Solved! Rutland Herald, Facebook and loose lips

Business, National, , , ,

Hold the presses! A mysterious Department of Defense-US Navy oversized load being hauled by truck goes off the road on Wednesday while traveling through rural Vermont. Susan Smallheer at The Rutland Herald/Times Argus  smells a story, starts making calls — officials refuse to answer questions and won’t speculate.

Front pageThe newspaper presses officials for information — they ask: Helicopter blades headed for the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard? No, said Lt. Kevin Andrews of the Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles.

Cruise missiles? “I’m not going to speculate,” said Colleen O’Rourke of the Navy’s Naval Sea Systems Command.

The facts as known and reported Friday, July 8, by The Times Argus/ Rutland Herald:

The long, unmarked gray metal container originated in Williamsburg, Virginia, and was being hauled to New Hampshire by Crofton Specialized Hauling of Virginia, according to Lt. Kevin Andrews of the Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles.

The reporter was stymied regarding the contents of the hauler, and the mystery deepened: Officials at the shipping company didn’t return messages Thursday. Andrews said the shipment entered Vermont on Route 279 in Bennington, and at the time of the crash, it had been making a turn from Route 103 to head north on I-91.

Security must not be all that good at Crofton Specialized Hauling in Virginia as they posted an image of the truck and what the “secret” cargo was on July 1 –– days earlier on Facebook. Crofton ind.Seven days later and the paper never checked.

The cargo, it turns out, is a ship’s propeller shaft — or in Navy-speak, a “primary output shaft for a Navy cruiser”; for now reports are that it, along with the truck and driver, will stay in Vermont until repairs can be made.

Well, next time, Times Argus/Herald reporters, you may find it first on Facebook. And in case you are wondering, Crofton Specialized Hauling hasn’t posted anything more to Facebook about it — better check Twitter. And how about that next “secret” D.O.D/US Navy hauling contract…

Racism and Gun Culture: the Perfect Storm

National, ,

What happened last night in Dallas was tragic, but probably inevitable in a nation where racism and gun culture have long had the potential to seamlessly combine.

Plenty of attention, both useful and exacerbating, will be devoted to the role that racism appears to have played in this latest mass-murder, but I expect that far less will be said about the familiar signature of the lone gunman equipped to take out an army.

The penny has yet to drop on the likelihood that, following years of spectacularly bad news about the justice system and race in America, imbalanced and aggrieved individuals who exist in the black community just as surely as they do in the white community, have finally heeded the message carried by the NRA, and even Donald Trump, that the only way to deal with gun violence is to arm yourself and enter, guns blazing, into the fray.

Sadly, this day has been coming for a long time, as we allowed gun-rights advocates to dominate the regulatory conversation, and arms manufacturers took advantage of ginned-up paranoia to dump an arsenal of ever more lethal weapons on the streets.

On the books, gun manufacturers look like they’ve just been good businessmen, in the fine old tradition of free enterprise. In reality, the Wild West has been opening up all across America.

Who’d have thought that the disadvantaged and legitimately aggrieved might be listening to the same paranoid messaging that amps-up Trump rallies: “Don’t trust the government;” “Anyone who doesn’t look like you might be the Enemy,” “Arm yourself for Armegeddon.”

It used to be that white men were more likely to be packing heat than black men; but in just the two incidents within twenty-four hours that prompted the Dallas mass murder, both black victims of police shootings were found to be carrying guns; and that mere fact was cited by the shooters as a risk to their own safety that seemed to justify lethal force.

In neither case did the victim actually withdraw the gun from his person or threaten the detaining officer in any way. The mere presence of the civilian gun in the scene seems to have raised tension so much as to cost the carrier his life.

If history has taught us anything, it is that the pattern of shootings will continue and escalate into as yet unthinkable territory; and it may be too late to do anything about it.

Even common sense gun regulation, unlikely to ever get a vote in Congress, can only do so much to make us safer at this point.

