 11(c).

44. The MDRP is the sole means for presenting and resolving grievances, complaints, or disputes between Members, insureds, certificate owners or beneficiaries and Thrivent or Thrivent’s directors, officers, agents and employees. The MDRP reflects Thrivent’s Christian belief system and strives to preserve Members’ fraternal relationship.”

“47. A key benefit of the MDRP is that it preserves the fraternal relationship between Thrivent and its Members by avoiding adversarial litigation that could threaten to undermine the organization’s core mission. Thrivent’s Bylaws provide that no lawsuits or other actions are permitted for claims or disputes covered by the MDRP. Thrivent’s MDRP provides for resolution of disputes on an individual basis, involving Thrivent and the Members. Representative or class actions are not permitted under the MDRP Bylaw, which provides that “no disputes may be brought forward in a representative group or on behalf of or against any ‘class’ of persons, and the disputes of multiple members, insureds, certificate owners or beneficiaries (other than immediate family) may not be joined together for purposes of these procedures.” See Bylaws, § 11(e).
48. The MDRP is consistent with Thrivent’s fraternal nature, consistent with the Christian belief system of its Members, and reflects the careful balancing between Thrivent’s and its Members’ desire for a prompt, fair and efficient resolution of disputes, on the one hand, and the protection of the interests of all Members on the other. As such, the MDRP is an integral part of Thrivent’s governance structure. Experience has shown that the MDRP not only provides a fair and efficient process for dispute resolution, but is also in the best interest of Members.”

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/Thrivent_Financial_for_Lutherans_v_Perez_et_al_Docket_No_016cv032?1552582945

DOL temporarily stopped enforcing anti-arbitration provision.

“Thrivent Financial for Lutherans convinced a federal judge in Minnesota to temporarily stop the Labor Department from enforcing the fiduciary rule’s anti-arbitration provision against the nonprofit financial entity.

Thrivent showed the threat of irreparable harm to its business model, both now and in the future, was sufficient to have its request for a preliminary injunction granted, Judge Susan Richard Nelson held Nov. 3 (Thrivent Fin. for Lutherans v. Acosta, 2017 BL 396118, D. Minn., No. 0:16-cv-03289-SRN-DTS, order granting preliminary injunction 11/3/17″

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/employee-benefits/thrivent-financial-wins-battle-over-labor-dept-arbitration-ban?context=article-related

Status report January 2, 2018.

“While the administrative process continues forward, it is not yet complete. On November 29, 2017, the Department published in the Federal Register a final rule extending the transition period and delay of applicability dates for the relevant prohibited transaction exemptions from January 1, 2018 to July 1, 2019. See 82 Fed. Reg. 56545 (Nov. 29, 2017). The Department believes that this administrative delay will provide the Department time to complete its review of the underlying Fiduciary Rule and related exemptions and its intended proposal of “a new streamlined class exemption.” Id. at 56548. The Department believes that both its review and any proposed changes can be implemented before July 1, 2019. See id. at 56552 (explaining the Department’s belief that the additional time “is sufficient to complete review of the new information in the record and to implement changes to the Fiduciary Rule and/or PTEs, if any, including opportunity for notice and comment and coordination with other regulatory agencies”) ”

https://www.dolfiduciaryrule.com/portalresource/ThriventvPerez2018-01-02ECF112JointStatusReport.pdf

Status report July 2, 2018.

“Pursuant to the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order dated November 3, 2017, the parties submit this joint status report to address whether a continued stay of proceedings is necessary. The parties agree that a continued stay of proceedings is appropriate and anticipate providing a subsequent report to the Court on September 4, 2018.

In its Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting the “implementation and enforcement of the BIC Exemption’s anti-arbitration condition against Thrivent . . . until the conclusion of this litigation or such time as the Court so orders.” ECF No. 111 at 19. The Court also stayed the case, concluding that “[s]taying this matter will allow the administrative process to fully develop, possibly resolving this dispute, and thereby promoting judicial economy.””

https://www.napa-net.org/sites/napa-net.org/files/uploads/thrivent-dol-status-report.pdf

A status report for September 2018 has not been located.

However, the following suggests the Department of Labor is continuing to work on the “Fiduciary Rule and Prohibited Transaction Exemptions.”

RIN Data

DOL/EBSA RIN: 1210-AB82 Publication ID: Fall 2018
Title: Fiduciary Rule and Prohibited Transaction Exemptions
Abstract:The Department of Labor in 1975 issued a regulation defining who is “fiduciary” under section 3(21)(A)(ii) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) as a result of giving investment advice for a fee or other compensation.  On April 8, 2016, the Department replaced the 1975 regulation with a new regulatory definition.  The new regulatory definition was vacated in toto in Chamber of Commerce v. Department of Labor, 885 F.3d 360 (5th Cir. 2018).  The Department is considering regulatory options in light of the Fifth Circuit opinion.
Agency: Department of Labor(DOL) Priority: Other Significant
RIN Status: Previously published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Final Rule Stage
Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No
EO 13771 Designation: Deregulatory
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined     (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1002 (ERISA sec. 3(21))    29 U.S.C. 1108 (ERISA sec. 408)
Legal Deadline:  None
Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite
Request for Information (RFI) 07/06/2017 82 FR 31278
RFI Comment Period End 08/08/2017
Final Rule 09/00/2019

https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201810&RIN=1210-AB82

How will this play out? Who knows.

The NAIC in 2016 stated: “pre-dispute mandatory arbitration provisions are inappropriate in insurance policies and incompatible with the legal duties insurers owe policyholders when handling their claims.”

Hopefully justice will prevail.

***  Update Mar 15, 2019  ***

According to a USDOJ attorney who worked on the lawsuit, it has ended.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Thrivent claim news, Dr. Grover office contact, Sincere investigation attempt?, Records not requested in 2017 contrary to Thrivent letter statement, Mediation session sham

Thrivent claim news, Dr. Grover office contact, Sincere investigation attempt?, Records not requested in 2017 contrary to Thrivent letter statement, Mediation session sham

“Companies don’t want to go to court because it puts them on a level playing field. Courts are ruled by law, legal precedent, and legal discovery, which allows litigants to obtain information and evidence from their opponents or from third parties.”…North Carolina Consumers Council

“The insurance companies understand that if they deny and deny claims, then many of the claimants will never pursue their claim,”…ABC News Good Morning America April 25, 2008

“Companies And CEOs Rarely Admit To Wrongdoing”…NPR Sept. 20, 2013

 

From Citizen Wells October 15, 2018.

“I have in my possession startling new evidence which explains the “Alice in Wonderland” responses and requests I received from Thrivent personnel and agents during the processing of my disability claims.

I am requesting that you examine the letter your senior claims examiner sent to the NC Insurance Commission on  August 10, 2018 and take the appropriate actions.

If I were in your shoes, after examining and reviewing the evidence, I would immediately issue an apology and make reparations.

In the absence of those Christian responses, I am requesting again that we proceed to mediation instead of Thrivent’s insistence on perceived authority to mandate binding arbitration.”

https://citizenwells.com/2018/10/15/to-brad-hewitt-thrivent-financial-for-lutherans-request-for-mediation-based-on-startling-new-evidence-request-you-examine-august-10-2018-letter-senior-claims-examiner-sent-to-nc-insurance-commissio/

Has a sincere effort to investigate what has actually transpired in my claims case begun?

