10
1) John Harris agreed to plead guilty to one count of wire fraud for participating in former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's scheme to sell the US Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama.
2) Harris admitted that between October and December 2008, as Blagojevich's Chief of Staff, he discussed with Blagojevich ways for Blagojevich to obtain personal benefits in exchange for appointing someone to the Senate seat, such as high-paying jobs and campaign contributions.
3) Although Harris at times advised Blagojevich that he could not trade the Senate appointment for personal gain, Harris also suggested ways for Blagojevich to covertly obtain value for the
Negotiations over the fiscal cliff continued this week with no agreement. The White House offered a proposal including $1.6 trillion in tax increases and $400 billion in entitlement cuts, but Republicans rejected it. Meanwhile, the House passed a bill to increase visas for skilled immigrants, but the White House did not support the narrow scope. At the UN, Palestine was recognized as a non-member observer state over U.S. objections. In Egypt, an Islamist-dominated assembly approved a constitution without opposition input.
The letter requests Vice President Biden's assistance on nuclear safety issues that the writer has been attempting to raise for decades. It provides extensive background documents on alleged cover-ups and ignored safety concerns regarding counterfeit and substandard parts in nuclear plants. The writer founded a whistleblower organization and has contacted multiple government officials and agencies about these issues but received no response or action. He is seeking Vice President Biden's intervention to get President Obama to meet with the writer and address the unanswered safety concerns raised.
Obama suspicious death lists... body countsRepentSinner
This document discusses several suspicious deaths that have occurred involving individuals connected to President Obama or controversial topics. It mentions:
1) The killing of three U.S. citizens, including Warren Weinstein, in a U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan along with suspicions around their knowledge of sensitive topics.
2) Speculation by Hugo Chavez that the CIA gave him and other Latin American leaders cancer as a political weapon.
3) The unsolved murders of the children and nanny of a CNBC producer shortly after CNBC reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit against major banks and government officials.
4) Other deaths of individuals such as a Secret Service agent and US diplomats that are
Obama suspicious death lists ... body countsRepentSinner
This document discusses several suspicious deaths of individuals connected to controversial political issues or investigations. It mentions:
1) The deaths of three U.S. citizens in a drone strike, including Warren Weinstein, who may have had information about 9/11 and Bin Laden's death.
2) Speculation by Hugo Chavez that the CIA gave him and other Latin American leaders cancer as a political weapon.
3) The unsolved murders of the children and nanny of a CNBC producer shortly after CNBC reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit against major banks.
4) Other suspicious deaths including a Secret Service agent and a Obama campaign worker.
The document discusses elections in the United States. It explains that the presidential election occurs every four years on the first Tuesday in November. Citizens vote for electors who then vote for the president and vice president as part of the Electoral College system. It also outlines the Democratic and Republican parties, noting that Barack Obama was elected president in 2008. The document raises topics for debate such as same-sex marriage, healthcare, and the war in Iraq.
Obama suspicious death lists ... body countsRepentSinner
The document discusses several suspicious deaths of individuals connected to controversial political issues or having sensitive information. It mentions the deaths of Warren Weinstein, Adam Gadahn, and Ahmed Farouq who were killed in a US drone strike; Hugo Chavez's speculation that the CIA gave him cancer; the murdered children of a CNBC producer who reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit; and others. It raises questions about whether some of the deaths could have been assassinations rather than accidents or suicides.
The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was attacked by armed extremists, resulting in the death of U.S. Ambassador John Christopher Stevens and three others. Protests against an anti-Muslim video also occurred outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. President Obama condemned the Benghazi attack and increased security at other embassies. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney faced criticism for a statement seen as politicizing the events, and protests continued in other Middle Eastern countries.
Negotiations over the fiscal cliff continued this week with no agreement. The White House offered a proposal including $1.6 trillion in tax increases and $400 billion in entitlement cuts, but Republicans rejected it. Meanwhile, the House passed a bill to increase visas for skilled immigrants, but the White House did not support the narrow scope. At the UN, Palestine was recognized as a non-member observer state over U.S. objections. In Egypt, an Islamist-dominated assembly approved a constitution without opposition input.
The letter requests Vice President Biden's assistance on nuclear safety issues that the writer has been attempting to raise for decades. It provides extensive background documents on alleged cover-ups and ignored safety concerns regarding counterfeit and substandard parts in nuclear plants. The writer founded a whistleblower organization and has contacted multiple government officials and agencies about these issues but received no response or action. He is seeking Vice President Biden's intervention to get President Obama to meet with the writer and address the unanswered safety concerns raised.
Obama suspicious death lists... body countsRepentSinner
This document discusses several suspicious deaths that have occurred involving individuals connected to President Obama or controversial topics. It mentions:
1) The killing of three U.S. citizens, including Warren Weinstein, in a U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan along with suspicions around their knowledge of sensitive topics.
2) Speculation by Hugo Chavez that the CIA gave him and other Latin American leaders cancer as a political weapon.
3) The unsolved murders of the children and nanny of a CNBC producer shortly after CNBC reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit against major banks and government officials.
4) Other deaths of individuals such as a Secret Service agent and US diplomats that are
Obama suspicious death lists ... body countsRepentSinner
This document discusses several suspicious deaths of individuals connected to controversial political issues or investigations. It mentions:
1) The deaths of three U.S. citizens in a drone strike, including Warren Weinstein, who may have had information about 9/11 and Bin Laden's death.
2) Speculation by Hugo Chavez that the CIA gave him and other Latin American leaders cancer as a political weapon.
3) The unsolved murders of the children and nanny of a CNBC producer shortly after CNBC reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit against major banks.
4) Other suspicious deaths including a Secret Service agent and a Obama campaign worker.
The document discusses elections in the United States. It explains that the presidential election occurs every four years on the first Tuesday in November. Citizens vote for electors who then vote for the president and vice president as part of the Electoral College system. It also outlines the Democratic and Republican parties, noting that Barack Obama was elected president in 2008. The document raises topics for debate such as same-sex marriage, healthcare, and the war in Iraq.
Obama suspicious death lists ... body countsRepentSinner
The document discusses several suspicious deaths of individuals connected to controversial political issues or having sensitive information. It mentions the deaths of Warren Weinstein, Adam Gadahn, and Ahmed Farouq who were killed in a US drone strike; Hugo Chavez's speculation that the CIA gave him cancer; the murdered children of a CNBC producer who reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit; and others. It raises questions about whether some of the deaths could have been assassinations rather than accidents or suicides.
The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was attacked by armed extremists, resulting in the death of U.S. Ambassador John Christopher Stevens and three others. Protests against an anti-Muslim video also occurred outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. President Obama condemned the Benghazi attack and increased security at other embassies. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney faced criticism for a statement seen as politicizing the events, and protests continued in other Middle Eastern countries.
Obama suspicious death lists... body countsRepentSinner
This document discusses several suspicious deaths of individuals connected to controversial political issues or who possessed sensitive information. It mentions the deaths of Warren Weinstein, Adam Gadahn, and Ahmed Farouq who were killed in a US drone strike; Hugo Chavez's speculation that the CIA gave him cancer; the murdered children of a CNBC producer who reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit; and others. It raises questions about whether their deaths may have been targeted assassinations intended to silence them.
This document discusses immigration laws and racial profiling in the United States. It provides background on immigration over time, current illegal immigration statistics, and details about obtaining legal resident status through a green card. It also examines racial profiling practices by law enforcement and specific racial profiling events. The document poses questions about the definition of racial profiling, Arizona's immigration law and governor Jan Brewer, illegal immigration rates by country, and processes for obtaining legal residency.
The United States elects a president every four years on the first Tuesday of November. To run for president, one must be at least 35 years old, a natural born U.S. citizen, and have lived in the country for at least 14 years. Candidates campaign by giving speeches, shaking hands, running ads, and participating in debates in their effort to win the majority of electoral votes, which are allotted based on each state's population. On January 20 following the election, the winner is sworn in as president during a ceremony in Washington D.C. and will serve a four-year term residing in the White House.
The official US citizenship test questions answered, assembled by USCIS. In this slideshare, you will discover flashcards of the 100 US Naturalization questions you might be asked during your citizenship interview and how to answer them.
For questions, cchedule a call at alienattorney.com/schedule-phone-consultation
- President Obama and Congressional leaders met to negotiate a deal to avoid the "fiscal cliff" and disagree on how to balance tax increases and spending cuts.
- Congress held hearings on preventing future meningitis outbreaks and is working on the defense authorization act, but progress is slowed by disputes over amendments.
- The elections resulted in gains for Democrats, but some races are still unresolved and Republicans are challenging results in close contests.
The document discusses civil liberties in the United States, including how the courts play a role in deciding civil liberties issues, debates around displaying religious symbols on government property and the use of confessions in court cases. It also examines whether the Patriot Act reduces civil liberties and how rights can be in conflict, such as freedom of the press versus right to a fair trial. The document also covers applying the Bill of Rights to states, interpreting the First Amendment, and issues around crime, due process and national security in the context of civil liberties.
The document summarizes recent domestic and foreign policy matters in the United States. On the domestic front, it discusses ongoing budget and fiscal negotiations, healthcare reform legislation, farm bill negotiations, and tax policy discussions. On foreign policy, it outlines discussions at the UN on Syria, new US sanctions on Iran, eased sanctions on Burma to allow new US investment, and recent international travel by Secretary of State Clinton to countries in Asia and Africa to discuss bilateral relations and issues like territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
092812 David Addington Article (ENGLISH)VogelDenise
David Addington is a powerful but little known government lawyer who has served as chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. He played a key role in many controversial Bush administration national security policies and legal positions after 9/11. Addington is a staunch advocate of expansive executive power and the unitary executive theory. He believes the president alone has authority over national security matters and that Congress cannot impede the president's constitutional powers. Addington helped draft hundreds of presidential signing statements that asserted expansive interpretations of executive authority.
This document is a presentation on same-sex marriage that includes: an overview of the Declaration of Independence and basic rights it enshrines; a summary of the Defense of Marriage Act; and summaries of three major court cases - Plessy v. Ferguson, Perez v. Sharp, and Loving v. Virginia - that relate to marriage rights. The presentation also examines arguments for and against maintaining the Defense of Marriage Act.
This brief argues that the Presidential Proclamation banning certain visas violates the United States' obligations under the World Trade Organization's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). As a WTO member, the US is bound by GATS, which requires admitting L-1 intracompany transferee visas. The Proclamation banning these visas contradicts this commitment and could lead other WTO members to challenge the US through the WTO dispute resolution process, potentially authorizing retaliation against American exports and companies abroad.
This document provides information about key members of the United States government including Barack Obama as President, Joe Biden as Vice President, and cabinet members such as Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. It also lists the current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as Sonia Sotomayor and outlines some of the roles and responsibilities of the President, Congress, and Supreme Court.