By allowing the arguments of gun ‘rights’ advocates to twist and bend the Second Amendment into something it was never meant to be, we have, as a nation, surrendered our future to a perpetual cycle of unparalleled gun violence.

Anyone who thought that the poor and the downtrodden wouldn’t eventually arm themselves and turn their guns on their perceived tormenters was kidding themselves.

Welcome to the United States of Armerica.

Peter Welch gets it.

Uncategorized,

Apparently, House Democrats actually booed Bernie Sanders today when he didn’t commit to a speedy endorsement of Hillary Clinton, which comes as no surprise to his steadfast supporters.

The notable exception to this establishment fit of pique was Vermont’s own Congressman Peter Welch, a bold Bernie endorser, who today  restated Sanders’ own message, that this is not just about winning a single election:

A lot of members are anxious about when is he going to explicitly support Hillary,” said Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.). “And what he’s saying is that’s an ongoing process. But if we want to win, we’ve got to take the long view that we need a platform that is going to genuinely create excitement for our nominee…What he said very clearly is we’ve got to beat Trump, and the way he believes we’re going to do it is by having a commitment to an agenda that excites people, including the younger people. And he’s working on that.”

Exactly.

Party stalwarts who seek to extinguish the Bernie phenomena, do so at their own risk. The vast crowds that turned out to hear Bernie on the campaign trail are building on a movement that first brought its aspirations to support Barack Obama; then, frustrated by glacial progress, evolved into Occupy Wall Street.

If their demands are callously exploited and swept aside once again for short-term political considerations, the Democratic party will have squandered an entire generation of support.

What better time to move forward with commonsense progressive agenda items that reflect the values of our increasingly diverse youth population, than when the Republican nominee is the most unpopular, even repellant candidate in recent history?

It’s now, or, quite possibly, never.

Burlington’s Open Meeting Problem

local/regional, , , , , ,

‘Sounds like it’s time for Sec. of State Jim Condos to bring his celebrated
Transparency Tour to the big city of Burlington.

I used to think Franklin County was the poster child for dodgy open-meeting practices, but this week, Miro Weinberger and company seem to be giving FC a run for its money.

On GMD, we’ve long questioned the wisdom of locating F-35 fighter planes in the densely populated area that is Burlington Airport. We’ve read the well-articulated concerns of neighbors and the glaringly deficient conclusions of officialdom.

We know that Burlington probably wouldn’t even have been considered for the siting if it were not for the concentrated efforts of Senator Leahy, the Chittenden County political elite and the development community, which seems to play a central role in local decision making.

Even assuming the best of intentions on the part of all of these interested parties, legitimate public concerns always seem to get short-shrift.

When such a controversial topic is discussed before City Councilors, one would think there would be special care taken to ensure that the rules governing open meetings are scrupulously observed, even to the point of over-compensation.

Even though the notice posted announcing the meeting stated that “no Council business will be discussed,” a quorum of Councilors was present (the minimum number of Councilors necessary to conduct Council business), and that of and by itself triggers the ‘open meeting’ requirement and all the rules associated with an open meeting.

To say that no Council business would be discussed is a bit disingenuous in any case, as a presentation by the Guard would undoubtedly involve some mention of the F-35 siting and questions and answers of interest to the public who are engaged on either side of the issue.

It is my understanding that, to remain within the confines of Open Meeting Law, either the public must be free to attend, or the number of Councilors in attendance must be below the number required to conduct a legal vote. If a quorum must be in attendance, the Council has no choice but to gavel a meeting before the public.

After that, if it can be justified under the limitations governing open meetings, the Council may go into Executive Session, excluding the public from the conversation. But there are strict rules governing the circumstances under which Executive Session may be convened. I believe the only allowable reasons are to discuss a city employee or legal matters which my be adversely affected by premature disclosure. They should be prepared to summarily explain why Executive Session is justified, and they must come out of Executive Session if a vote is to be taken.