I received a call from Dr. Grover’s office on Tuesday, Oct. 23, 2018, at 3:00 PM, asking if I had given my permission for an insurance company to receive my records.

I answered yes.

Since this phone number did not match the one I had on record, I decided I must verify it. I also wanted to know if anyone had requested my records in 2017.

On Friday, Oct. 26, 2018, I called the number which was answered as Dr. Grover’s office. I verified my identity and asked if anyone had requested my records in 2017. I was told someone would call me back.

I received a call several hours later. No one requested my records in 2017.

Thrivent Attorney Wayne Luck during mediation and the same claims person who wrote the 6 page letter to the NC Insurance Commission with the nonsensical contract explanation, the  “Alice in Wonderland” protocol, tried to accuse me of falsifying records. The claims person in her letter to my former attorney stated that Dr. Grover’s office had no records for me. As you note above, Dr. Grover’s office had no record of Thrivent requesting my records.

I however, have multiple copies of documents proving Dr. Grover saw me multiple times.

At no time has Thrivent requested these records.

The hole is getting deeper.

I will not put off forever revealing the  “Alice in Wonderland” nonsense the Thrivent claims person wrote.

I hope that someone(s) at Thrivent is intelligent and moral enough to seek the truth.

Background on Dr. Grover controversy.

http://eachstorytold.com/2018/10/27/thrivent-claim-more-startling-new-evidence-of-fraud-or-incompetence-dr-grovers-office-called-consequence-of-alice-in-wonderland-protocol/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Insurance company intimidation tactics, Fraud allegations bullying, Manipulate situation by choosing what information is relevant, NC Statutes on unfair claim settlement practices

Insurance company intimidation tactics, Fraud allegations bullying, Manipulate situation by choosing what information is relevant, NC Statutes on unfair claim settlement practices

“For members who have found themselves in disputes with Thrivent, the retroactive change rankles. “You’re wondering how Lutheran organizations can treat their own customers that way,” says Mr. Tiedemann, an 83-year-old retiree who navigated the dispute-resolution process for more than two years before giving up.”...WSJ May 30, 2006

“The insurance companies understand that if they deny and deny claims, then many of the claimants will never pursue their claim,”…ABC News Good Morning America April 25, 2008

“pre-dispute mandatory arbitration provisions are inappropriate in insurance policies and incompatible with the legal duties insurers owe policyholders when handling their claims.”…NAIC, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, August 15, 2016

 

How Do Insurance Companies Use Intimidation Tactics?

“One of the ways an insurance company may try to manipulate the situation is by choosing what information is relevant. If they discover some key information that wasn’t previously communicated to them, they might choose to punish you for not telling them, instead of simply assuming you had made a mistake and asking you to supply the missing information.”

“Unsubstantiated Fraud Allegations: Many insurance providers will allege that their policyholder is engaged in fraud by inflating the value of items in their claim, fabricating events resulting in loss or claiming loss of items that do not exist or were not lost or damaged. Sometimes these allegations will be loosely based on mistakes on a proof of loss form or be completely without any factual support. The objective is to intimidate a policyholder into accepting a lowball offer because of fears that the insured will face potential civil or criminal liability as well as having his or her claim completely denied.”

http://eachstorytold.com/2018/06/30/fraud-accusation-insurance-company-intimidation-tactic-common-intimidation-techniques-tactics-by-insurance-companies-are-unethical-illegal-obligation-of-good-faith-and-fair-dealing-toward-policyh/

From AcomHealth.

“It is a very common device for claims adjusters to allege “fraud” as a means to drive a minimal financial settlement with a provider. The claim by some insurance company employee that “overutilization” has taken place and that somehow, based on self-serving and unreal “guidelines” they are exploring legal action against the provider is, indeed, sobering and probably as intimidating as it is intended to be. As absurd and unethical as this behavior is, it is frequent and it is effective in driving low-dollar settlements by providers even for the most legitimate of claims.”

“While the exact language in the law regarding fraud may vary from state to state, the common elements necessary to prove fraud might be summarized as follows:

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant’s actions involved five separate elements:

  1. A false statement of a material fact,
  2. Knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue,
  3. Intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim,
  4. Justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and
  5. Injury to the alleged victim as a result. Source:  Farlex Internet Free Dictionary”

Read more:

https://acomhealth.com/steps-prevent-defend-claims-insurance-fraud/

NC Statutes.

“§ 58-24-165. Unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices. Every society authorized to do business in this State shall be subject to the provisions of Article 63 of this Chapter relating to unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices”

https://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_58/GS_58-24-165.pdf

“(11) Unfair Claim Settlement Practices. – Committing or performing with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice of any of the following: Provided, however, that no violation of this subsection shall of itself create any cause of action in favor of any person other than the Commissioner:
a. Misrepresenting pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to coverages at issue;
 b. Failing to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly upon communications with respect to claims arising under insurance policies;
c. Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation of claims arising under insurance policies;
d. Refusing to pay claims without conducting a reasonable investigation based upon all available information;
e. Failing to affirm or deny coverage of claims within a reasonable time after proof-of-loss statements have been completed;
 f. Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear;
g. Compelling [the] insured to institute litigation to recover amounts due under an insurance policy by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in actions brought by such insured;
h. Attempting to settle a claim for less than the amount to which a reasonable man would have believed he was entitled;
 i. Attempting to settle claims on the basis of an application which was altered without notice to, or knowledge or consent of, the insured;
 j. Making claims payments to insureds or beneficiaries not accompanied by [a] statement setting forth the coverage under which the payments are being made;
k. Making known to insureds or claimants a policy of appealing from arbitration awards in favor of insureds or claimants for the purpose of compelling them to accept settlements or compromises less than the amount awarded in arbitration;
 l. Delaying the investigation or payment of claims by requiring an insured claimant, or the physician, of [or] either, to submit a preliminary claim report and then requiring the subsequent submission of formal proof-of-loss forms, both of which submissions contain substantially the same information;
 m. Failing to promptly settle claims where liability has become reasonably clear, under one portion of the insurance policy coverage in order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage; and

n. Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy in relation to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement.”

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can Obama keep Blagojevich and Hastert from talking?, Sidley Austin coming to their aid?, Hastert named in Rezko trial, Witness testified Rezko stated that Patrick Fitzgerald would be fired and replaced by Hastert pick, Purple Hotel or other Stuart Levine drug/sex ties?

Can Obama keep Blagojevich and Hastert from talking?, Sidley Austin coming to their aid?, Hastert named in Rezko trial, Witness testified Rezko stated that Patrick Fitzgerald would be fired and replaced by Hastert pick, Purple Hotel or other Stuart Levine drug/sex ties?

“Maloof, who once helped run some of Rezko’s fast-food businesses, said Rezko told him of Fitzgerald’s replacement: “That they will order the prosecutor to stop the investigation.”
“It is the first time jurors heard an accusation that Rezko worked behind the scenes to oust Fitzgerald.”
“Maloof left the stand without ever invoking Barack Obama’s name, despite previous allegations by prosecutors that he made a straw donation for Rezko to Obama’s Senatorial campaign fund. It is clear that lawyers — and the judge — have been careful not to bring Obama’s name into case, even outside the presence of the jury.”…Chicago SunTimes April 28, 2008

“In both conversations with Obama for America and AKP Message & Media, I explained that on November 6, 1999, I had been introduced to Barack Obama by a friend and that Obama had, in fact, sold me an eight-ball of cocaine and had himself engaged in smoking crack cocaine in my limo on that date and again in my hotel room the following day.”…Larry Sinclair, “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder”

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

“There is enough corruption in Illinois so that all it takes is someone who is serious about finding it to uncover it. If a U.S. attorney is not finding corruption in Illinois, they’re not seriously looking for it.”…Northwestern Law Professor James Lindgren

 

 

Rod Blagojevich and Tony Rezko have been languishing in prison for years for their involvement in Chicago, IL corruption.