A U-Visa lets victims of crimes who meet certain requirements stay in the United States. A U-Visa provides the following benefits:
You can legally live in the United States for four years. After three years of having a U-Visa you can apply for a green card to stay in the U.S. permanently. (And if you get a green card, you can eventually apply to become a U.S. citizen).
With a U-Visa you can get permission to work in the United States.
Some of your family members might also be able to get a U-Visa
With a U-Visa you might be eligible for certain public benefits in some States like California and New York.
The document provides an overview of the American bureaucracy, including:
1) How the bureaucracy has become a "fourth branch" of government due to its extensive powers and responsibilities.
2) The actual size and scope of the federal bureaucracy, which includes over 2 million civilian employees as well as millions more who work indirectly for the federal government.
3) Common issues with bureaucratic performance like "red tape" and efforts taken to improve agencies and make them more efficient like the Brownlow Commission.
President Donald J Trumps new executive order caused chaos across the nation and the world. Many people were detained at airports, even those with means of legal residents in the U.S.
A U-Visa lets victims of crimes who meet certain requirements stay in the United States. A U-Visa provides the following benefits:
You can legally live in the United States for four years. After three years of having a U-Visa you can apply for a green card to stay in the U.S. permanently. (And if you get a green card, you can eventually apply to become a U.S. citizen).
With a U-Visa you can get permission to work in the United States.
Some of your family members might also be able to get a U-Visa
With a U-Visa you might be eligible for certain public benefits in some States like California and New York.
- Bipartisan talks among eight Senators continue on addressing expiring tax cuts and sequestration cuts. The economy added 114,000 jobs in September while the unemployment rate fell.
- The Supreme Court opened its new term reviewing cases on issues like affirmative action, human rights abuses, gay marriage, and the Voting Rights Act.
- President Obama and Mitt Romney debated domestic policy issues in their first presidential debate, with most analyses saying Romney performed better.
Crimea: U.S. Executive Actions and Legal Implications of Overlapping Global S...Patton Boggs LLP
The document summarizes the recent executive actions taken by the United States and European Union imposing sanctions in response to Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. It provides details on:
1) The new U.S. Executive Order signed on March 17th authorizing sanctions on senior Russian officials, the Russian arms sector, and those providing support. So far 11 individuals have been sanctioned.
2) The EU publishing a list on March 18th sanctioning 21 Russian and Ukrainian officials, including some also sanctioned by the U.S.
3) The legal implications and scope of sanctions authorized by the new U.S. Executive Order, including asset blocking and visa bans.
The document describes the origins and structure of the branches of the US government. After gaining independence from England, states debated how to set up a new government. They created a system with three branches: the legislative Congress, the executive president, and the judicial Supreme Court. This balanced the power between a strong national government and state autonomy to create a stable democracy.
The document summarizes various domestic and foreign policy matters from the previous week. On the domestic front, negotiations over the fiscal cliff continued without an agreement. The White House rejected a Republican proposal that did not raise tax rates on top incomes. Internationally, concerns grew over Syria's chemical weapons as the U.S. warned of consequences if they were used. In Egypt, protests accelerated against Morsi's plans for a referendum on a new constitution. On other foreign issues, the U.S. opposed further Israeli settlements and Senate passed a defense bill authorizing $631.4 billion in spending.
This document provides instructions for filling out a census form. It states that the form is for informational purposes only and is not an official census form. It instructs people to complete the census to help their community receive needed funding. It also states that answers are protected by law.
Obama suspicious death lists... body countsRepentSinner
This document discusses several suspicious deaths of individuals connected to controversial political issues or who possessed sensitive information. It mentions the deaths of Warren Weinstein, Adam Gadahn, and Ahmed Farouq who were killed in a US drone strike; Hugo Chavez's speculation that the CIA gave him cancer; the murdered children of a CNBC producer who reported on a $43 trillion money laundering lawsuit; and others. It raises questions about whether their deaths may have been targeted assassinations intended to silence them.
This document discusses immigration laws and racial profiling in the United States. It provides background on immigration over time, current illegal immigration statistics, and details about obtaining legal resident status through a green card. It also examines racial profiling practices by law enforcement and specific racial profiling events. The document poses questions about the definition of racial profiling, Arizona's immigration law and governor Jan Brewer, illegal immigration rates by country, and processes for obtaining legal residency.
The United States elects a president every four years on the first Tuesday of November. To run for president, one must be at least 35 years old, a natural born U.S. citizen, and have lived in the country for at least 14 years. Candidates campaign by giving speeches, shaking hands, running ads, and participating in debates in their effort to win the majority of electoral votes, which are allotted based on each state's population. On January 20 following the election, the winner is sworn in as president during a ceremony in Washington D.C. and will serve a four-year term residing in the White House.
The official US citizenship test questions answered, assembled by USCIS. In this slideshare, you will discover flashcards of the 100 US Naturalization questions you might be asked during your citizenship interview and how to answer them.
For questions, cchedule a call at alienattorney.com/schedule-phone-consultation
- President Obama and Congressional leaders met to negotiate a deal to avoid the "fiscal cliff" and disagree on how to balance tax increases and spending cuts.
- Congress held hearings on preventing future meningitis outbreaks and is working on the defense authorization act, but progress is slowed by disputes over amendments.
- The elections resulted in gains for Democrats, but some races are still unresolved and Republicans are challenging results in close contests.
The document discusses civil liberties in the United States, including how the courts play a role in deciding civil liberties issues, debates around displaying religious symbols on government property and the use of confessions in court cases. It also examines whether the Patriot Act reduces civil liberties and how rights can be in conflict, such as freedom of the press versus right to a fair trial. The document also covers applying the Bill of Rights to states, interpreting the First Amendment, and issues around crime, due process and national security in the context of civil liberties.
The document summarizes recent domestic and foreign policy matters in the United States. On the domestic front, it discusses ongoing budget and fiscal negotiations, healthcare reform legislation, farm bill negotiations, and tax policy discussions. On foreign policy, it outlines discussions at the UN on Syria, new US sanctions on Iran, eased sanctions on Burma to allow new US investment, and recent international travel by Secretary of State Clinton to countries in Asia and Africa to discuss bilateral relations and issues like territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
092812 David Addington Article (ENGLISH)VogelDenise
David Addington is a powerful but little known government lawyer who has served as chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. He played a key role in many controversial Bush administration national security policies and legal positions after 9/11. Addington is a staunch advocate of expansive executive power and the unitary executive theory. He believes the president alone has authority over national security matters and that Congress cannot impede the president's constitutional powers. Addington helped draft hundreds of presidential signing statements that asserted expansive interpretations of executive authority.
This document is a presentation on same-sex marriage that includes: an overview of the Declaration of Independence and basic rights it enshrines; a summary of the Defense of Marriage Act; and summaries of three major court cases - Plessy v. Ferguson, Perez v. Sharp, and Loving v. Virginia - that relate to marriage rights. The presentation also examines arguments for and against maintaining the Defense of Marriage Act.
This brief argues that the Presidential Proclamation banning certain visas violates the United States' obligations under the World Trade Organization's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). As a WTO member, the US is bound by GATS, which requires admitting L-1 intracompany transferee visas. The Proclamation banning these visas contradicts this commitment and could lead other WTO members to challenge the US through the WTO dispute resolution process, potentially authorizing retaliation against American exports and companies abroad.
This document provides information about key members of the United States government including Barack Obama as President, Joe Biden as Vice President, and cabinet members such as Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. It also lists the current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as Sonia Sotomayor and outlines some of the roles and responsibilities of the President, Congress, and Supreme Court.
A U-Visa lets victims of crimes who meet certain requirements stay in the United States. A U-Visa provides the following benefits:
You can legally live in the United States for four years. After three years of having a U-Visa you can apply for a green card to stay in the U.S. permanently. (And if you get a green card, you can eventually apply to become a U.S. citizen).
With a U-Visa you can get permission to work in the United States.
Some of your family members might also be able to get a U-Visa
With a U-Visa you might be eligible for certain public benefits in some States like California and New York.
The document provides an overview of the American bureaucracy, including:
1) How the bureaucracy has become a "fourth branch" of government due to its extensive powers and responsibilities.
2) The actual size and scope of the federal bureaucracy, which includes over 2 million civilian employees as well as millions more who work indirectly for the federal government.
3) Common issues with bureaucratic performance like "red tape" and efforts taken to improve agencies and make them more efficient like the Brownlow Commission.
President Donald J Trumps new executive order caused chaos across the nation and the world. Many people were detained at airports, even those with means of legal residents in the U.S.
A U-Visa lets victims of crimes who meet certain requirements stay in the United States. A U-Visa provides the following benefits:
You can legally live in the United States for four years. After three years of having a U-Visa you can apply for a green card to stay in the U.S. permanently. (And if you get a green card, you can eventually apply to become a U.S. citizen).
With a U-Visa you can get permission to work in the United States.
Some of your family members might also be able to get a U-Visa
With a U-Visa you might be eligible for certain public benefits in some States like California and New York.
- Bipartisan talks among eight Senators continue on addressing expiring tax cuts and sequestration cuts. The economy added 114,000 jobs in September while the unemployment rate fell.
- The Supreme Court opened its new term reviewing cases on issues like affirmative action, human rights abuses, gay marriage, and the Voting Rights Act.
- President Obama and Mitt Romney debated domestic policy issues in their first presidential debate, with most analyses saying Romney performed better.
Crimea: U.S. Executive Actions and Legal Implications of Overlapping Global S...Patton Boggs LLP
The document summarizes the recent executive actions taken by the United States and European Union imposing sanctions in response to Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. It provides details on:
1) The new U.S. Executive Order signed on March 17th authorizing sanctions on senior Russian officials, the Russian arms sector, and those providing support. So far 11 individuals have been sanctioned.
2) The EU publishing a list on March 18th sanctioning 21 Russian and Ukrainian officials, including some also sanctioned by the U.S.
3) The legal implications and scope of sanctions authorized by the new U.S. Executive Order, including asset blocking and visa bans.
The document describes the origins and structure of the branches of the US government. After gaining independence from England, states debated how to set up a new government. They created a system with three branches: the legislative Congress, the executive president, and the judicial Supreme Court. This balanced the power between a strong national government and state autonomy to create a stable democracy.
The document summarizes various domestic and foreign policy matters from the previous week. On the domestic front, negotiations over the fiscal cliff continued without an agreement. The White House rejected a Republican proposal that did not raise tax rates on top incomes. Internationally, concerns grew over Syria's chemical weapons as the U.S. warned of consequences if they were used. In Egypt, protests accelerated against Morsi's plans for a referendum on a new constitution. On other foreign issues, the U.S. opposed further Israeli settlements and Senate passed a defense bill authorizing $631.4 billion in spending.