In any case, maintaining public trust should be paramount in any question of excluding citizens from a Council gathering.

While the Secretary of States office is relatively powerless in enforcing open meeting rules, Jim Condos has recognized that Vermont has a problem in that area, and initiated his annual “Transparency Tour” not long after he took office.

Since receiving a polite reminder of the obligation to follow the open meeting rules a couple of years ago, I am happy to say that the City of St. Albans appears to have become much more conscientious. Apparently, the same cannot necessarily be said of Burlington.

As I have discovered, there is little legal recourse for the aggrieved in the event of an open meeting violation, so it is not surprising to learn that

“None of the community members…are currently pursuing any action.”

Somebody, please neuter Bill Clinton

National, Uncategorized, , ,

As a baby, was Bill Clinton dropped on his head?

No one has contributed more to Hillary Clinton’s credibility problems than ol’ Blue Eyes, himself. Unbelievably, with  his impromptu drop-in to the Attorney General’s plane, he’s done it again…big time!

It’s almost as if he does it on purpose.

It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that it was Bill’s bright idea to have a private email server!

I’ve never quite seen what some people like about this corn-fed romeo, but nobody thinks more highly of Bill than he obviously does of himself.

If I’d have been Hillary, I’d have left him facedown in the dirt many years ago.

She was obviously so much smarter than he, even as he occupied the Oval Office. Perhaps it was the subliminal knowledge of her fundamental superiority that egged him on to act out passive-aggressively in riskier ways.

Many would argue that his choices of where and with whom to misbehave on the most famous occasions were expressing a subconscious desire to get caught.

Should the worst come to pass and ‘Il Dumbi‘ beats Hillary in the General, everyone will undoubtedly blame Bernie.

They will be wrong to do so for several reasons, not least of which is the contribution to Hillary’s problems that Bill Clinton has made, not just every time he opened his mouth in this election cycle, but over the years of his administration and beyond.  He seems to have done his level-best to handicap any future ambitions of his long-suffering wife by acting on a mixture of impulse and arrogance that is not entirely unreminiscent of You-Know-Who.

EB-5 “ponzi” brokerage Raymond James: Flashing blue lights in the rear view mirror

Business, local/regional, , , , ,

The Vermont Commissioner of the Department Financial Regulation, Susan Donegan, has announced a $5.95 million agreement with Raymond James Associates, a Florida-based securities broker-dealer. brokerwhacking

This is the brokerage firm implicated in the massive Jay Peak EB-5 ponzi scheme allegedly perpetrated by partners Bill Stenger and Ariel Quiros. The pair face a variety of federal and state lawsuits and are accused of misappropriating $200 million EB-5 immigrant investor economic development funds.

Federal and State lawsuits allege the brokerage house broke securities regulations by arranging illegal access to EB-5 immigrant investor funds.  Quiros’ ready access to these funds played a pivotal role in the complicated illegal eight-year scheme to flow money away from the mandated EB-5 targeted development at Jay Peak, Burke Mountain Resorts (formerly Q-Burke) and other NEK EB-5 job creating projects.

In a press release announcing the settlement Vermont DFR Commissioner Donegan explained: This agreement provides for the payment of $4.5 million to the appointed federal receiver in the case SEC v. Quiros for the purpose of reimbursing possible claims by investors. Additionally, $200,000 will be paid to DFR for the cost of the investigation and $1.25 million will be paid to Vermont’s general fund as an administrative penalty.

The broker agreed to the settlement terms but is not required to admit to or deny the department’s allegations. DFR’s Donegan has said the brokerage had “inadequate written supervisory procedures” for collateralization of margin loans. The Commissioner pointedly notes the firm ultimately profited from the Jay Peak EB-5 fund transactions.