Obama was involved in much of the same corruption but he has been occupying the White House.

It doesn’t seem quite fair, does it?

Blagojevich and Rezko know plenty about Obama’s involvement in corruption, drug use and probable down low sexual activity.

I am willing to bet that Dennis Hastert does too.

HastertBlagojevich

From comments and emails in 2008 by a Chicago restaurant owner.

Comment May 1, 2008.

“As the Chicago-area chef and restaurateur mentioned in this posting, I’ve already provided information to Larry Sinclair’s attorney concerning the several dozen (at least) gay men who spoke with me about Obama’s sexual proclivities (specifically, his being on the “down low,” as they say). I began hearing these rumors in late 2000-early 2001, and continued to hear them until I closed my restaurant and dropped out of civilized society in 2003. These stories were from apparently unrelated sources, and the details in each, when such details were given, were consistent from story to story: always oral sex only, with Obama as the, well, I suppose “recipient” would be as good a word as any.”

Comment May 24, 2008.

Yes, I do live in the Chicago area. I was a chef/restaurant owner here until several years ago. During that time, I heard from several dozen different Chicagoland gay men that Obama was bisexual. Their details closely correspond with Larry Sinclair’s account. This was several years before Obama’s presidential run… he was simply a local politician, part of the same dark Chicago political machine that makes that of my home area (Washington, DC) seem almost tame by comparison. Back then, all I knew of Obama was that he was an extremely mediocre legislator and was one of the dirtiest campaigners I’ve ever encountered… and I come from a politically involved family, and had previously known many a less-than-clean politician. I’m honestly astonished that anyone considers him capable of leading this country in any direction except down.

Comment June 5, 2008.

“Levine’s the one who’s talking… yet he was silenced in court by the judge, stopped from naming names, including the names of the politicians and powerbrokers who had the “all-night all-male drug parties.” And those he has done his talking to — FBI? Fitzgerald? some we know, some we don’t — haven’t let any secrets slip, either.

They’ve thrown Blagojevich to the wolves… and we both know who he was sacrificed for.”

Email May 6, 2008.

“And as I told you tonight, the only other politician mentioned to me as being on the down low by gay guys from the Chicago area, none other than Denny Hastert… who apparently stepped down from a highly powerful US Senate career after being threatened with being outed for gay activities.”

So, there we have it.

Dennis Hastert, who is being investigated for perjury and banking activities tied to alleged gay sex extortion, according to the Rezko trial testimony, was going to help replace Patrick Fitzgerald.

Why and How?

From the Chicago Tribune April 29, 2008.

“Witness says Hastert linked to alleged plot
House speaker would have picked Fitzgerald’s replacement, defendant’s ex-associate claims”

“The name of former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert was added Monday to the roster of political heavyweights linked by witnesses to an alleged plan to dump Chicago’s top federal prosecutor and kill a criminal investigation into a top fundraiser for Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

A witness at the corruption trial of Blagojevich insider Antoin “Tony” Rezko testified that Rezko told him in February 2005 about an effort under way to fire U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald and replace him with someone more compliant to be hand-picked by Hastert, then the top Republican in the House.

Rezko said the Hastert designee would then “order the prosecutor to stop the investigation,” recalled Elie Maloof, a former Rezko business associate who also testified that Rezko had told him to keep Rezko’s name to himself if he were questioned by authorities because it could damage Blagojevich.”

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-04-29/news/0804280604_1_antoin-tony-rezko-robert-kjellander-house-speaker-dennis-hastert

From True News USA August 27, 2013.

“The Purple Hotel – made famous during the Stuart Levine criminal trial as the hotel that Rezko, Stuart Levine, and Obama attended drug filled gay orgies is set to be demolished”

“Daylong, drug-fueled parties at the Purple Hotel in Lincolnwood and sometimes in Springfield. Snorting crystal meth and “Special K.” Stuart Levine, the star witness at businessman and political fund-raiser Tony Rezko’s corruption trial, told jurors Monday the drugs would make him “euphoric” and lower his inhibitions as he partied all night with five other men.
“I would stay out all night,” said Levine, testifying that he hid his behavior “in order to deceive my family.”

Stuart Levine (inset) testified that he took part in daylong, drug-fueled parties at the Purple Hotel (shown in 2006) in Lincolnwood.”

http://truenewsusa.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-purple-hotel-made-famous-during.html

ObamaLevine

 

Obama known drug use and probable down low.

Citizen Wells August 16, 2012.

Obama 2000 tax return raises questions, Obama drug use left him more or less broke?, Obamas adjusted gross income over 240K, Obama Larry Sinclair Stuart Levine

The law firm of Sidley Austin is representing Hastert.

From Muckety May 20, 2012.

“Obama connection to Sidley Austin still strong

To those outside legal circles, Sidley Austin is probably best known as the Chicago law firm where Barack Obama and Michelle Obama met.

The future president was an intern in 1989. The future first lady was an associate. Barack Obama turned down a job offer at the end of his internship, Michelle Obama left the firm, and the two married in 1992.”

“Two decades later, Sidley Austin is faring well under the Obama administration.

Current and former attorneys at the firm receiving presidential appointments include:

  • Virginia A. Seitz – Seitz was a partner at Sidley Austin before being named assistant attorney general in 2011.
  • Gary Scott Feinerman – A former solicitor general of Illinois and clerk to Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Feinerman is now a federal judge with the District Court of the Northern District of Illinois.
  • David B. Barlow – A partner at the firm from 2006 to 2010, Barlow is now U.S. attorney for the Utah district.
  • John G. Levi – A current partner and a bundler for the Obama 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns, Levi chairs the Legal Services Corporation, a governmental corporation that funds legal aid for the poor.
  • Christopher P. Lu – After working as a litigation associate at Sidley Austin, Lu moved to government. He was legislative director to then-Sen. Barack Obama and is now the president’s cabinet secretary.
  • Kathryn B. Thomson – Thomson, who is married to Lu, worked for 19 years at Sidley Austin. She became counselor to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood in 2009, and was appointed chief counsel of the Federal Aviation Administration in 2012.
  • Michael Strautmanis – Like Lu, Strautmanis worked with Obama before 2009. He was chief counsel and deputy chief of staff during Obama’s stint in the Senate. He previously practiced complex litigation and employment law at Sidley Austin.

Newton Minow, senior counsel at the law firm and chairman of the Federal Communications Commission during the Kennedy administration, has multiple connections to the White House. Minow met Barack Obama through his daughter Martha, who was Obama’s professor. She urged her father to hire the young law student.

As president, Obama appointed Martha Minow, now dean of Harvard Law School, to the Legal Services Corporation. He named another Minow daughter, Mary, to the National Museum Library Services Board.

Sidley Austin has been embraced by Washington in more ways than federal appointments.