This document provides instructions for filling out a census form. It states that the form is for informational purposes only and is not an official census form. It instructs people to complete the census to help their community receive needed funding. It also states that answers are protected by law.
The document summarizes the findings of a survey of 818 American workers about their views on the economy and unemployment. Key findings include:
1) American workers have a grim outlook on the economy and labor market, with most expecting continued recession or depression and high unemployment.
2) The recession has had a major financial impact on most Americans, especially the unemployed, with many taking on debt and making lifestyle changes.
3) Americans blame the recession and policies of former presidents Bush and Obama for high unemployment, but few blame the unemployed themselves.
4) Most Americans report that they, family, or friends have lost jobs in the past three years, showing the widespread impact of job losses.
This document provides tips and strategies for retaining employees by focusing on employee engagement, morale, and appreciation. Some of the key points include:
1) A survey found that CFOs' top lesson from the recession was the importance of focusing on employee morale.
2) Small acts of recognition and appreciation, from thank you notes to washing employees' cars, can go a long way in boosting morale.
3) Involving employees in decision-making and making them feel that their input is valued also increases engagement. Steps include suggestion boxes, informal lunches with managers, and surveys to gather employee feedback.
4) Fostering fun and laughter in the workplace through events, games, and
The document discusses strategies for membership development, including member relations, recruitment and retention. It covers developing communication strategies to engage diverse current and potential members. Examples are provided on conducting a membership needs analysis and developing a strategic plan with goals and objectives to evaluate messaging and communication approaches. The importance of communicating value and relevance to members is also covered.
The document outlines a management model that empowers professional staff by transferring operational authority and responsibilities from the board of directors to staff. This allows the organization to be managed more like a business with the board focusing on strategic visioning and goal-setting while staff handles day-to-day operations, budgeting, committee management, and other duties. Key aspects include giving staff control over organizational structure, decision-making authority, developing policies, and recruiting volunteer leaders to work collaboratively with staff.
The document is a 3-page excerpt from a longer manual titled "The Management Model for Associations, Chambers and NonProfits".
It discusses staff management for non-profit organizations. Specifically, it recommends developing six manuals to document processes and institutional knowledge, including a leadership notebook, procedures manual, policy manual, emergency preparedness manual, communications style manual, and personnel manual. It also discusses risk management, volunteer immunity, and using performance measures to monitor organizational performance.
The global meetings and events industry faces significant challenges in 2009 due to economic uncertainty and reduced budgets. Meeting planners anticipate a 9% decrease in meetings, 3% decrease in staffing, and 5% increase in meetings planned per planner. Suppliers expect a similar 9% decrease in supported meetings and 4% staffing decrease. Independent planners expect varying impacts by region. Organizations cancelled an average of 4.1 meetings in late 2008 and 3.4 already in 2009. Planners will focus on cost control and ROI. The industry will prioritize necessities, negotiate concessions, and build flexibility into contracts. Virtual meetings will grow in importance while face-to-face remains effective for building relationships and trust.
The document is a 3-page excerpt from a longer manual titled "The Management Model for Associations, Chambers and NonProfits".
It discusses staff management for non-profit organizations. Specifically, it recommends developing six manuals to document processes and institutional knowledge, including a leadership notebook, procedures manual, policy manual, emergency preparedness manual, communications style manual, and personnel manual. It also discusses risk management, volunteer immunity, and using performance measures to monitor organizational performance.
This document discusses North Carolina's tax policies and economic trends. It notes that while NC has a large economy, per capita income has fallen relative to the national average in recent decades despite economic development efforts. The sales tax base has narrowed as consumption patterns have changed. To maintain revenues, sales tax rates have increased. The document suggests modernizing NC's tax code to promote income growth, considering a broader sales tax base or reducing reliance on volatile income taxes.
The document discusses several topics related to education and professional development, including the six factors that influence education (time, value expectations, market structure, generational differences, competition, and technology). It also lists several volunteer roles that can be filled at events, such as greeters, registration helpers, and videographers. Finally, it provides tips and resources for speakers, including sources for finding speaking opportunities, generating headlines, and building an online presence.
This document provides guidance on communicating externally as an association. It discusses that associations have internal affairs to manage but sometimes external issues become a priority. It outlines different strategic tools for ramping up external communication including committed members, ambassadors, press, advertising, and social media. Specific tactics are presented for each tool, emphasizing relationship building, targeted messaging, and clear calls to action. Examples from the NC Retail Merchants Association and NC Association of Realtors demonstrate how reframing issues in the press and mobilizing members can influence policy debates.
The document discusses strategies for associations to increase membership by focusing on return on investment (ROI) for members. It recommends that associations conduct research to quantify the specific monetary value members receive from membership on an annual basis. This allows associations to demonstrate a strong ROI to both members and non-members to recruit more members. It also discusses the importance of new member assimilation and engagement programs to retain members. The key message is that associations should prove their relevance by clearly communicating the tangible financial benefits of membership.
This document discusses various online learning options for associations, including webinars, webcasts, virtual study groups, and knowledge communities. It provides an overview of key terms related to online learning and recommendations for pricing, marketing, and developing online educational programs and content. The document emphasizes using online learning to engage members year-round and highlights some common challenges in preparing and delivering online content.
This document summarizes the key findings of a survey of 674 association professionals regarding trends and practices in association communications. Some of the main findings include:
- 90% of respondents said they are communicating with members more frequently than 3 years ago, yet under half feel they are communicating more effectively.
- While associations have adapted their flagship communication vehicles, many have not increased staffing or resources accordingly.
- Over half of respondents believe members ignore at least half of regular communications.
- Few associations have strict policies governing communication frequency and volume.
- The study surveyed over 8,500 members of 97 associations about their beliefs, behaviors, and attitudes in response to the current economy.
- Most association members (over 73%) expect their employment situation to stay about the same over the next year, while more than twice as many expect it to get better rather than worse.
- Nearly half of members who have their dues paid by their employer say they will drop their membership if the employer stops paying, indicating employers play a critical role in membership levels.
- While members express some wariness, their overall level of anxiety is less than expected, though those expecting worse employment are less optimistic about associations and participation.
The document discusses best practices for managing the growing challenge of email overload. It recommends regularly emptying your inbox by deleting unneeded emails, filing important ones into folders, and completing tasks that take less than two minutes. Emails requiring action or follow up should be organized into "Action" and "Waiting For" folders. While customized approaches vary, the core principles of separating action and reference emails and regularly reviewing action items are most effective for gaining control over one's email inbox.
This document discusses principles for effectively communicating the benefits of membership to persuade others using empathy, credibility and focusing on the other person's interests rather than your own. Some key points covered include establishing credibility by demonstrating character, competence and caring; emphasizing mutual benefit over manipulation; and influencing others by first being influenced and helping others get what they want.
This document is a criminal complaint filed against Rod Blagojevich and John Harris. It alleges two counts:
1) Conspiring to commit fraud by devising a scheme where Blagojevich and Harris used their public offices to obtain personal financial gains in exchange for appointments, contracts, and funds.
2) As agents of Illinois, Blagojevich and Harris corruptly solicited the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial members critical of Blagojevich in exchange for $100 million in state assistance for Wrigley Field.
The affidavit provides background on Blagojevich and Harris' positions and duties. It summarizes evidence the investigation has uncovered of efforts to obtain campaign funds and personal benefits in
This document is a criminal complaint filed against Rod Blagojevich and John Harris. It alleges two criminal counts:
1) Conspiring to commit honest services fraud by devising a scheme for Blagojevich to use his office for personal gain through campaign contributions in exchange for official acts.
2) As agents of Illinois, corruptly soliciting the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial members critical of Blagojevich in exchange for $100 million in state assistance for Wrigley Field, intending to be influenced for transactions worth $5,000 or more.
The affidavit provides background on the investigation and intercepted communications supporting allegations that Blagojevich solicited contributions for official acts and tried to
Rodriguez 1
Diego Rodriguez
Winston Padgett
Government 2305, Sect. 049
Monday, April 14, 2014
Same Sex Marriage: Constitutional and Cultural Considerations Outline
Same sex marriage - is a highly controversial topic in the United States. It impacts our culture and, in many regards to religious beliefs
I. Why and how the U.S. Supreme Court has issued two important rulings that opened up room in constitutional jurisprudence for consideration of gay rights.
A. Yet the vast majority of other states have adopted statutes or constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. Do they right to revolt against government tyranny and fight for their rights
B. What states approve of same sex marriage? Which states deny same sex marriage? How has this happen?
II. In this Article, I argue that an individual who marries in her state of domicile and then migrates to a mini-defense of marriage act state has a significant liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause in the ongoing existence of her marriage.
A. Section 1 ARTICLE IV “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”
B. Courts generally agreed right applies to individuals
C. Government permitted to limit some rights of marriage by same sex.
D. Questions today center around: What bans our enforced presently on same sex marriage? Should it be mandatory for gays that want marriage neutral principle grounded in core Due Process Clause values: protection of reasonable expectations and of marital and family privacy, respect for established legal and social practices, and rejection of the idea that a state can sever a legal family relationship merely by operation of law?
III. Court cases outcome for gay marriages
A. The article cites a survey on the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in the U.S. which found that 50% of the American people are in favor of the amendment banning same-sex marriages while 47% strongly opposed.
B. This survey was conducted by Gallup Poll Ltd. conducted on May 8-11, 2006. Findings also revealed that 66% of the Republicans favor the constitutional amendment defining marriage as a heterosexual institution while 55% of the Democrats opposed the amendment.
C. United States v. Windsor, a narrow majority ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which comprehensively defined "marriage" and "spouse" in federal law to exclude same-sex partners, was unconstitutional.
D. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Court let stand a trial-court ruling invalidating California's Proposition 8, which outlawed same-sex marriage. Will Fourteenth Amendment still not incorporated to protect gay marriage
IV. There have been and there will continue to be disagreements about the merits of same-sex marriage. But disagree ...
The National Federation of Democratic Women supports ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment to guarantee equal rights regardless of sex. While some laws aim to prevent discrimination, they are inconsistent and can be repealed. The last three states ratified the ERA in 2017-2020, but the Archivist has not certified it due to a Trump administration opinion claiming issues with the ratification timeline. Supporters argue the 38 state threshold has been met and are appealing the lower court's dismissal. The NFDW calls on Congress and the Archivist to recognize the ERA as the 28th Amendment to solidify equal rights protections for all.
Indiana House - brief in support re [29] motion to intervene , filed by inte...Abdul-Hakim Shabazz
As Indiana lawmaker attempt to hire their own counsel to represent them in the sexual harassment case involving Attorney General Curtis Hill, they also spell out their own defenses as to why the state is not liable.
G. k. butterfield wikipedia (highlighted)VogelDenise
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
G K Butterfield's Bio and/or Biography – Do you know this HOUSE NEGRO?