Well, the $5.95 million payout that Vermont DFR got may sound like tidy sum money, but look at it this way: it is less than what Raymond James pays their CEO Paul Reilly. His total pay package for 2015 is estimated to be $7.8 million (up 37.7%) and all four top executives at the firm made over three million each in 2015. Last year the company recorded an annual income of $502.1 million, up 7 percent, not exactly proportional to the boost its CEO got.

The firm also has a long trail of fines paid out over the years. Lax supervisory procedures, such as those mentioned by Commissioner Donegan, appear to be a feature — not an aberration — at the brokerage house Ariel Quiros chose to help build his complex web of alleged financial fraud.

In 2007 Raymond James was fined $2.75 million by the National Association of Securities Dealers for failing to maintain an adequate supervisory system to oversee the sales activities of over 1,000 producing branch managers working in offices throughout the United States.

And in May 2016 the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc.(FINRA) fined them a record-setting $17 million for widespread compliance failures in the brokerage firm’s anti-money laundering programs.

(FINRA, the Wall Street funded industry watchdog, is the successor to the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. [NASD]. It is a non-governmental organization that regulates member brokerage firms and exchange markets.)

 Raymond James Associates reportedly is pleased that a guilt-free settlement was reached with Vermont DFR. No doubt they are happy to be clear of this latest little bit of unpleasantness — and it must seem a bargain price at only $5.95 million! moneygo1

The amount will likely not satisfy the EB-5 immigrant investors seeking green cards, and it won’t do a thing to put the NEK economy back together again.

The settlement is simply the cost of doing business for a brokerage firm like Raymond James — on the level of a speeding ticket for the rest of us. And there is no admission of “wrong doing,” so no points accumulated on their brokerage “driving licenses.”

Given the firm’s history, there’s no evidence that such a penalty will even make its managers wary enough to look in their rear-view mirrors for flashing blue lights.

Norm McAllister assaults the system…and gets away with it…again.

local/regional, , , ,

So, accused rapist/sex trafficker Norm McAllister will remain on the Republican primary ballot for senator even though his petition has been found to be deficient.  I hear fellow Republican candidate Carolyn Branagan’s cry of indignation and I share it!

Mr McAllister must be some sort of human detector for weaknesses in Vermont’s judiciary and legislative systems.

So far, he has succeeded in exploiting no less than five significant failures, and he hasn’t even come to trial yet to face accusations made by two more women.

1) The lack of meaningful protections for the vulnerable in the private workplace.

2) An apparent culture of “don’t ask; don’t tell” in the statehouse, where the extreme youth
of Mr. McAllister’s omnipresent ‘intern’ should have raised concerns and led to timely interventions.

3) The lack of a meaningful ethics policy governing legislators.

4) The lack of adequate provision in court for the PTSD disability common to victims of sexual abuse.

5) The lack of effective vetting practices to validate candidate petitions.

I’m sure there are more, but these spring most quickly to mind. Do not look for a grasp of reality anytime soon from this man because both Franklin County and the state of Vermont have yet to demonstrate any ability to bring his arrogance and his appetites to heel.

US House Republican leadership: Democrats’ sit-in supports terrorism!

National, , , , ,

“I… I don’t know exactly how to put this, sir, but are you aware of what a serious breach of security that would be? I mean, he’ll see everything, he’ll… he’ll see the Big Board!” General “Buck” Turgidson

Speaker Paul Ryan got on a local talk radio program from his home state and vented about how horrible the Democrats were for staging a sit-in on the House floor to force a vote on gun control measures. Vermont Congressman Peter Welch and Senators Leahy and Sanders joined in the demonstration that took place last week. Cllh0V2XIAUg6yh

Speaker Ryan, perhaps embarrassed by losing control of the situation on his House floor called the action  a “a low moment for the people’s House,”  He threatened Republicans “will not tolerate” it if Democrats launch another sit-in on the House floor after the Fourth of July recess to force a vote on gun control.