The firm has landed federal contracts totalling nearly $12 million since 2009.”

http://news.muckety.com/2012/05/20/obama-connection-to-sidley-austin-still-strong/37071

Anybody smell a rat(s)?

 

 

 

 

 

Hillary Clinton exposed and she still runs, Benghazi debacle, Emails not protected and then deleted by Hillary, Dick Morris “Rewriting History” revealed the true nature of the Clintons

Hillary Clinton exposed and she still runs, Benghazi debacle, Emails not protected and then deleted by Hillary, Dick Morris “Rewriting History” revealed the true nature of the Clintons

“By contrast, Hillary knows full well who she is and what parts of her must never be exposed to public view. She reminds herself consciously, day after day, which parts of herself to hide and which to expose. Where Bill’s instinct for deception is neurotic, Hillary’s is opportunistic. He wants to hide his private life from our eyes; Hillary seeks to conceal her character from our view. But the things that Hillary hides are integral to her political essence. They are who she is and what makes her tick. Her trickery is designed to hide her most basic character and instincts from all of us.”….“While I was working for the Clintons, I had firsthand experience with the tactics they used to distract, delay, and derail the work of special prosecutor Kenneth Starr.”…Dick Morris “Rewriting History”

“The only question that remains today is whether or not Hillary Clinton gets away with another cover-up, like she did in the Vince Foster case, and runs for President in 2016, or will she finally be held accountable, and Americans learn the truth about the Benghazi terrorist attack?”…Canada Free Press December 18, 2012

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

 

The audacity of subterfuge.

In the 2008 election cycle the pickens were the slimmest ever.

On the Democrat side it was Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

Hillary was the lesser of evils then, but only because she was the “devil I know” and what I knew then and now of Clinton is still scary.

Citizen Wells February 29, 2008.

“US voters have short memories and many are oblivious to the truth and resemble more cattle been driven to the slaughter.

I have been revisiting “Rewriting History”, by Dick Morris, that was published in 2004 and made the NY Times bestseller list. Dick Morris was an advisor to Bill Clinton and became his campaign manager in the 1996 election. Dick Morris spent a lot of time with Bill and Hillary Clinton and knew them intimately. Dick Morris has become a serious critic of Bill and Hillary Clinton and in “Rewriting History” he reveals the truth about Hillary, the truth that only an insider and confidant could have. It still amazes me how much of the public ignores or refuses to believe the true nature of the Clintons. Here are some excerpts from “Rewriting History.” I urge you to read the book for yourself and do corroborating research.

“But some of Hillary’s hidden side is indeed dark.”

“Both of the Clintons are masters of subterfuge.”

“By contrast, Hillary knows full well who she is and what parts of her must never be exposed to public view. She reminds herself consciously, day after day, which parts of herself to hide and which to expose. Where Bill’s instinct for deception is neurotic, Hillary’s is opportunistic. He wants to hide his private life from our eyes; Hillary seeks to conceal her character from our view. But the things that Hillary hides are integral to her political essence. They are who she is and what makes her tick. Her trickery is designed to hide her most basic character and instincts from all of us.”

“The Clintons released their tax returns, but not for 1978 or 1979. Why not? I wondered. When the scandal about Hillary’s winnings in cattle future emerged, I had my answer: They were apparently anxious to hide her profits, lest there be questions about insider trading…”
“In fact, Hillary did not report her commodities profits on her
1980 tax returns; indeed, she reported a loss of $ 1,000. In April 1984, Clinton attorney, David Kendall had to announce that the Clintons were paying $ 14,615 in additional taxes, interest, and penalty on their underreported income for these years.”

A lot has been written about the “Whitewater Scandal”, but what Dick Morris has written is a must read. Here is a small sample:
“Hillary writes warmly of Susan McDougal for choosing years in jail rather than answer Starr’s questions. “Susan was suffering in jail for refusing to testify before the Whitewater Grand Jury.” But Hillary hasn’t always been so nice about Susan McDougal. When it looked as though she might turn on the Clintons, Hillary told me: “She is such a liar. She worked for Zubin Mehta and stole his silver. She’s crazy, unstable, and totally dishonest. You can’t trust a thing she says.” Susan was eventually acquitted of stealing from Mehta.”

“While I was working for the Clintons, I had firsthand experience with the tactics they used to distract, delay, and derail the work of special prosecutor Kenneth Starr.”
I could go on and on quoting Dick Morris, but it is better if you
read the book for yourself. Dick Morris has a website and if you have any questions or want more insight, visit:

http://www.dickmorris.com

http://citizenwells.net/2008/02/29/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-rewriting-history-dick-morris-lies-deception-half-truths/

 

Reported at Citizen Wells March 11, 2015.

Many thanks to Canada Free Press for this great article from December 18, 2012.

“The Fix is in: Hillary’s Benghazi cover-up—like Vince Foster death investigation”

“Recall how it was Clinton who was one of the first top Obama administration officials to mislead the public by falsely blaming a YouTube video for the deadly attack. President Barack Obama, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and White House Press Secretary James Carney towed-the-line and repeated the same falsehood knowing it would be reported as the truth by the media.”

“What you witnessed from the Obama-Clinton regime is called “cohesive strategy.” We have seen that cover-up tactic before. It was successfully used by the Clinton White House during the investigations of the Clinton era as documented in The Whistleblower: How the Clinton White Stayed in Power to Reemerge in the Obama White House and on the World Stage. Additionally, it notably appears in my latest book, Following Orders: The Death of Vince Foster, Clinton White House Lawyer. Cohesive strategy is a smoke and mirrors public relations trick where the White House tells Americans and investigators what they want them to know as opposed to what really happened, and how their scripted version becomes the so-called truth, the ‘talking points,’ the narrative picked up by the media.

It was on July 20, 1993 when Vince Foster, President Bill Clinton’s childhood friend and Hillary Clinton’s closest White House confidante, was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound in the head in Fort Marcy Park, Virginia. Before a preliminary investigation began, Americans were told by White House officials and President Clinton that Vince Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park, nobody saw it coming, and it would remain a “mystery”—the cohesive strategy crafted in Hillary’s White House counsel’s office. Clinton Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers even stated: “the Park Service Police is the only agency that’s investigating [Vince Foster’s death], and that the objective of their search is simply to determine that it was a suicide.”

The fix was in. The objective of the investigation into Vince Foster’s death, the highest ranking government official’s death since President John Kennedy was assassinated, was “simply to determine that it was a suicide [emphasis mine].” The conclusion was predetermined. The cohesive strategy stuck as “truth” and they got away with it. Homicide, foul play, the possibility of blackmail, a potential risk to America’s national security, was never investigated. No need for the Clinton White House to cooperate with investigators or the media. They didn’t. Case closed. Move on….

And now Hillary Clinton and the Obama White House are following the same cover-up playbook in Benghazi.”

“During the Foster death investigations, like Benghazi, investigators were also thwarted, stonewalled, and unable to perform their jobs. Hillary denied them “unfettered” access to Foster’s office, and some evidence was contaminated or outright withheld (despite being subpoenaed). The initial investigation was at best—shoddy.”

Read more:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51811

From Dick Morris April 13, 2015.

“Hillary began her Presidential campaign yesterday. How’s she doing it? Stealthily, quietly, secretly, weirdly.

It started with a tweet. The least technical savvy person on the planet is now hip.

It’s really a lot easier that way. No more speeches, no elaborations of her message, and, most of all, no room for annoying press questions. Just a set number of characters and a quick message.