In our pursuit of the OVERTHROW of the United States’ DESPOTISM Government Regime, we intend to seek the PROSECUTION of these House Negroes (i.e. some of which are LAWYERS). Please NOTE “HOW Many” were EDUCATED under WHITE INSTITUTIONS!
While the AGE REQUIREMENT is 25 Years Old to serve as a United States SENATOR and/or REPRESENTATIVE, as of 2017, the AGE RANGE for the House Negroes Serving is BETWEEN 40 – 88 Years Old!
This is SIGNIFICANT because the House Negroes Placed in the United States Congress are those who GREW UP in the Heart of the CIVIL RIGHTS Movement and EXPERIENCED the BRUTAL Murders/Killings of Civil Rights Leaders as Medgar Evers, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. Therefore, MAKING them EASY PREY to be CONTROLLED by THREATS and FEAR on their Lives and their Family Members MADE by WHITE Jews/Zionists and WHITE Supremacists!
Help BRING these HOUSE NEGROES to JUSTICE for the ROLES they have PLAYED in the TERRORIST/RACIST/DISCRIMINATORY Practices of the United States’ DESPOTISM Government Regime!
This House Negro had a DUTY and OBLIGATION to NOTIFY the Public/World of the Illegal/Unlawful Occupation of the DESPOT presently CONTROLLING and RUNNING the United States’ DESPOTISM Government Regime!
Moreover, the THREATS made (if any) by WHITE Jews/Zionists and WHITE Supremacists AGAINST them and/or their Family Members, Friends, etc.
Differences Between Congress, Voters, And Political PartiesMarisela Stone
This document discusses three factors that influence U.S. foreign policy: Congress, voters, and political parties. Congress affects policy through its constitutional powers to regulate commerce and declare war. Voters choose Congress members and influence their decisions through reelection. Political parties impact policy through partisanship and creating divisions.
This document is an indictment from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois charging Rod Blagojevich and others with racketeering conspiracy and related offenses. Specifically:
1) It alleges that Blagojevich and others used Blagojevich's position as Governor of Illinois and associated entities to engage in a pattern of racketeering activity including fraud and extortion schemes.
2) It charges that the purpose of the criminal enterprise was to exercise power over the Illinois government for financial and political benefit of Blagojevich and his associates.
3) It details specific means of the conspiracy including using government power to obtain financial benefits like campaign contributions in exchange for official acts.
The American Experiment to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" fleshing out through 14th Amendment, historical context, privileges and immunities clause, citizenship clause, equal protection clause, and due process clause. Illustrated through Gore v. Bush.
Korb v. Raytheon involved a Raytheon vice president, Korb, who was terminated after making remarks at a press conference that were critical of increased defense spending. Korb sued for wrongful termination claiming violation of his constitutional rights, but the court ruled in favor of Raytheon.
Garcetti v. Ceballos involved a prosecutor, Ceballos, who was retaliated against for writing a memo recommending dismissal of a case due to misrepresentations in an affidavit. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled Ceballos' speech was made pursuant to his job duties and was not protected by the First Amendment.
The document discusses additional challenges around freedom of speech, freedom of information, and
17Supreme Court Cases – the right to voteJesus Mojica.docxdrennanmicah
1
7
Supreme Court Cases – the right to vote
Jesus Mojica
History 121
Ochoa
November 6, 2018
Introduction
The Shelby county V. Holder, the United States V. Reese and the Ohio voter purge are Supreme Court cases which are concerned with the voting right in the United States. The United States being a federal state has to set out different voting rights in order to ensure that the voting processes are carried out efficiently in the state. These rights also define the voting in the different nations which fall under the United States federation. The three cases are therefore related since they are concerned with voting rights in the US. The Shelby county V. holder, 570 US 2 is concerned with a voting act which was passed back in the year 1965 requiring both the state and the local governments not to pass laws or voting policies that denied the American citizens their rights to vote in accordance to race among other differences among the citizens. The Supreme Court later took the case back in the year 2012 and was decided in the year 2013.
The united states V. Reese, 92 US 214 case on the other hand is a case whereby the us supreme court went ahead and interpreted the 15th amendment of the us constitution which was mainly that the citizens should not be restricted of suffrage due to their race, color as well as the fact that one is a slave. This case therefore was mainly restrictions of voters voting rights due to their various differences from the other citizens. The Ohio voter purge supreme court case lastly is mainly about voter’s suppression. It was presented in the Supreme Court back last year due to voter purging in that removing the voter’s registrations which are termed as outdated. This paper therefore explains in detail these three cases that are highly recognized in the United States Supreme Court.
Shelby County V. Holder
As mentioned before this case is mainly regarding the appeal by the Shelby County on the voting rights act which was passed back in 1965 in the American constitution. This case dwelled on two articles in the American constitution. The first article is the section 5 of the voting rights act which requires certain states or rather counties local governments to obtain the federal clearance before changing the voting practices in their areas. The other article is the section 4(b) of the voting rights act which states the jurisdictions of the clearance process and the basis of the local government’s history on voting discrimination. This information is contained in the coverage formula in this section of the voting rights act. The district and the court of appeal courts in USA upheld the constitutionality of the two sections of the voting acts back in 2006 and 2012. The district court had reauthorized the section 5 and also the continuing of the section 4(b) coverage formula back in 2006 while the court of appeal also agreed that the section 5 was justified and the section 4(b) coverage formula continued to outdo the c.
FOR THE ESSAY QUESTION 1 Example for case briefing Pl.docxAKHIL969626
FOR THE ESSAY QUESTION
1\ Example for case briefing
Please read and brief the following cases:
New York Times v. Sullivan
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/376/254
New York Times v. US
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/403/713
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
Facts of the case:
A government elected official brought suit in Alabama State Court, Montgomery
against the New York Times newspaper. The allegation was that a paid
advertisement appeared in the paper, that was presumed to be libelous to the
elected official. Libel, if intended with malicious purposes, could be used as a
reason to sue in Alabama.
The government official won the case but could not claim damages due to a lack of
evidence showing malicious intent.
Issues: The issue being disputed concerned if New York Times had intended malice
in its printing of the paid advertisement or if it had intentionally ignored facts in an
effort to harm. If this was the case, evidence existed against New York Times.
Decision: The Supreme Court, to which the New York Times appealed after initial
judgment in favor of the official, ruled 9 to 0 in favor of the New York Times.
Proof could not be established showing malicious intent on the part of the New
York Times.
Reasoning: The First and Fourteenth Amendments safeguard free speech and
damages cannot be awarded to an official by the State if the individual is unable to
prove a libelous statement has been made with malicious intent.
Conclusion: The case was a victory for the First Amendment and Fourteenth
Amendment that guaranteed that freedom of speech and press is afforded to the
citizens of the United States.
CASE BRIEFS 2
Title: New York Times Co. v. United States
Facts of the case: Richard Nixon acting under the US Govt. brought suit against the
New York Times attempting to prevent them from publishing classified articles.
Issues: The issue in question was if the New York Times was acting within its
constitutional right to publish freely (as a member of the press)
Decision: The Court ruling was in favor of the New York Times
Reasoning: It is unconstitutional to hinder free speech, as granted by the first
amendment, and if the New York Times was stopped from publication, then it
would be a direct attack against the rights of the people.
Conclusion: The final ruling secured the freedom of press and its ability to serve
the people without pressure from even the government.
2\ Example for case briefing
PLEASE READ AND BRIEF THE FOLLOWING CASES
BRANDENBURG V. OHIO
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/395/444
SCHENCK V. US
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/249/47
Title: Brandenburg v. Ohio
Facts of the case: A KKK leader was convicted under an Ohio law that allowed conviction for
promoting terroris ...
Dietrich was charged with drug trafficking offenses under the Customs Act 1901. He claimed he could not afford legal representation and requested a stay in proceedings to obtain counsel, but this was denied. On appeal, the High Court considered whether Dietrich had a right to legal representation given he faced serious charges but could not afford a lawyer. The Court acquitted Dietrich of one charge but upheld his conviction on other charges, finding the trial court did not have the power to appoint counsel but could have stayed proceedings to allow Dietrich to obtain representation.
Issues Whether Dietrich is liable for the drugs trafficking.pdfsdfghj21
Dietrich is charged with drug trafficking under the Customs Act. He claims the drugs were not his and requests legal representation since he cannot afford it, but his requests are denied. At his trial, Dietrich is convicted and sentenced to 7 years in prison. He appeals, arguing he was entitled to legal representation under common law tradition and international law. The High Court acquits Dietrich of one charge but upholds his conviction on other charges. However, two judges dissent, stating the courts have a duty to ensure legal representation for serious charges.
GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT372 U.S. 335Gideon v. Wainwright (No.docxbudbarber38650
GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT
372 U.S. 335
Gideon v. Wainwright (No. 155)
Argued: January 15, 1963
Decided: March 18, 1963
Reversed and cause remanded.
· Syllabus
· Opinion, Black
· Separate, Douglas
· Concurrence, Clark
· Concurrence, Harlan
Syllabus
Charged in a Florida State Court with a noncapital felony, petitioner appeared without funds and without counsel and asked the Court to appoint counsel for him, but this was denied on the ground that the state law permitted appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in capital cases only. Petitioner conducted his own defense about as well as could be expected of a layman, but he was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment. Subsequently, he applied to the State Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, on the ground that his conviction violated his rights under the Federal Constitution. The State Supreme Court denied all relief.
Held: The right of an indigent defendant in a criminal trial to have the assistance of counsel is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial, and petitioner's trial and conviction without the assistance of counsel violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Betts v. Brady,316 U.S. 455, overruled. Pp. 336-345.
[p336]
TOP
Opinion
BLACK, J., Opinion of the Court
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
Petitioner was charged in a Florida state court with having broken and entered a poolroom with intent to commit a misdemeanor. This offense is a felony under [p337]Florida law. Appearing in court without funds and without a lawyer, petitioner asked the court to appoint counsel for him, whereupon the following colloquy took place:
The COURT: Mr. Gideon, I am sorry, but I cannot appoint Counsel to represent you in this case. Under the laws of the State of Florida, the only time the Court can appoint Counsel to represent a Defendant is when that person is charged with a capital offense. I am sorry, but I will have to deny your request to appoint Counsel to defend you in this case.
The DEFENDANT: The United States Supreme Court says I am entitled to be represented by Counsel.
Put to trial before a jury, Gideon conducted his defense about as well as could be expected from a layman. He made an opening statement to the jury, cross-examined the State's witnesses, presented witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made a short argument "emphasizing his innocence to the charge contained in the Information filed in this case." The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and petitioner was sentenced to serve five years in the state prison. Later, petitioner filed in the Florida Supreme Court this habeas corpus petition attacking his conviction and sentence on the ground that the trial court's refusal to appoint counsel for him denied him rights "guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by the United States Government."[n1]Treating the petition for habeas corpus as properly before it, the State Supreme Court, "upon consideration thereof" but without an op.
