yup, we can't have "selective prosecution"It's called settlement
as in, "everybody else did this"
according to the us atty in arkansas
moreA 2010 settlement with Native Americans was contentious for its own reasons. Justice Department lawyers argued that the $760 million agreement far outstripped the potential cost of a defeat in court. Agriculture officials said not that many farmers would file claims.
That prediction proved prophetic. Only $300 million in claims were filed, leaving nearly $400 million in the control of plaintiffs’ lawyers to be distributed among a handful of nonprofit organizations serving Native American farmers. Two and a half years later, the groups have yet to be chosen. It is unclear how many even exist.
why did "nearly everyone in two adjoining apartment buildings" in columbus, ohio, receive checks from usda for $50,000 each?Judge Robertson had refused to certify either group [women and Hispanics] as a class. The United States Court of Appeals had upheld him, stating in 2006 that the Hispanic plaintiffs had been denied loans “for a variety of reasons, including inadequate farm plans and lack of funds.” Nor had female farmers proved a pattern of bias, the court found.
The Justice Department’s lawyers had definitively ruled out any group-style settlement. “Some of these folks have never made a loan payment in their entire history with U.S.D.A.,” Lisa A. Olson, the lead government litigator against the 81 Hispanic plaintiffs, told Judge Robertson in August 2009. “There may even be folks who are under criminal investigation.”
Michael Sitcov, assistant director of the Justice Department’s federal program branch, told the judge that senior department officials agreed with career litigators that the cases should be fought one by one.
But members of the Congressional Hispanic caucus and a group of eight Democratic senators, led by Mr. Menendez, were lobbying the White House to move in the opposite direction. They grew increasingly agitated as the plaintiffs’ cases appeared to falter.
The issue came to a head after the Supreme Court refused to reopen the issue of class certification. The next month, on Feb. 11, 2010, Daniel J. Meltzer, principal deputy White House counsel, held the first of three meetings at which resolution of the case was discussed, records and interviews show. Among the attendees were senior Justice and Agriculture Department officials, including Mr. West, Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, and Krysta Harden, then the assistant agriculture secretary for Congressional relations.
Settlement negotiations began the next week. Judge Robertson expressed surprise at the news, “given the history of the case.”
Last edited by The Prof; 04-27-13 at 01:23 PM.
"its very design encouraged people to lie:" nyt, front page, above the fold, yesterday, concerning doj's settlement with class action plaintiffs who charged discrimination against usda
"the bar for a successful claim was so low it was almost impossible to show fraud"
"the template of the deal... proved a magnet to fraud"
this eager INVITATION (ag actively made 16,000 phone calls, you recall) to engage in fraud is NOT confined to barack obama's doj and usda
as you know
99.5% of illegal immigrants get approval for legal status - Washington Times
why did us attorney paula casey say, "everybody else did it"
if you ever voted for this man you owe your neighbors an apology
it's gonna get worse---ask max baucus
Last edited by The Prof; 04-27-13 at 02:06 PM.
"It's called settlement."
No, it's called BS...and don't forget, the sequester was Obama's idea...remember?
Bob Woodward: Obama owns sequestration - Kevin Cirilli - POLITICO.com
why did one family in little rock get 10 separate checks for $50,000 each, according to the ny times?
aren't you curious?
White House in Full Retreat as FAA Sequester Stunt Backfires.....
http://www.debatepolitics.com/govern...e-picture.html (The Sequester Fraud in One Picture)
Originally posted by cpwill on the political cartoons thread:
Who is the government kidding about cutbacks and the results of cutbacks?
The results of the sequester are just so much hogwash. Nothing is really being cut back. Government is still growing. Can't afford the Blue Angels? Can't afford white house tours?
All because of a small decrease in the rate of growth?
Really, I mean, really? Are people t hat easily fooled?
Can't we just turn Congress off and then turn it back on again?
no, he's not happy, he doesn't like it
159 of pelosi's democrats voted with john boehner
so what's responsible, mr president?
taxing the internet?
excising cigarettes to provide universal preschool?
giving more money to fisker?
Obama: Flight delay fix a 'Band-Aid'President Barack Obama says the congressional fix for widespread flight delays is an irresponsible way to govern, but he's prepared to sign the legislation that lawmakers fast-tracked.
He says the bipartisan bill to end furloughs of air traffic controllers is a "Band-Aid" solution rather than a lasting answer to this year's $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts known as the sequester.
The cuts have affected all federal agencies, and flight delays last week left thousands of travelers frustrated and furious and Congress feeling pressured to respond.
The Federal Aviation Administration announced Saturday that it had suspended all employee furloughs and that air traffic facilities would begin returning to regular staffing levels over the next 24 hours. The FAA's statement said the air traffic system would resume normal operations by Sunday evening.
"Republicans claimed victory when the sequester first took effect, and now they've decided it was a bad idea all along," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address, aired Saturday. He singled out the GOP even though the bill passed with overwhelming Democratic support in both the House and Senate.
The president scolded lawmakers for helping the Federal Aviation Administration while doing nothing to replace other cuts that he said harm federal employees, unemployed workers and preschoolers in Head Start. "Maybe because they fly home each weekend, the members of Congress who insisted these cuts take hold finally realized that they actually apply to them, too," Obama said.
Rushed through Congress with remarkable speed, the bill marked a shift for Democrats who had hoped the impact of the cuts would increase pressure on Republicans to reverse the broad cuts. The bill signed by Obama would let the FAA use up to $253 million from an airport improvement program and other accounts to halt the furloughs through the Sept. 30 end of the government's fiscal year.
Faced with the prospect that emboldened Republicans will push to selectively undo other painful effects of the cuts, the White House said Friday that a piecemeal approach would be impractical, but wouldn't definitely rule out signing other fixes.
responsible leadership, president obama has made plain and clear, means to him---punishing the public until they agree to fork over more revenue
and exactly what does he need all this money for?
why did "nearly every resident in two adjoining apt buidlings" in columbus ohio (according to nyt) each cash a check from tom vilsack for $50,000?
why was vilsack's usda tasked to recruit 16,000 "claims against itself?"
if you ever voted for this man you owe yourself an apology
get out before it gets worse
The only reason for this Bill is because all Congressmen fly, most frequently. They don't like being inconvenienced, sequester or not!