She tweeted that she was taking a “road trip.” She’s actually sneaking into Iowa, riding in an unmarked secret service van for the more than1000 miles from Chappaqua to Des Moines. Along with Huma Abedin and another aide, they’re taking an undisclosed route, stopping randomly at gas stations for photo ops. When she gets to Iowa, she’ll attend meetings closed to the public.

What’s she hiding from?

Emails, Benghazi, the Clinton Foundation.”

Read more:

Hillary’s Stealth Announcement

 

Senator Sherrod Brown finds certified copies of Obama birth certificate…oops, Same lies reported at Citizen Wells December 30, 2008, Democrat mantra end justifies the means

Senator Sherrod Brown finds certified copies of Obama birth certificate…oops, Same lies reported at Citizen Wells December 30, 2008, Democrat mantra end justifies the means

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya”...Barrister Michael Shrimpton

 

 

Finally, certified copies of Obama’s birth certificate.

Or not.

From BirtherReport March 16, 2015.

“U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown Says Obama Gave Several News Orgs Certified Copies Of Original Birth Certificate”

A constituent received a stunning reply from U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown claiming Obama provided several news organizations with certified copies of his purported original long-form birth certificate, even though the only “news reporter” ever to reportedly touch one of the two purported certified copies was NBC’s Savannah Guthrie.

The email exchange:

From: Sherrod Brown [mailto:Senator_Brown@brown.senate.gov]
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 5:12 PM
To: ###########
Subject: Reply from Senator Sherrod Brown
Dear Mr. #######:
Thank you for getting in touch with me regarding President Obama.
President Obama has provided several news organizations with certified copies of his original long-form birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals born in Hawaii after its admission are legitimate natural-born United States citizens. In addition, the Hawaii State Health Department has issued a public statement verifying the authenticity of President Obama’s birth certificate.
The White House has posted the Certificate of Live Birth on its website. You can view a copy at:

Click to access birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding executive orders issued by President Obama.”

Read more:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/03/us-senator-says-obama-gave-several-news.html#dqAErireC0RlzFK5.99

These lies from Senator Brown are the same ones reported at Citizen Wells on December 30, 2008 in the Hall of Shame.

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation
or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge
the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
Congressional oath of office

US Constitution

HALL OF SHAME

A letter received from Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio
regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:

“Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Barack Obama.

President-Elect Obama has provided several news organizations with a
copy of his birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii
on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals
born in Hawaii after its admission are considered natural-born United
States citizens. In addition, the Hawaii State Health Department
recently issued a public statement verifying the authenticity of
President-Elect Obama’s birth certificate.

Thank you again for contacting me.

Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown”

Senator Sherrod Brown, as a US Senator, the public expects for you to be
well informed on important matters and a presidential election certainly
qualifies as important.

Every word of your paragraph was wrong!!

Obama has provided no one a copy of his birth certificate.

Mr. Brown, do you know what “natural born citizen” means in the
eligibility provision of the US Constitution?

Being born in Hawaii does not make one a natural born citizen of the US.
If it did, then British citizens vacationing in Hawaii and delivering
a child would enable that British child to be president.

The Hawaii Health Department Official stated that they had Obama’s
birth certificate. Read more below. You should have already learned this.

Why Obama is not eligible

What Hawaii Health Official really said

From the Alan Keyes lawsuit

“A press release was issued on October 31, 2008, by the Hawaii Department
of Health by its Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino. Dr. Fukino said that she
had “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of
Health has Senator Obama’s original birth certificate on record in
accordance with state policies and procedures.” That statement failed to
resolve any of the questions being raised by litigation and press accounts.
Being “on record” could mean either that its contents are in the computer
database of the department or there is an actual “vault” original.”

“Further, the report does not say whether the birth certificate in the
“record” is a Certificate of Live Birth or a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth.
In Hawaii, a Certificate of Live Birth resulting from hospital documentation,
including a signature of an attending physician, is different from a
Certificate of Hawaiian Birth. For births prior to 1972, a Certificate of
Hawaiian Birth was the result of the uncorroborated testimony of one witness
and was not generated by a hospital. Such a Certificate could be obtained up
to one year from the date of the child’s birth. For that reason, its value
as prima facie evidence is limited and could be overcome if any of the
allegations of substantial evidence of birth outside Hawaii can be obtained.
The vault (long Version) birth certificate, per Hawaiian Statute 883.176
allows the birth in another State or another country to be registered in
Hawaii. Box 7C of the vault Certificate of Live Birth contains a question,
whether the birth was in Hawaii or another State or Country. Therefore,
the only way to verify the exact location of birth is to review a certified
copy or the original vault Certificate of Live Birth and compare the name of
the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor against the
birthing records on file at the hospital noted on the Certificate of the
Live Birth.”

ohbrown

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/senator-sherrod-brown-ohio-us-constitution-hall-of-shame-obama-not-eligible-us-congress-electoral-college-votes-obama%E2%80%99s-eligibility-must-be-challenged-oh-senator/

If Senator Sherrod Brown knows of the whereabouts of certified copies of Obama’s birth certificate, I would like to see them.

 

 

IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane emails backups may exist, More computer problems with less than 20 individuals, Chairman Issa IRS attempted to keep key witness Mr. Kane away from investigators

IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane emails backups may exist, More computer problems with less than 20 individuals, Chairman Issa IRS attempted to keep key witness Mr. Kane away from investigators

“Don’t think I want to be on stage with Grassley on this issue.”…Lois Lerner email

“The IRS is clearly in full cover-up mode,” “It is well past time for the Obama administration to answer to a federal court about its cover up and destruction of records.”…Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton

 

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

From the the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform July 21, 2014.

“New Testimony: IRS May Still Have Missing Lois Lerner E-mails Backed Up”

“Official in charge of document production also raises possibility of new e-mail losses from ‘less than 20’ officials

During a transcribed interview with congressional investigators on Thursday, July 17, IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Thomas Kane, who supervises the IRS’s targeting scandal document production to Congress, testified that new developments now make him uncertain whether e-mail back-up tapes containing lost e-mails from key IRS targeting official Lois Lerner exist or not.  The new testimony is at odds with the June 13, 2014, memo sent to Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) by the IRS which reported that the IRS, “Confirmed that back-up tapes from 2011 no longer exist because they have been recycled.”  Kane had reviewed the June 13 memo but noted his current uncertainty with investigators.

Kane and a Committee investigator had the following exchange during Thursday’s transcribed interview:

Investigator: You stated at the time that document was produced to Congress, the document, the white paper in Exhibit 3[the June 13 memo], that it was accurate to the best of your knowledge.  Is it still accurate?

Kane: There is an issue as to whether or not there is a ‑‑ that all of the backup recovery tapes were destroyed on the 6‑month retention schedule. 

Investigator: So some of those backup tapes may still exist?

Kane: I don’t know whether they are or they aren’t, but it’s an issue that’s being looked at. 

Kane also testified that in addition to the IRS officials who had experienced hard drive crashes, as reported to the House Ways & Means Committee, a number of officials above and beyond these officials “have had computer problems over the course of the period covered by the investigations and the chairman’s subpoena” that could prevent the IRS from fully complying with the subpoenas.  Kane characterized the number of such individuals as “less than 20” and named IRS officials Andy Megosh, Kimberly Kitchens, Justin Lowe, and David Fish as members of the new group.