I observed a circuit court proceeding involving a criminal case. The defendant was charged with assault and the prosecution called witnesses to testify about the alleged assault. The defense cross-examined the witnesses and called the defendant to testify. The judge ultimately found the defendant guilty based on the evidence presented.
The document provides biographical information about Barack Obama and Joe Biden. It states that Obama selected Joe Biden as his vice presidential running mate in 2008. Obama and Biden were elected in November 2008 and inaugurated in January 2009. Obama was then re-elected in 2012 with Biden again as his vice president. The document also provides some background on Obama's political career prior to becoming president.
1. The Supreme Court affirmed a lower court ruling that found Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. Section 3 defined marriage for federal purposes as between one man and one woman and denied federal benefits to same-sex couples legally married in their states.
2. The plaintiff, Edith Windsor, was legally married to her same-sex partner in Canada but was barred from claiming an estate tax exemption for surviving spouses under DOMA after her partner passed away. She paid estate taxes and sued for a refund.
3. While the plaintiff's case was pending, the Obama administration announced it would no longer defend DOMA in court. The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the House
The Growth & Opportunity Project report analyzes the Republican Party's performance in the 2012 election and makes recommendations for improving future campaigns. It conducted extensive research, including over 2,600 interviews, focus groups, surveys, and listening sessions. The report's key findings are that the Party's messaging is not connecting with various demographic groups, especially minorities, women and youth. It recommends updating messaging to emphasize compassion and economic opportunity for all. The future of the Party depends on adopting a more inclusive tone and developing policies that appeal to a diverse America.
The Tredyffrin Township Democrats ran a survey in January to gauge current involvement levels and interest in future participation. 77 people responded. The survey found that 95% read the FLASH newsletter, 34% "Like" the Facebook page, 56% do not use Twitter, and over 97% vote in every election or almost every election. Regarding involvement, 43% would like to be more involved, 26% are very involved, 22% are too busy to be involved, and 8% don't know what the organization does. Comments indicated that time constraints are a major barrier to involvement for many.
This report analyzes the relationship between top tax rates and economic growth in the United States since 1945. It finds that while the top marginal tax rate has decreased from over 90% to 35% over this period, there is no conclusive evidence of a clear relationship between the tax rate reductions and economic growth. The data suggest tax rate reductions have had little association with key factors like saving, investment and productivity growth. However, tax rates appear related to rising income inequality, with higher-income groups receiving a larger share of total income as rates have declined.
President Obama outlined a plan to strengthen the middle class and grow the economy through investments in manufacturing, energy, education, and reducing the deficit. He discussed creating 1 million new manufacturing jobs and 600,000 energy jobs by expanding domestic production. The plan aims to support small businesses, improve education through recruiting teachers and funding community colleges, and cut the deficit by more than $4 trillion through tax reforms and spending cuts.
The document describes A.A.A.D.D. (Age Activated Attention Deficit Disorder), where one gets easily distracted from tasks throughout the day. It provides an example of trying to water the garden but getting distracted by other chores like washing the car, paying bills, finding checks, putting away a Pepsi, watering flowers, and more, resulting in nothing getting fully completed. In the end, the person is tired and can't remember what they did all day but feels busy, and realizes they need help for this serious problem of getting easily distracted.
The document is a summary of key findings from the 2010 U.S. Election Assistance Commission Election Administration and Voting Survey. It describes the survey methodology, including revisions made for 2010. It also summarizes some of the main results regarding how Americans voted in 2010 such as in-person, absentee, early voting, and overseas/military voting. Finally, it provides highlights about election administration topics covered in the survey such as the number of poll workers, polling places, and types of voting technologies used.
The document is a memorandum opinion from a Commonwealth Court judge regarding a request to enjoin enforcement of Pennsylvania's voter ID law. In the opinion, the judge makes two determinations: 1) that the procedures for deploying alternate voter IDs do not meet the legal requirement of liberal access, and 2) that voter disenfranchisement will likely still occur before the upcoming election. As a result, the judge orders a preliminary injunction preventing the disenfranchisement provisions of the voter ID law from being enforced. The injunction is targeted to specifically address the issues identified by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court regarding voter access and disenfranchisement.
This Supreme Court of Pennsylvania order addresses a challenge to the state's Voter ID Law. The order summarizes that: (1) while the state has a legitimate interest in requiring voter ID, the law is not being implemented according to its terms and some voters will be disenfranchised; (2) state agencies acknowledge voters will be unable to obtain IDs and elections may be impaired; and (3) the Commonwealth Court denied a preliminary injunction based on predictions that education and remedial efforts will prevent disenfranchisement, but appellants argue more time is needed for implementation. The order reviews the Commonwealth Court's denial of a preliminary injunction for abuse of discretion.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive functioning. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
The document summarizes the impact of Pennsylvania Governor Corbett's proposed 2012-2013 budget on services in Philadelphia. It outlines proposed cuts to health and human services ($41 million reduction), education funding, public library subsidies, aging services, and probation/parole services. Specific impacts include increased homelessness, reduced mental health and addiction treatment, closure of 400 community residential beds, and increased burdens on other city departments. The budget also eliminates funding for the Homeowners Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program.
This Pennsylvania House Resolution declares 2012 as the "Year of the Bible" in Pennsylvania. It recognizes the formative influence of the Bible on the founding of the United States and Pennsylvania. It notes that many national leaders acknowledged this influence and that applying biblical teachings can strengthen the nation during challenging times. The resolution aims to renew knowledge of and faith in God through studying and applying the teachings of the holy scriptures.
This document summarizes how millions of Americans are losing their health insurance due to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). It discusses how a survey found that 45-50% of employers will likely drop coverage for employees after 2014 due to the law. It also provides examples of major health insurers exiting state markets, dropping certain plans, and reducing coverage options, impacting tens of thousands of individuals and small businesses. The author argues this is occurring due to onerous regulations in the ACA that are making it difficult for insurers to remain profitable and continue offering coverage.
This document is a report from the U.S. Census Bureau that summarizes key statistics on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States in 2010. It acknowledges those involved in preparing sections on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage. The report provides essential data on economic well-being and access to healthcare for Americans.
1. The document outlines President Obama's American Jobs Act, which includes proposals to cut payroll taxes for businesses and workers to encourage hiring, invest in infrastructure projects to put people back to work, reform unemployment insurance, and provide tax relief to middle class families.
2. It proposes tax cuts and credits for small businesses to hire new workers, veterans, and the long-term unemployed as well as investments in schools, transportation, and a national infrastructure bank.
3. Reforms to the unemployment system are aimed at helping the long-term unemployed transition back to work through job search assistance and flexible programs.
The letter urges President Obama to present an ambitious jobs plan that directly creates millions of jobs, including jobs in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other areas. It argues that bold action is needed to address the 25 million Americans who are unemployed or underemployed. Specifically, it recommends including Representative Jan Schakowsky's "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act" which would create over 2 million jobs and decrease unemployment by 1.3%. It also calls for raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for job creation and investment in economic recovery.
लालू यादव की जीवनी LALU PRASAD YADAV BIOGRAPHYVoterMood
Discover the life and times of Lalu Prasad Yadav with a comprehensive biography in Hindi. Learn about his early days, rise in politics, controversies, and contribution.
15062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
Why We Chose ScyllaDB over DynamoDB for "User Watch Status"ScyllaDB
Yichen Wei and Adam Drennan share the architecture and technical requirements behind "user watch status" for a major global media streaming service, what that meant for their database, the pros and cons of the many options they considered for replacing DynamoDB, why they ultimately chose ScyllaDB, and their lessons learned so far.
Shark Tank Jargon | Operational ProfitabilityTheUnitedIndian
Don't let fancy business words confuse you! This blog is your cheat sheet to understanding the Shark Tank Jargon. We'll translate all the confusing terms like "valuation" (how much the company is worth) and "royalty" (a fee for using someone's idea). You'll be swimming with the Sharks like a pro in no time!
केरल उच्च न्यायालय ने 11 जून, 2024 को मंडला पूजा में भाग लेने की अनुमति मांगने वाली 10 वर्षीय लड़की की रिट याचिका को खारिज कर दिया, जिसमें सर्वोच्च न्यायालय की एक बड़ी पीठ के समक्ष इस मुद्दे की लंबित प्रकृति पर जोर दिया गया। यह आदेश न्यायमूर्ति अनिल के. नरेंद्रन और न्यायमूर्ति हरिशंकर वी. मेनन की खंडपीठ द्वारा पारित किया गया
विवादास्पद फिल्म के ट्रेलर से गाली-गलौज वाले दृश्य हटा दिए गए हैं, और जुर्माना लगाया गया है। सुप्रीम कोर्ट और बॉम्बे हाई कोर्ट दोनों ने फिल्म की रिलीज पर रोक लगा दी है और उसे निलंबित कर दिया है। पहले यह फिल्म 7 जून और फिर 14 जून को रिलीज होने वाली थी, लेकिन अब यह 21 जून को रिलीज हो रही है।
मद्रास उच्च न्यायालय के सेवानिवृत्त न्यायाधीश और केंद्र और राज्य सरकार के नौकरशाहों सहित आठ अन्य लोगों की अध्यक्षता वाली एक उच्च स्तरीय समिति ने 2021 में NEET परीक्षा को खत्म करने की सिफारिश की थी। महत्वपूर्ण बात यह है कि रिपोर्ट में 2010-11 में ग्रामीण पृष्ठभूमि से तमिल छात्रों की संख्या में 61.5% की भारी गिरावट को दर्शाया गया है। इसके बजाय मेट्रो छात्रों में वृद्धि दर्ज की गई है।
17062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
La defensa del expresidente Juan Orlando Hernández, declarado culpable por narcotráfico en EE. UU., solicitó este viernes al juez Kevin Castel que imponga una condena mínima de 40 años de prisión.
18062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
Recent years have seen a disturbing rise in violence, discrimination, and intolerance against Christian communities in various Islamic countries. This multifaceted challenge, deeply rooted in historical, social, and political animosities, demands urgent attention. Despite the escalating persecution, substantial support from the Western world remains lacking.
#WenguiGuo#WashingtonFarm Guo Wengui Wolf son ambition exposed to open a far...rittaajmal71
Since fleeing to the United States in 2014, Guo Wengui has founded a number of projects in the United States, such as GTV Media Group, GTV private equity, farm loan project, G Club Operations Co., LTD., and Himalaya Exchange.