Republican grumblings include calling for a vote to censure Democrats that took part in the sit-in. The Hill.com explains the Republican’s argument:

…photographing and filming from all angles on the floor jeopardizes national security and the lives of members of Congress. Terrorists could study the images to help them prepare for a possible attack on the Capitol.  fullhouse

“There are safety and national security reasons that that is the rule,” said a lawmaker close to leadership. “And it is extraordinary that they ignored it.” 

Donald Trump, Boris Johnson and a popular idiom

International, Uncategorized, , ,

The newspaper editor decided to devote more space to photographs of the disaster than to text, since a picture is worth a thousand words.

trumpboris

In the aftermath of the UK Brexit vote to leave the EU, Donald Trump promoted his Golf course in Scotland; he seemed stunningly unaware the Scots had voted against it and were furious with the result. “They took their country back …” he happily tweeted and later said it would be good for his businesses.

And Boris Johnson … well how about Boris Johnson? Well,that’s Johnson stuck,hanging on a zipline in 2012 when he was Mayor of London. He was celebrating Great Britain’s Olympic victories. The Guardian described the event:

But after a promising start gliding along happily waving his flags, he lost momentum and came to a halt, dangling over a crowd of people, for a long and somewhat awkward moment.

Trump’s blather sounds a little like the way Boris’ Brexit victory may be remembered: a long awkward moment until he falls.

Update: Is this what scuttled the McAllister trial?

local/regional, ,

As I have already said elsewhere, I sat in disbelief last Wednesday as the Prosecution dropped the charges of multiple sexual assaults against suspended senator Norm McAllister.  This, after putting the fragile victim through something like five hours of clearly painful and humiliating public testimony while the accused, seated with his back to the curious crowd, was spared the need for any account of himself.

I was further dismayed to see so little concern over the decision expressed by conventional media. Emphasis seemed to rest on the Defense’s unchallenged assertion that McAllister had been “vindicated.” Attorneys for the two sides shook hands amicably and left the courtroom without really explaining what had happened.

The victim was simply abandoned to the tender mercies of public speculation.

It was therefore more than a little heartening to finally hear a piece on VPR this afternoon that showed more empathy for the victim than was exhibited in the immediate aftermath of the aborted trial.

From VPR, we learned that the Prosecution had made the decision to drop the case after the Defense pointed to something that the victim “lied” about in her testimony. We are told that the victim felt question asked was “too personal” and, in any case,  irrelevant to the case; but the prosecutor, nevertheless, decided to withdraw the charges when the victim admitted that she hadn’t answered truthfully..

I think I might know what this is all about and it really was a very poor reason to abandon the case. If I am mistaken, I would really like someone to set me straight.

Toward the close of the cross-examination, she was clearly reaching the end of her emotional tether.  Perhaps realizing she was that close to breaking, the Defense began to pressure her about physical evidence of the crime on her body, and in rapid succession she said, “no,no, no” to every intimate question that was asked.  Her body language indicated to me that they had hit a wall of resistance to any further indignity.  She’d had enough.

The other possibility that occurs to me is that the Defense succeeded in persuading the Prosecution that they could dispute a detail of the first attack as she described it, by referencing her Facebook page.

In her testimony, the victim said that her ponytail had been dyed purple at the time of the first attack. At the break, I overheard the Defense, first discussing among themselves; then,with the Prosecution, that this was “impossible” because photos on her Facebook page showed her with a purple ponytail a year later but not in any of the photos on her Facebook page that date to the time of the first attack.

Having had a teenager, I know, as probably most people do, that these colors can be applied rather spontaneously and disappear or are rinsed away rather easily. She could very well have had a purple ponytail at the time of the first attack too, but not been photographed with it.

It is, in any case, the kind of detail that could easily become confused in the memory of a girl suffering the mental anguish of rape and trying to suppress that memory in order to keep it secret.

If this is what caused the Prosecution to drop the charges, it is a pretty poor reason.

Either way, the inconsistencies in her testimony could have easily been explained by the Prosecution as consistent with PTSD from sexual abuse.