Justin Lowe – Technical Advisor to the Commissioner of Tax-Exempt and Government Entities, before that he was a tax-law specialist in EO (Exempt Organizations) Technical and then EO Guidance.  Advisor to Tax-Exempt and Government Entities Commissioner Joseph Grant.

David Fish – Manager of EO Guidance (which develops formal and informal guidance to the public on tax-exempt issues); Fish also served as Acting Director of Rulings and Agreements in late 2011/early 2012. Advisor to Lois Lerner.

Andy Megosh – Group manager in EO Guidance.  Megosh was cited in the Ways and Means Committee’s referral of Lerner Lerner to the Justice Department.

Kimberly Kitchens – IRS revenue agent in Cincinnati who donated to President Obama’s reelection campaign.

Chairman Issa issued the following statement on the new revelations in Kane’s testimony:

“I’m struck by the fact that the IRS attempted to keep a key witness like Mr. Kane away from investigators and only agreed to his appearance after I issued a subpoena for his testimony. Finding out that IRS Commissioner Koskinen jumped the gun in reporting to Congress that the IRS ‘confirmed’ all back-up tapes had been destroyed makes me even more suspicious of why he waited months to inform Congress about lost Lois Lerner e-mails.  Commissioner Koskinen has repeatedly blamed the reporting delay on an effort to be sure what he said was correct, we now know that wasn’t the case.”

 An expanded transcript of Mr. Thomas Kane’s exchange about the possibility that e-mail back-up tapes may still exist falls below:

Q1- And the white paper that you identified, that you called a white paper in Exhibit 3, you said that you had an opportunity to review that before it was produced.  Is that accurate?

A- Yes.

Q1- And to the best of your knowledge, was that document an accurate representation of the information within it?

A- At that time, that was certainly accurate. 

Q1- And if you had had any concerns about the accuracy of that document, would you have raised them?

A- Yes. 

Q1- And did you raise any concerns about the accuracy of that document?

A- As I indicated earlier, I had some issues that are suggested edits that I thought needed to be made, and there was a discussion about those, and there were some changes made.  They weren’t major, but, you know, I was accommodated. 

Q1- So the end product was accurate?

A- That was the state of knowledge and facts as we knew it when the document was set up.

Q1- Thank you very much.  I really appreciate the many hours you’ve spent with us. 

Q2- Sir, if I could just ask you one clarifying question based on your answers to those questions.  You stated at the time that document was produced to Congress, the document, the white paper in Exhibit 3, that it was accurate to the best of your knowledge.  Is it still accurate? 

A- There is an issue as to whether or not there is a ‑‑ that all of the backup recovery tapes were destroyed on the 6‑month retention schedule. 

Q2- So some of those backup tapes may still exist?

A- I don’t know whether they are or they aren’t, but it’s an issue that’s being looked at. 

Q2- By who?

A- It’s part of the TIGTA investigation.

Q2- So no one in the IRS, to your knowledge, outside of TIGTA, is looking at that issue?

A- The IRS is not looking at anything being investigated by TIGTA. 

Q2- And when was that issue identified?

A- Sometime after the white paper was sent up. 

Q2- And has there been any discussion about disclosing that issue to Congress, to the best of your knowledge?

A- I don’t know whether it has or it hasn’t been.  I thought Chairman Issa asked a question about it at the last hearing, but I could be wrong about that. 

Q2- The hearing with Commissioner Koskinen?

A- Yes.

Q2- And did the Commissioner give an accurate response to that question?

A- I forget how the question was framed, but I thought I had a recollection that Chairman Issa had asked the Commissioner about a backup tape issue looking ‑‑ being looked at by TIGTA.  That’s the context of my recollection. 

Q2- Anything else that you’re aware of that you can tell us about about the issue of the potential availability of a backup tape? 

Kane’s Counsel – Objection to form.

A- Again, it’s all under investigation by TIGTA at this point in time.  And I don’t know if there is a backup tape with information on it or there isn’t.  I know that there’s an issue out there about it. 

Q2- Okay.  Thank you, sir. 

(Q1= Committee investigator #1; Q2= Committee investigator #2; A= Kane)”

http://oversight.house.gov/release/new-testimony-irs-may-still-missing-lois-lerner-e-mails-backed/

Obama presidential eligibility summary, Reality 101, March 11, 2014, Natural born citizen status, Birth certificate, Foreign born father, Obama used private and taxpayer paid attorneys to keep records hidden

Obama presidential eligibility summary, Reality 101, March 11, 2014, Natural born citizen status, Birth certificate, Foreign born father, Obama used private and taxpayer paid attorneys to keep records hidden

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya”...Barrister Michael Shrimpton

 

 

 

Most things are simple.

It is important to sometime step back and look at an otherwise complex situation and provide clarity.

We know much about the Obama presidential eligibility and records despite Obama employing private and numerous government attorneys at taxpayer expense.

The following is a summary. Supporting details can be found on this site and many others.

  • Obama’s father, by all indications was a foreigner. By many definitions, going back to the founding of this country, 2 citizen parents are required to be a natural born citizen. A current case, Paige V State of Vermont, makes this assertion and is currently presented to the US Supreme Court. The SCOTUS should clearly define what a natural born citizen is and put this issue to rest.
  • Obama, starting in 2008 has used Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, other private attorneys and numerous government attorneys, at taxpayer expense to keep his birth certificate, college records and other records hidden.
  • Most of the circumstantial evidence up to early 2008 indicates that Obama was born in Kenya.
  • There is no evidence, that would hold up in a court of law, that Obama was born in the US.
  • The image placed on WhiteHouse.gov in 2011 is obviously not a copy of a traditional birth certificate that you and I had to present to play Little League baseball. It has “or abstract” at the bottom. Since anyone born anywhere could register a birth in Hawaii, even if the document came from HI, it proves nothing.
  • Obama was born somewhere. We still do not know where.
  • We have no solid proof that Stanley Ann Dunham was Obama’s biological mother.
  • We have compelling evidence that Obama was helped with his college expenses. We have seen no evidence of his college loans.
  • If Obama is a natural born citizen and eligible to be POTUS, we have been provided no proof.

Don’t take my word for it.

Look it up.

If you want the truth, you will find it.

Obama DOJ fights Kansas to allow foreigners to vote, Justice Department lawyer Bradley Heard, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, Arizona Supreme Court decision quoted

Obama DOJ fights Kansas to allow foreigners to vote, Justice Department lawyer Bradley Heard, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, Arizona Supreme Court decision quoted

“Based on my firsthand experiences, I believe the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law. Others still within the department share my assessment. The department abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens victimized by the New Black Panthers. The dismissal raises serious questions about the department’s enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.”…J. Christian Adams

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln
“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patroits to prevent its ruin”…Samuel Adams, 1776

Reported by J. Christian Adams, former DOJ attorney, at Pajamas Media February 12, 2014.
“DOJ Argues to Court Against Rules to Prevent Foreigners From Voting”

“Justice Department lawyer Bradley Heard was in court today trying to stop Kansas from ensuring that only citizens register to vote. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, relying on a United States Supreme Court opinion of last year, asked the federal Election Assistance Commission to permit him to ensure that only citizens were registering to vote.

The Election Assistance Commission said no, so Kris Kobach went to federal court. Enter Eric Holder’s Justice Department, as usual, opposing election integrity measures.