Christian persecution in Islamic countries has intensified, with alarming incidents of violence, discrimination, and intolerance. This article highlights recent attacks in Nigeria, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, and Iraq, exposing the multifaceted challenges faced by Christian communities. Despite the severity of these atrocities, the Western world's response remains muted due to political, economic, and social considerations. The urgent need for international intervention is underscored, emphasizing that without substantial support, the future of Christianity in these regions is at grave risk.
https://ecspe.org/the-rise-of-christian-persecution-in-islamic-countries/
19 जून को बॉम्बे हाई कोर्ट ने विवादित फिल्म ‘हमारे बारह’ को 21 जून को थिएटर में रिलीज करने का रास्ता साफ कर दिया, हालांकि यह सुनिश्चित करने के बाद कि फिल्म निर्माता कुछ आपत्तिजनक अंशों को हटा दें।
1. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) No. 08 CR 888-5
vs. ) Judge James B. Zagel
)
JOHN HARRIS )
PLEA AGREEMENT
1. This Plea Agreement between the United States Attorney for the Northern
District of Illinois, PATRICK J. FITZGERALD, and defendant JOHN HARRIS, and his
attorney, TERRY EKL, is made pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure and is governed in part by Rule 11(c)(1)(C), as more fully set forth below. The
parties to this Agreement have agreed upon the following:
Charge in This Case
2. Count Four of the superseding indictment (“indictment”) in this case charges
defendant with wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1343 and
1346.
3. Defendant has read the charge against him contained in Count Four of the
indictment, and that charge has been fully explained to him by his attorney.
4. Defendant fully understands the nature and elements of the crime with which
he has been charged.
Charge to Which Defendant is Pleading Guilty
2. 5. By this Plea Agreement, defendant agrees to enter a voluntary plea of guilty
to Count Four of the indictment. Count Four charges defendant with participating in a
scheme to commit wire fraud, including through the deprivation of honest services, in
violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1343 and 1346.
Factual Basis
6. Defendant will plead guilty because he is in fact guilty of the charge contained
in Count Four of the indictment. In pleading guilty, Defendant admits the following facts
and that those facts establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and constitute relevant
conduct pursuant to Guideline §1B1.3:
From approximately October 2008 to on or about December 9, 2008, in the Northern
District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Defendant, together with co-defendant Rod Blagojevich
and others, participated in a scheme to deprive the people of the State of Illinois of their
intangible right to the honest services of Defendant and Rod Blagojevich, in violation of Title
18, United States Code, Sections 1343 and 1346.
It was part of the scheme that beginning in or about October 2008, and continuing
until on or about December 9, 2008, Rod Blagojevich (“Blagojevich”), with the assistance
of Defendant and others, sought to obtain financial benefits for Blagojevich and his wife, in
return for the exercise of his duty under Illinois law to appoint a United States Senator to fill
the vacancy created by the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States. At
times Defendant assisted Blagojevich’s efforts to carry out the scheme by suggesting means
by which Blagojevich could secure personal benefits for himself in exchange for appointing
2
3. a United States Senator, conducting factual research relating to the scheme at Blagojevich’s
direction, and counseling Blagojevich on carrying out the scheme. At other times, Defendant
expressed opposition to Blagojevich’s efforts to enrich himself through his appointment of
a United States Senator, and/or did not follow instructions from Blagojevich to assist in those
efforts.
Specifically, starting in December 2005 and continuing until December 2008,
Defendant served as then Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s Chief of Staff. Over the
course of many months in 2008, Defendant participated in and was aware of discussions
involving Blagojevich and others about the possibility that Blagojevich might have the ability
to appoint someone to replace then-U.S. Senator Barack Obama if he won the general
election for the President of the United States. By early October 2008, Defendant
participated in regular conversations with Blagojevich about what personal benefits
Blagojevich could obtain in exchange for naming someone to the U.S. Senate seat should
Obama win the Presidency. As one example, around October 6, Blagojevich asked
Defendant what Blagojevich could get in exchange for the U.S. Senate seat. Defendant told
Blagojevich that the appointment could either reward an ally or make a new ally but that
Blagojevich could not trade the Senate seat for something for himself. In other discussions
with Blagojevich, Defendant and others told Blagojevich that he could not receive money
(either campaign money or other money) in exchange for naming someone to the Senate seat.
Blagojevich ignored Defendant’s statements.
3
4. Shortly before and immediately after the November 4, 2008 election of Barack Obama
as President of the United States, Blagojevich’s discussions with Defendant about
Blagojevich’s appointment of a replacement Senator became more frequent and more
detailed. Defendant participated in numerous discussions with Blagojevich and others about
this issue. Defendant was aware that Blagojevich was also talking to a small group of
internal and external advisors about this issue. Throughout the course of these discussions,
Blagojevich made it clear to Defendant that Blagojevich was not focused on what was in the
best interest of the people of the state of Illinois but instead was focused in large part on what
Blagojevich could get personally in exchange for the Senate appointment.
Around the time of the November 4 election, Defendant learned that Senate Candidate
B was interested in the Senate seat. Blagojevich discussed with Defendant that he wanted
to use Senate Candidate B’s interest in the Senate seat as a way to get something for himself
from President-elect Obama. Initially, Blagojevich wanted to be appointed Secretary of
Health and Human Services (“HHS”). On or about November 6, 2008, Blagojevich met with
Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Official A, who had been presented to
Blagojevich and Defendant as an emissary working on behalf of President-elect Obama with
respect to filling the Senate seat. Prior to the meeting, Defendant helped Blagojevich
strategize regarding how to ask SEIU Official A for the HHS position in exchange for
making Senate Candidate B the Senator. After the meeting, Blagojevich told Defendant and
others that during the meeting, he asked SEIU Official A for the HHS position in exchange
for making Senate Candidate B the Senator.
4
5. During discussions with Defendant, Blagojevich expressed interest in an
ambassadorship from President-elect Obama in exchange for making Senate Candidate B the
Senator. On or about November 5, 2008, Blagojevich directed Defendant and Deputy
Governor A to research ambassadorship options for him. Blagojevich also directed
Defendant and Deputy Governor A to research private foundations where he might be able
to get a high-paying position in exchange for making Senate Candidate B the Senator.
Defendant told Blagojevich that the private foundation option would give President-elect
Obama a buffer, meaning that it would not be obvious that Blagojevich was getting a position
in exchange for making Senate Candidate B the Senator. Defendant suggested that the
foundation would need to be a group that was dependent on federal funding, so that
President-elect Obama would have enough influence to get Blagojevich a position.
Blagojevich was very interested in this idea and told Defendant to look into options right
away.
Deputy Governor A asked whether Blagojevich was thinking about a position with
a private foundation for 2010 (when his term as Governor ended) or now. Blagojevich said
that he wanted the position now and wanted to know how much the position paid. Deputy
Governor A responded that the salary was likely $200,000 to $300,000. Blagojevich seemed
disappointed in that salary and asked something like, “Oh is that all?” At that point,
Defendant said that he thought the salary was more like $300,000 to $500,000. Blagojevich
had a more positive reaction to that salary. Blagojevich suggested that SEIU and other labor
unions provided funds to some private foundations and suggested those foundations be the
5
6. ones Defendant and Deputy Governor A research. Defendant understood that Blagojevich’s
personal financial circumstances and security were a significant consideration for
Blagojevich in his analysis of whom he should name to the Senate seat.
Blagojevich told Defendant that if he could not get a position directly through
President-elect Obama in exchange for picking a desired candidate, then Blagojevich would
seek a position through supporters of President-elect Obama in exchange for naming
someone to the Senate seat. Blagojevich asked Defendant to develop a union-based option
for him. The next day Defendant responded to his assignment by presenting Blagojevich
with an idea by which Blagojevich could become the national coordinator for an organization
named “Change to Win.” Change to Win is an organization associated with a number of
labor unions, including SEIU. Defendant suggested to Blagojevich that SEIU Officials A
and B, whom Defendant and Blagojevich believed were already acting as emissaries between
Blagojevich and President-elect Obama for purposes of picking a desired Senate candidate,
could get Blagojevich the Change to Win position in exchange for Blagojevich agreeing to
make Senate Candidate B the Senator. Defendant explained to Blagojevich that the benefit
to SEIU would be that SEIU would have helped President-elect Obama by getting
Blagojevich to appoint Senate Candidate B to the Senate and in exchange, President-elect
Obama would look favorably on SEIU’s agenda in President-elect Obama’s administration.
The benefit to Blagojevich would be a paid position as National Coordinator with Change
to Win. Defendant further explained that the benefits to President-elect Obama would be that
6
7. Blagojevich would appoint Senate Candidate B to the U.S. Senate seat, and SEIU Officials
A and B would act as a buffer between President-elect Obama and Blagojevich.
Defendant explained to Blagojevich that the Change to Win position would keep him
politically viable, pay him a salary, and provide him with union support and connections for
whatever he wanted to do down-the-road. Blagojevich said that he thought it was a great
idea, but was concerned that he would have to make the Senate appointment first, which
meant that SEIU could withhold the Change to Win position later. Defendant explained to
Blagojevich that part of the advantage to the Change to Win idea was that this was something
that SEIU Officials A and B could promise to Blagojevich now and Blagojevich could
believe that they would follow through on later, while part of the disadvantage to the Change
to Win idea was that it was not politically acceptable for Blagojevich to step down as
Governor to take that position. In response, Blagojevich suggested the possibility of having
his wife take a position now and then Blagojevich could take the national position later.
Defendant told him that this was not a good idea. Blagojevich asked Defendant what the
Change to Win position paid and asked whether he could get extra income if he sat on other
boards. Defendant speculated that the position would pay no more than SEIU Official A’s
salary.
On November 7, 2008, Defendant participated in a conference call with Blagojevich
and Advisor A, in which Blagojevich solicited Advisor A’s thoughts on the Change to Win
idea. Defendant knew that Advisor A was an outside consultant whom Blagojevich trusted
and upon whom Blagojevich relied for political advice. During the call, Blagojevich told
7
8. Advisor A what had happened at the November 6 meeting with SEIU Official A.
Blagojevich then directed Defendant to tell Advisor A about the Change to Win idea.
Defendant explained the idea and Advisor A responded in a very positive way. Advisor A
analogized the Change to Win deal to a three-way trade in baseball because it allowed
President-elect Obama to stay out of Illinois politics because he would have a buffer and
there would be no obvious quid pro quo for Senate Candidate B. Blagojevich told Advisor
A that he was looking for $250,000-$300,000 in salary and also to sit on some boards.
During the call, Defendant understood that Blagojevich was focused on obtaining money and
maintaining his political viability in his analysis of whom to name to the Senate seat. After
this call, defendant and Blagojevich learned that SEIU Official A’s salary was approximately
$125,000 to $150,000 annually. Upon learning this, Blagojevich was disappointed and
wanted to know if he could be paid more than SEIU Official A.
On or about November 12, 2008, the media reported that Senate Candidate B was
going to work at the White House. Defendant participated in a number of conversations with
Blagojevich about this development. Defendant believed that Senate Candidate B’s decision
to go to the White House caused Blagojevich to become anxious about losing leverage for
what he might be able to ask of President-elect Obama with respect to a position for himself.
At this point, Blagojevich began to express greater interest in the possibility that supporters
of President-elect Obama would establish and fund a 501(c)(4) organization for the benefit
of Blagojevich in exchange for a Senate seat appointment. Blagojevich asked Defendant to
8
9. reach out to United States Congressman A about this possibility. Defendant believed that
this was a direct quid pro quo and Defendant did not make any calls to further Blagojevich’s
request. Defendant concealed from Blagojevich that he did not follow Blagojevich’s
directive to contact United States Congressman A about the 501(c)(4). Blagojevich later told
Defendant that he had approached SEIU Official A about the 501(c)(4) idea and Blagojevich
said that SEIU Official A was going to “run it up the flag pole,” which Defendant took to
mean that he was going to check with representatives of President-elect Obama.
At this time, Blagojevich also pressed Defendant to have an “off campus” discussion
with Senate Candidate D. Defendant knew that this was a reference to Blagojevich’s prior
directive to Defendant to ask Senate Candidate D for Senate Candidate D’s remaining
campaign funds in exchange for appointing Senate Candidate D to the U.S. Senate Seat.
Sometime in the summer of 2008, Blagojevich told Defendant that if he appointed Senate
Candidate D to the vacant Senate seat, he would want and expect Senate Candidate D to give
Blagojevich some or all of Senate Candidate D’s campaign funds. Blagojevich raised this
topic, which was often referred to as “the off-campus discussion” with Senate Candidate D,
in several phone calls with Defendant. Defendant believed that Blagojevich was again
raising this issue because Blagojevich believed that a deal with representatives of President-
elect Obama involving Senate Candidate B was no longer a possibility.
In response to Blagojevich’s directives to him, on November 12, 2008, Defendant met
with Senate Candidate D in his Springfield office. During the meeting, Defendant had a
discussion with Senate Candidate D about his plans for his campaign funds that could not be
9
10. converted to personal use. Defendant did not directly tell Senate Candidate D that
Blagojevich was going to ask Senate Candidate D for his campaign funds. Based on what
Defendant did say, however, Defendant believed that Senate Candidate D was on notice that,
in relation to the Senate seat, Blagojevich was going to talk with Senate Candidate D about
Senate Candidate D’s campaign funds.
On or about December 4, 2008, Blagojevich told Defendant that Senate Candidate A,
through a third-party, had offered to raise $1.5 million in campaign funds for Blagojevich in
exchange for the U.S. Senate appointment. Defendant told Blagojevich that the offer to raise
funds should not be a factor in his decision, although it was clear to Defendant that a large
part of Blagojevich’s consideration for appointing Senate Candidate A to the Senate was the
offer of campaign funds. Defendant had previously advanced an argument in favor of Senate
Candidate A, listing all of the favorable points of a Senate Candidate A appointment, in
response to which Blagojevich had dismissed all of the points Defendant made and had
refused to even entertain the idea of appointing Senate Candidate A. Although Blagojevich
was previously not willing to consider Senate Candidate A, Defendant believed that
Blagojevich was now seriously considering Senate Candidate A because of the offer of
campaign funds.
In addition, Defendant was aware that, from time to time, in the course of considering
options to fill the open Senate seat, Blagojevich considered appointing certain other
individuals or appointing himself to the open Senate seat, often with personal benefits to
himself as part of Blagojevich’s consideration. For instance, with respect to appointing
10
11. himself, Blagojevich expressed a variety of reasons for doing so, including to possibly avoid
impeachment by the Illinois legislature, to obtain greater resources if he was indicted as a
sitting Senator as opposed to a sitting governor, and to facilitate his wife’s employment as
a lobbyist.
In or about the spring of 2008, around the time that Blagojevich’s wife passed her
Series 7 examination, which allowed her to sell financial securities, Blagojevich told
Defendant that Blagojevich wanted to get Blagojevich’s wife a job using her Series 7 license
with an entity that did business with the State of Illinois. Defendant told Blagojevich that
his wife could not work for an entity that did business with the State of Illinois. Despite this,
Blagojevich asked Defendant to set up informational or networking meetings for his wife
with financial institutions that had business with the State of Illinois in hopes that those
businesses would assist in getting Blagojevich’s wife a job. Defendant subsequently
arranged a meeting between Blagojevich’s wife and an official at a financial institution that
had business with the State of Illinois. Defendant also spoke with an official at another
financial institution that had business with the State of Illinois concerning that official
helping Blagojevich’s wife develop possible employment opportunities. When Blagojevich
concluded that officials at these institutions had been unhelpful in finding his wife a job,
Blagojevich told Defendant that he did not want the institutions to receive further business
from the State of Illinois. With respect to one of the institutions, Defendant told Blagojevich
that, because the entity had business through the state pension funds, Blagojevich did not
control those decisions. With respect to the other financial institution, despite Blagojevich’s
11
12. directive, Defendant did not prevent that institution from getting further business with the
State and avoided telling Blagojevich when the institution was applying for State business
so as to prevent Blagojevich from following through on his directive.
Further, in November and December 2008, in response to Chicago Tribune editorials
that had been critical of Blagojevich, Blagojevich directed Defendant to tell Tribune
Financial Advisor that Blagojevich was going to withhold state financial support that would
benefit the Tribune Company, unless the Tribune Owner fired people on the editorial board.
In order to appease Blagojevich, Defendant told Blagojevich that he would and did relay this
threat to Tribune Financial Advisor. Although Defendant did have a conversation with
Tribune Financial Advisor about the negative editorials regarding Blagojevich, Defendant
did not relay the threats as directed by Blagojevich.
On or about November 7, 2008, at Chicago, in the Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division, and elsewhere, Defendant and Blagojevich, for the purpose of executing
the above-described scheme, did knowingly cause to be transmitted by means of wire and
radio communication in interstate commerce signals and sounds, namely a phone call
between Blagojevich and Defendant, in Chicago, Illinois, and Advisor A, in Washington,
D.C., in which Blagojevich, Defendant, and Advisor A discussed financial benefits which
Blagojevich could request in exchange for the appointment of Senate Candidate B to the
United States Senate; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1343 and 1346.
7. The foregoing facts are set forth solely to assist the Court in determining
whether a factual basis exists for defendant’s plea of guilty, and are not intended to be a
12
13. complete or comprehensive statement of all the facts within defendant’s personal knowledge
regarding the charged crime and related conduct.
Maximum Statutory Penalties
8. Defendant understands that the charge to which he is pleading guilty carries
the following statutory penalties:
a. A maximum sentence of 20 years imprisonment. This offense also
carries a maximum fine of $250,000. Defendant further understands that the judge also may
impose a term of supervised release of not more than three years.
b. In accord with Title 18, United States Code, Section 3013, defendant
will be assessed $100 on the charge to which he has pled guilty, in addition to any other
penalty imposed.
Sentencing Guidelines Calculations
9. Defendant understands that in imposing sentence the Court will be guided by
the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Defendant understands that the Sentencing
Guidelines are advisory, not mandatory, but that the Court must consider the Guidelines in
determining a reasonable sentence.
10. For purposes of calculating the Sentencing Guidelines, the parties agree on the
following points:
a. Applicable Guidelines. The Sentencing Guidelines to be considered
in this case are those in effect at the time of sentencing. The following statements regarding
13
14. the calculation of the Sentencing Guidelines are based on the Guidelines Manual currently
in effect, namely the November 2008 Guidelines Manual.
b. Offense Level Calculations.
i. The base offense level for the offense of conviction is 14,
pursuant to Guideline §2C1.1(a)(1), because defendant was a public official.
ii. Pursuant to Guideline §2C1.1(b)(2), because the value to be
obtained exceeded $5000, the offense level is increased by the number of levels from the
table in §2B1.1.
iii. Pursuant to Guideline §2B1.1(b)(1)(H), a 14 level increase is
warranted because the pecuniary value of the intended loss foreseeable to defendant was
more than $400,000 but less that $1,000,000.
iv. Pursuant to Guideline §2C1.1(b)(3), a four level increase is
warranted because defendant and Blagojevich were public officials in high-level decision-
making or sensitive positions.
v. Pursuant to Guideline §3B1.2, a two level decrease is warranted
because defendant was a minor participant in the criminal activity.
vi. Defendant has clearly demonstrated a recognition and affirmative
acceptance of personal responsibility for his criminal conduct. If the government does not
receive additional evidence in conflict with this provision, and if defendant continues to
accept responsibility for his actions within the meaning of Guideline §3E1.1(a), including
by furnishing the United States Attorney’s Office and the Probation Office with all requested
14
15. financial information relevant to his ability to satisfy any fine that may be imposed in this
case, a two-level reduction in the offense level is appropriate.
vii. In accord with Guideline §3E1.1(b), defendant has timely
notified the government of his intention to enter a plea of guilty, thereby permitting the
government to avoid preparing for trial and permitting the Court to allocate its resources
efficiently. Therefore, as provided by Guideline §3E1.1(b), if the Court determines the
offense level to be 16 or greater prior to determining that defendant is entitled to a two-level
reduction for acceptance of responsibility, the government will move for an additional one-
level reduction in the offense level.
c. Criminal History Category. With regard to determining defendant’s
criminal history points and criminal history category, based on the facts now known to the
government, defendant’s criminal history points equal zero and defendant’s criminal history
category is I.
d. Anticipated Advisory Sentencing Guidelines Range. Therefore,
based on the facts now known to the government, the anticipated offense level is 27, which,
when combined with the anticipated criminal history category of I, results in an anticipated
advisory Sentencing Guidelines range of 70 to 87 months’ imprisonment, in addition to any
supervised release, fine, and restitution the Court may impose.
e. Defendant and his attorney and the government acknowledge that the
above Guideline calculations are preliminary in nature, and are non-binding predictions upon
which neither party is entitled to rely. Defendant understands that further review of the facts
15
16. or applicable legal principles may lead the government to conclude that different or
additional Guideline provisions apply in this case. Defendant understands that the Probation
Office will conduct its own investigation and that the Court ultimately determines the facts
and law relevant to sentencing, and that the Court’s determinations govern the final
Guideline calculation. Accordingly, the validity of this Agreement is not contingent upon
the probation officer’s or the Court’s concurrence with the above calculations, and defendant
shall not have a right to withdraw his plea on the basis of the Court’s rejection of these
calculations.
f. Both parties expressly acknowledge that this plea agreement is not
governed by Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(1)(B), and that errors in applying or interpreting any of the
Sentencing Guidelines may be corrected by either party prior to sentencing. The parties may
correct these errors either by stipulation or by a statement to the Probation Office or the
Court, setting forth the disagreement regarding the applicable provisions of the Guidelines.