Despite harping about resource concerns (which apparently means that the DOJ can do nothing about corrupted voter rolls), Holder found the time and money to send Bradley Heard to a hearing in Kansas to argue against Kobach’s election integrity measures.

Things didn’t go well for Bradley Heard before Judge Eric Melgren today. The Wichita Eagle:

Judge Eric Melgren repeatedly pressed Department of Justice lawyer Bradley Heard to explain how a Supreme Court decision last year on Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship law allows the federal Election Assistance Commission to reject requests from Arizona and Kansas to add state-law requirements to the instructions for filling out the voting form.

“The single pivotal question in this case is who gets to decide … what’s necessary” to establish citizenship for voting, Melgren said.

Heard said that decision lies with the EAC under the federal National Voter Registration Act, also known as the motor-voter law. He said the law empowers the commission to decide what questions and proofs are necessary to include in the federal registration form.

Take note, Heard argued both that Kobach can’t take steps to prevent foreigners to register to vote, and, that federal government power over state elections is supreme.

So who is Bradley Heard?”

Read more:

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/02/12/doj-aruges-to-court-against-rules-to-prevent-foreigners-from-voting/

Obamacare scarier than nonfunctioning website higher premiums and skyrocketing deductibles, Lack of physicians, Rural areas not covered, Doctors forced to alter their practices

Obamacare scarier than nonfunctioning website higher premiums and skyrocketing deductibles, Lack of physicians, Rural areas not covered, Doctors forced to alter their practices

“We need an educated citizenry that values hard evidence.”…Barack Obama

“In the Inland Empire, an economically depressed region in Southern California, President Obama’s health care law is expected to extend insurance coverage to more than 300,000 people by 2014. But coverage will not necessarily translate into care: Local health experts doubt there will be enough doctors to meet the area’s needs. There are not enough now.”…NY Times July 28, 2012

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

When Obama and the left began pushing “health care reform” I was concerned.

When Obamacare was passed I knew we had a serious problem.

How did I know this?

First of all, soon after I started Citizen Wells in January of 2008, I spent a few days researching Obama. That alone told me that we had a problem.

He has a history of lying, associating with radical elements of society and pay to play politics. Crony capitalism.

I am well read and well informed.

I have known and spoken to many medical doctors over the years. They all have had a common concern. Malpractice insurance, it’s cost and impact on their practice.

The impact of malpractice insurance, a direct result of rampant lawsuits in this country, has been known for years.

From the NY Times October 4, 1987.

“Students are also alarmed over the threat of malpractice suits and the increasing cost of malpractice insurance. When UConn asked prospective students what there concerns were about practicing medicine, 40 percent cited the fear of malpractice suits, said Dr. Markowitz. A year of malpractice insurance in the Northeast could cost as much as $100,000, he said.”

It came as no surprise that Obama omitted tort reform from Obamacare. Afterall, he and Michelle were attoneys at one time and attorneys and law firms were his biggest contributors in 2008.

Much has been reported about the Obamacare website, rising premiums and skyrocketing deductibles.

Perhaps an even scarier aspect of Obamacare will be the lack of physicians and the ways they will be forced to alter their practices.

From WND October 22, 2013.

“DOCTORS IN CONGRESS: OBAMACARE WORSE THAN YOU THINK”

“At least 12 doctors in Congress have expressed serious concerns about Obamacare, and now President Obama admitted the recently unveiled online health insurance exchanges have been a technological headache and that he’s “frustrated” by them.

Obama also insists once those problems are fixed people will discover that the exchanges offer wonderful health plans at affordable prices, but a prominent congressman says the facts are not on the president’s side.

“They’re still trying to sell a program that the American people know won’t work,” said Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., a former physician who authored a free-market version of health-care reform that is still awaiting House consideration. “And it won’t work because the same things that are wrong with the website, that is the challenge of getting into it and having it work are the same things that are going to be wrong throughout the entire health-care system when Washington is running it.”

The exchange woes are very real in Price’s district as well. At a town hall on Monday, many constituents had tried to navigate the website with no success. Price stresses that whenever the online problems are fixed, the biggest problems will just be starting.

“The real problem is not that the website won’t work,” Price said. “It’s that the program won’t work because it puts Washington in charge and that’s not what people want.””

““This system won’t work because it can’t work,” he said. “It doesn’t work for patients. It doesn’t work for families, doesn’t work for doctors and certainly doesn’t work for employers or employees. At this point, we’re seeing how it doesn’t work for states from an exchange standpoint or the federal government from a financing standpoint. I think the whole thing will implode. The sad thing about all this is there will be real people who will be harmed from a quality health care or accessibility aspect that wouldn’t have otherwise.””

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/doctors-in-congress-obamacare-worse-than-you-think/

From Citizen Wells July 30, 2012.

“What I am about to write about and explain is simple. It is very similar to governments taxing businesses. Doctors are businessmen as well as physicians.
When their cost of doing business rises, the costs are passed along to consumers, patients. It is that simple. The same applies to hospitals and pharmaceutical companies.

Doctors, just like any business person, must decide what service they will provide. They must weigh cost vs benefit and the current and potential risks they will take. Many areas of practice are too risky, especially in our litigious climate. This prevents many doctors from engaging in a type of practice or forces them to join larger groups.

This has been mostly downplayed or ignored by the mainstream media. News outlets like the NY Times have tap danced around the subject which is probably why some of my so called learned friends have been so ill informed. When George Bush brought up tort reform he was ridiculed. But Bush was right and he was not in bed with law firms and attorneys like Obama and the Democrats.

From the NY Times July 28, 2012.

“Doctor Shortage Likely to Worsen With Health Law”

“In the Inland Empire, an economically depressed region in Southern California, President Obama’s health care law is expected to extend insurance coverage to more than 300,000 people by 2014. But coverage will not necessarily translate into care: Local health experts doubt there will be enough doctors to meet the area’s needs. There are not enough now.

Other places around the country, including the Mississippi Delta, Detroit and suburban Phoenix, face similar problems. The Association of American Medical Colleges estimates that in 2015 the country will have 62,900 fewer doctors than needed. And that number will more than double by 2025, as the expansion of insurance coverage and the aging of baby boomers drive up demand for care. Even without the health care law, the shortfall of doctors in 2025 would still exceed 100,000.

Health experts, including many who support the law, say there is little that the government or the medical profession will be able to do to close the gap by 2014, when the law begins extending coverage to about 30 million Americans. It typically takes a decade to train a doctor.

“We have a shortage of every kind of doctor, except for plastic surgeons and dermatologists,” said Dr. G. Richard Olds, the dean of the new medical school at the University of California, Riverside, founded in part to address the region’s doctor shortage. “We’ll have a 5,000-physician shortage in 10 years, no matter what anybody does.”

Experts describe a doctor shortage as an “invisible problem.” Patients still get care, but the process is often slow and difficult. In Riverside, it has left residents driving long distances to doctors, languishing on waiting lists, overusing emergency rooms and even forgoing care.

“It results in delayed care and higher levels of acuity,” said Dustin Corcoran, the chief executive of the California Medical Association, which represents 35,000 physicians. People “access the health care system through the emergency department, rather than establishing a relationship with a primary care physician who might keep them from getting sicker.”

In the Inland Empire, encompassing the counties of Riverside and San Bernardino, the shortage of doctors is already severe. The population of Riverside County swelled42 percent in the 2000s, gaining more than 644,000 people. It has continued to grow despite the collapse of one of the country’s biggest property bubbles and a jobless rate of 11.8 percent in the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario metro area.