The validity of this Plea Agreement will not be affected by such corrections, and defendant
shall not have a right to withdraw his plea, nor the government the right to vacate this Plea
Agreement, on the basis of such corrections.
Cooperation
11. Defendant agrees he will fully and truthfully cooperate in any matter in which
he is called upon to cooperate by a representative of the United States Attorney’s Office for
the Northern District of Illinois. This cooperation shall include providing complete and
truthful information in any investigation and pre-trial preparation and complete and truthful
16
17. testimony in any criminal, civil or administrative proceeding. Defendant agrees to the
postponement of his sentencing until after the conclusion of his cooperation.
Agreements Relating to Sentencing
12. At the time of sentencing, the government shall make known to the sentencing
judge the extent of defendant’s cooperation. If the government determines that defendant has
continued to provide full and truthful cooperation as required by this plea agreement, then
the government shall move the Court, pursuant to Guideline §5Kl.l, to depart from the
applicable Guideline range and to impose the specific sentence agreed to by the parties as
outlined below. Defendant understands that the decision to depart from the applicable
guidelines range rests solely with the Court.
13. If the government moves the Court, pursuant to Sentencing Guideline §5K1.1,
to depart from the applicable Guideline range, as set forth in the preceding paragraph, this
Agreement will be governed, in part, by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C).
That is, the parties agree that any sentence of imprisonment shall not exceed fifty percent
(50%) of the low end of Federal Sentencing Guidelines range applicable to defendant’s
offense. It is also agreed that while the government will recommend a sentence of
imprisonment that is 50% of the low end of Federal Sentencing Guidelines range applicable
to defendant’s offense, defendant and his attorney are free to ask the sentencing court for any
sentence deemed to be appropriate. Other than the agreed maximum term of incarceration,
the parties have agreed that the Court remains free to impose the sentence it deems
appropriate. If the Court accepts the agreed maximum term of incarceration set forth herein,
17
18. defendant may not withdraw this plea as a matter of right under Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 11(d) and (e). If, however, the Court does not agree to the agreed maximum term
of incarceration set forth herein, thereby rejecting this plea agreement, or otherwise refuses
to accept defendant’s plea of guilty, either party has the right to withdraw from this plea
agreement.
14. If the government does not move the Court, pursuant to Sentencing Guideline
§5K1.1, to depart from the applicable Guideline range, as set forth above, this plea agreement
will not be governed, in any part, by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C), the
preceding paragraph of this plea agreement will be inoperative, and the Court shall impose
a sentence taking into consideration the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) as well as the
Sentencing Guidelines without any downward departure for cooperation pursuant to §5K1.1.
Defendant may not withdraw his plea of guilty because the government has failed to make
a motion pursuant to Sentencing Guideline §5K1.1.
15. Defendant agrees to pay the special assessment of $100 at the time of
sentencing with a cashier’s check or money order payable to the Clerk of the U.S. District
Court.
Presentence Investigation Report/Post-Sentence Supervision
16. Defendant understands that the United States Attorney’s Office in its
submission to the Probation Office as part of the Pre-Sentence Report and at sentencing shall
fully apprise the District Court and the Probation Office of the nature, scope and extent of
defendant’s conduct regarding the charge against him, and related matters. The government
18
19. will make known all matters in aggravation and mitigation relevant to the issue of sentencing,
including the nature and extent of defendant’s cooperation.
17. Defendant agrees to truthfully and completely execute a Financial Statement
(with supporting documentation) prior to sentencing, to be provided to and shared among the
Court, the Probation Office, and the United States Attorney’s Office regarding all details of
his financial circumstances, including his recent income tax returns as specified by the
probation officer. Defendant understands that providing false or incomplete information, or
refusing to provide this information, may be used as a basis for denial of a reduction for
acceptance of responsibility pursuant to Guideline §3E1.1 and enhancement of his sentence
for obstruction of justice under Guideline §3C1.1, and may be prosecuted as a violation of
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 or as a contempt of the Court.
18. For the purpose of monitoring defendant’s compliance with his obligations to
pay a fine during any term of supervised release or probation to which defendant is
sentenced, defendant further consents to the disclosure by the IRS to the Probation Office
and the United States Attorney’s Office of defendant’s individual income tax returns
(together with extensions, correspondence, and other tax information) filed subsequent to
defendant’s sentencing, to and including the final year of any period of supervised release
or probation to which defendant is sentenced. Defendant also agrees that a certified copy of
this Plea Agreement shall be sufficient evidence of defendant’s request to the IRS to disclose
the returns and return information, as provided for in Title 26, United States Code, Section
6103(b).
19
20. Acknowledgments and Waivers Regarding Plea of Guilty
Nature of Plea Agreement
19. This Plea Agreement is entirely voluntary and represents the entire agreement
between the United States Attorney and defendant regarding defendant’s criminal liability
in case 08 CR 888-5.
20. This Plea Agreement concerns criminal liability only. Except as expressly set
forth in this Agreement, nothing herein shall constitute a limitation, waiver or release by the
United States or any of its agencies of any administrative or judicial civil claim, demand or
cause of action it may have against defendant or any other person or entity. The obligations
of this Agreement are limited to the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District
of Illinois and cannot bind any other federal, state or local prosecuting, administrative or
regulatory authorities, except as expressly set forth in this Agreement.
Waiver of Rights
21. Defendant understands that by pleading guilty he surrenders certain rights,
including the following:
a. Trial rights. Defendant has the right to persist in a plea of not guilty
to the charge against him, and if he does, he would have the right to a public and speedy trial.
i. The trial could be either a jury trial or a trial by the judge sitting without
a jury. Defendant has a right to a jury trial. However, in order that the trial be conducted by
the judge sitting without a jury, defendant, the government, and the judge all must agree that
the trial be conducted by the judge without a jury.
20
21. ii. If the trial is a jury trial, the jury would be composed of twelve
citizens from the district, selected at random. Defendant and his attorney would participate
in choosing the jury by requesting that the Court remove prospective jurors for cause where
actual bias or other disqualification is shown, or by removing prospective jurors without
cause by exercising peremptory challenges.
iii. If the trial is a jury trial, the jury would be instructed that
defendant is presumed innocent, that the government has the burden of proving defendant
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the jury could not convict him unless, after
hearing all the evidence, it was persuaded of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury
would have to agree unanimously before it could return a verdict of guilty or not guilty.
iv. If the trial is held by the judge without a jury, the judge would
find the facts and determine, after hearing all the evidence, whether or not the judge was
persuaded that the government had established defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
v. At a trial, whether by a jury or a judge, the government would
be required to present its witnesses and other evidence against defendant. Defendant would
be able to confront those government witnesses and his attorney would be able to cross-
examine them.
vi. At a trial, defendant could present witnesses and other evidence
in his own behalf. If the witnesses for defendant would not appear voluntarily, he could
require their attendance through the subpoena power of the Court. A defendant is not
required to present any evidence.
21
22. vii. At a trial, defendant would have a privilege against self-
incrimination so that he could decline to testify, and no inference of guilt could be drawn
from his refusal to testify. If defendant desired to do so, he could testify in his own behalf.
b. Waiver of appellate and collateral rights. Defendant further
understands he is waiving all appellate issues that might have been available if he had
exercised his right to trial. Defendant is aware that Title 28, United States Code, Section
1291, and Title 18, United States Code, Section 3742, afford a defendant the right to appeal
his conviction and the sentence imposed. Acknowledging this, if the government makes a
motion at sentencing for a downward departure pursuant to Sentencing Guideline § 5K1.1,
defendant knowingly waives the right to appeal his conviction, any pre-trial rulings by the
Court, and any part of the sentence (or the manner in which that sentence was determined),
including any term of imprisonment and fine within the maximums provided by law, and
including any order of restitution or forfeiture, in exchange for the concessions made by the
United States in this Plea Agreement. Defendant also waives his right to challenge his
conviction and sentence, and the manner in which the sentence was determined, and (in any
case in which the term of imprisonment and fine are within the maximums provided by
statute) his attorney’s alleged failure or refusal to file a notice of appeal, in any collateral
attack or future challenge, including but not limited to a motion brought under Title 28,
United States Code, Section 2255. The waiver in this paragraph does not apply to a claim
of involuntariness, or ineffective assistance of counsel, which relates directly to this waiver
or to its negotiation, nor does it prohibit defendant from seeking a reduction of sentence
22
23. based directly on a change in the law that is applicable to defendant and that, prior to the
filing of defendant’s request for relief, has been expressly made retroactive by an Act of
Congress, the Supreme Court, or the United States Sentencing Commission.
c. Defendant understands that by pleading guilty he is waiving all the
rights set forth in the prior paragraphs. Defendant’s attorney has explained those rights to
him, and the consequences of his waiver of those rights. Defendant understands that he has
the right to have the criminal charge in the indictment brought within five years of the last
of the alleged acts constituting the specified violation. By signing this document, defendant
knowingly waives any right to have the charge in the indictment brought against him within
the period established by the statute of limitations. Defendant also knowingly waives any
defense or claim based upon the statute of limitations or upon the timeliness with which the
charge in the indictment was brought.
Other Terms
22. Defendant agrees to cooperate with the United States Attorney’s Office in
collecting any unpaid fine for which defendant is liable, including providing financial
statements and supporting records as requested by the United States Attorney’s Office.
Conclusion
23. Defendant understands that this Plea Agreement will be filed with the Court,
will become a matter of public record and may be disclosed to any person.
24. Defendant understands that his compliance with each part of this Plea
Agreement extends throughout the period of his sentence, and failure to abide by any term
23
24. of the Agreement is a violation of the Agreement. Defendant further understands that in the
event he violates this Agreement, the government, at its option, may move to vacate the
Agreement, rendering it null and void, and thereafter prosecute defendant not subject to any
of the limits set forth in this Agreement, or may move to resentence defendant or require
defendant’s specific performance of this Agreement. Defendant understands and agrees that
in the event that the Court permits defendant to withdraw from this Agreement, or defendant
breaches any of its terms and the government elects to void the Agreement and prosecute
defendant, any prosecutions that are not time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations
on the date of the signing of this Agreement may be commenced against defendant in
accordance with this paragraph, notwithstanding the expiration of the statute of limitations
between the signing of this Agreement and the commencement of such prosecutions.
25. Defendant and his attorney acknowledge that no threats, promises, or
representations have been made, nor agreements reached, other than those set forth in this
Plea Agreement to cause defendant to plead guilty.
26. Defendant acknowledges that he has read this Plea Agreement and carefully
reviewed each provision with his attorney. Defendant further acknowledges that he
understands and voluntarily accepts each and every term and condition of this Agreement.
AGREED THIS DATE: _____________________
PATRICK J. FITZGERALD JOHN HARRIS
24
25. United States Attorney Defendant
CARRIE E. HAMILTON TERRY EKL
Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorney for Defendant
25