But the growth in the number of physicians has lagged, in no small part because the area has trouble attracting doctors, who might make more money and prefer living in nearby Orange County or Los Angeles.”
“The pool of doctors has not kept pace, and will not, health experts said. Medical school enrollment is increasing, but not as fast as the population. The number of training positions for medical school graduates is lagging. Younger doctors are on average working fewer hours than their predecessors. And about a third of the country’s doctors are 55 or older, and nearing retirement.

Physician compensation is also an issue. The proportion of medical students choosing to enter primary care has declined in the past 15 years, as average earnings for primary care doctors and specialists, like orthopedic surgeons and radiologists, have diverged. A study by the Medical Group Management Association found that in 2010, primary care doctors made about $200,000 a year. Specialists often made twice as much.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/health/policy/too-few-doctors-in-many-us-communities.html?_r=3&partner=MYWAY&ei=5065

The Times did not mention the cost of malpractice insurance or tort reform and blamed the problem on the aging baby boomers and alleged increased coverage from Obamacare.

From Forbes May 5, 2008.

“Reasons Not To Become A Doctor”

“The American Medical Association recognizes there are shortages in certain geographic areas and in certain specialties. Part of that is due to the aging population and a stagnant number of medical-school applicants.

But there are other significant reasons. They include the increasing costs of medical malpractice coverage, higher practice costs, lower insurance reimbursement rates and insurance-company restrictions resulting in less autonomy over how patients are cared for.”
“Reasons Not To Become A Doctor”

“But for potential physicians, there is a future of looming medical-school debt, which is higher than ever. Students who graduate from a public medical school have a median debt of $100,000; private-school students graduate with a median debt of $135,000, according to a 2003 study by the Association of American Medical Colleges. Compare that with 1984, when median debt for public-school graduates was $22,000 and private-school students was $27,000.

Monthly payment on a debt of $150,000 at the end of residency at an interest rate of 2.8% is $1,761, according to the study.

The amount of time it takes to pay off debt depends on the specialty. The average physician’s net income, adjusted for inflation, declined 7% between 1995 and 2003, according to the Center for Studying Health System Change. In order to enter the most lucrative specialties, like radiology, ophthalmology, anesthesiology and dermatology, doctors must continue with their training into their 30s. That means they can’t start chipping away at their debt–let alone make money–until a time by which their counterparts in law or business are usually prospering.

Meanwhile, getting sued by a patient is a major concern. Of course, doctors who make fatal mistakes and who are unqualified should be held responsible. But there’s evidence that the bulk of lawsuits brought are frivolous. Of all malpractice lawsuits brought to jury trial in 2004, the defendant won 91% of the time. Only 6% of all lawsuits go to trial; those that aren’t thrown out are settled. Only 27% of all claims made against doctors result in money awarded to the plaintiff, according to Smarr, president of the trade association for medical malpractice companies.

Regardless, doctors need to defend themselves against the possibility of damages–and that’s an extremely expensive proposition. It takes about four-and-a-half years from the start of a lawsuit to the end, and the average cost to the defense in legal fees was $94,284 in 2004, according to the American Medical Association.

Many states are trying to establish laws to protect doctors from baseless suits. Texas went from the state with the most lawsuits filed to the only state that wrote tort reform into its constitution after its citizens voted it into law. Since tort reform was enacted in 2004, the yearly premium doctors pay in Texas for malpractice insurance has dropped by 40%. Now, the most plaintiffs can recoup for emotional damages is $250,000 from doctors and $500,000 from hospitals. Most interestingly, the number of claims filed against doctors has dropped by about half.”

http://www.forbes.com/2008/05/05/physicians-training-prospects-lead-careers-cx_tw_0505doctors.html

From the Concord Monitor March 13, 2008.

“Cost of malpractice insurance forcing doctors to leave high-risk specialties

Lawyers benefit from huge damage awards”

“I am an emergency physician. I care for about 5,000 patients a year. I have been practicing for 12 years and thus have cared for roughly 60,000 patients.

I receive deep satisfaction from my job and the privilege of the “laying on of hands” as the physician-patient relationship is called in medical school. Most of the time, I rely on the good graces and expertise of the primary care physicians, surgeons and many other specialists to help take care of the people who come to me seeking help. However, recent trends suggest that our hospitals’ ability to deliver that care with the help of appropriate specialists is eroding.

A great deal of this quiet but steadily growing crisis is caused by the direct and indirect costs of medical malpractice. The article about the malpractice suit involving Dr. Eric Leefmans (“Man wins $1.75 million suit against area doctor,” Sunday Monitor, March 9) demands a response from the medical community.”

“In New Hampshire, many physicians are leaving as malpractice insurance costs soar. Specialty physicians have experienced a 50 percent increase in premiums from five years ago. The average premium is now close to $100,000 for obstetricians and neurosurgeons.

Soaring insurance costs

Concord and Manchester have seen a significant decrease in subspecialty coverage in the past five years, including neurosurgical and oral surgery coverage for call. Several small hospitals in the state practice without an anesthesiologist. Only one obstetrician remains to deliver babies in the northern part of the state. Locally, many subspecialty groups have had significant challenges recruiting new physicians to practice in this area. General surgery, one of the most coveted residencies just 10 years ago, now struggles to fill residency positions. Several recent studies and articles predict a significant and increasing gap between the demand and availability of physicians of all types.”
“Our medical system is going through significant difficulties, including increasing health insurance costs, a growing uninsured population, rising medical costs and loss of specialists and primary care physicians. However, the cost of malpractice contributes to those problems – while making less money available to care for the uninsured. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has estimated medical liability costs add $60 billion to $108 billion to the cost of health care each year. Interestingly, the estimated annual cost of covering all of the uninsured patients in the United States is $100 billion.”

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/cost-of-malpractice-insurance-forcing-doctors-to-leave-high-risk-specialties?SESS0da5adf917ca993fd9972fb4069845a6=google&page=full

Why was tort reform not included in Obamacare?

From the NY Times March 23, 2000.

“To trial lawyers, especially those involved in the tobacco litigation, Mr. Bush has become their worst nightmare. He has made attacks on lawyers a campaign centerpiece, pointing with pride to his record in Texas of curbing civil litigation, capping legal fees and limiting jury awards.”

“To that end, while trial lawyers have long been heavy Democratic Party donors, the prospect of a Bush candidacy, along with the possibility that like-minded Republicans would retain control of Congress, has ratcheted up the stakes, and the donations.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/23/us/trial-lawyers-pour-money-into-democrats-chests.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Why Obama ignores tort reform?

Top Recipients, 2011-2012

Candidate Office Amount
Obama, Barack (D)  $12,116,092
Romney, Mitt (R)  $5,205,273
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) Senate  $1,999,202
Nelson, Bill (D-FL) Senate  $1,376,064
Warren, Elizabeth (D-MA)  $1,158,556

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=K01

Don’t be fooled by the false logic arguments, Orwellian wordsmithing and smooth talking devil attorneys. I have spoken to many physicians over the years and they all echoed the statements of the doctor above.

Oh, and did I mention John Edwards?”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/07/30/obamacare-and-no-tort-reform-why-healthcare-costs-skyrocketed-why-there-is-a-doctor-shortage-obama-and-democrats-in-bed-with-attorneys-and-trial-lawyers/