McCain and a final repudiation of the Bush doctrine is the real target as Democrats skirmish
__________________________
GOOD MORNING FLINT!
BY Terry Bankert 3/31/08
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
And Flint Talk http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26798#26798 __________________________
McCain and a final repudiation of the Bush doctrine is the real target as Democrats skirmish for the top of the ticket. The American public is not fooled. The importance of removing republicans from public office is of such importance that we want a tried and tested warrior to come out of our Democratic National Convention to take on the republicans and their Bush clone John McCain.[trb]
Senator Joe Lieberman blasted the Democratic Party yesterday as protectionist, isolationist, and hyper partisan.[b]
Judas, Benedict Arnold, spineless, fraud are my thoughts when the word Liberman is mentioned.[trb]
The message: The once noble Democratic Party has been taken over by peaceniks and radicals, who are weakening the country and threatening our security. Nearly two years after being rejected by his lifelong party in the Connecticut primary, it appears that Lieberman has only begun his effort to exact revenge. [t]
It’s the republican that have cost us 4,000 American lives and the devastation of our economy.[trb]
Speaking on ABC's "This Week," Lieberman, Independent of Connecticut, said it is not the same party that made him its vice presidential candidate in 2000.[b]
It is the same party that threw him out of the democratic party by electoral defeat in a partisan Senatorial primary.[trb]
This is Lieberman making a Republican general election argument, and it is notable for its scope. He is not just condemning his party's position on Iraq, or praising McCain, his long-time friend. He is condemning in sweeping language the very core identity of the Democratic Party as weak and extremist. This is a tried and true Republican theme, which traditionally has more to do with scaring independent voters than with actual reasoned debate of the issues.[t]
"It's not the Bill Clinton-Al Gore party, which was strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government," he [McCain] said. "It's been effectively taken over by a small group on the left of the party that is protectionist, isolationist, and very, very hyperpartisan. So it pains me."[b]
Wrong, Clinton and Obama are clearly middle of the road.[trb]
Lieberman, who won reelection to the Senate as an independent after losing the 2006 Connecticut Democratic primary, still caucuses with Democrats. But he has endorsed Republican John McCain's presidential bid, and said yesterday that McCain reflects the legacy of John F. Kennedy.[b]
I knew JFK and McCain is no JFK. And Liberman is not a leader, just a sold out has been.[trb]
Lieberman joins his fellow neoconservatives in pushing for a continuation of the Bush Doctrine.[t] McCain is more... more... more of the catastrophic Bush doctrine:[t]
BUSHIES RALLY AROUND LIBERMAN
"Randy Scheunemann is McCain's new defense and foreign policy adviser. He is a former adviser to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. He was President of the pre-war Committee for the Liberation of Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein.[t]
"Steve Schmidt, is McCain's high powered new political strategist. He worked on Bush's 2004 campaign and was Bush's attack dog whenever former Presidential candidate John Kerry criticized the Iraq War policy. They join other neocons on McCain's campaign like former CIA director James Woolsey.[t]
"[James] Woolsey helped direct US attention toward Iraq after 9/11 when on the next day he falsely accused the Iraqi Government of having a role in it.[t]
"Joining Scheunemann, a veteran neoconservative strategist and one of the chief architects of the Iraq War, are a panoply of like-minded neocons who've gathered to advise McCain, including Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan, Max Boot, Gary Schmitt and Maj. Ralph Peters."[t]
MCCAIN IS NOT A REFORMER...HE IS A BUSH CLONE.
McCain, he said, is "a reformer, somebody who understands ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country and remembers the other part of the Kennedy inaugural, which said that we will bear any burden, pay any price to assure the survival and sustenance of liberty. That's John McCain."[b]
Lieberman says he believes McCain will be able to win he support of a majority of independents and a lot of moderate Democrats. [n]
Lieberman has told reporters that he will speak at the Republican National Convention if McCain asks, but has ruled out sharing the 2008GOP ticket with McCain. [n]
LIBERMAN WANTS , LIKE BUSH AND MCCAIN, TO START ANOTHER WAR IN IRAN.
Lieberman also blasted Senator Barack Obama for voting against a resolution to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group and gave Clinton credit for supporting it. [b]
I'm not sure that McCain could come up with a less effective advocate that Lieberman. Lieberman's supporters are The Corner and their ilk. As a Democrat I hope he is out campaigning everyday for McCain.[t]
"Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) doesn't think Gen. Petraeus has enough war on his hands. The senator (changing the subject from Iraq with "I want to go to Iran...") asked Petraeus if he wanted "the authority" from Congress to "pursue the Qods forces into Iranian territory." Petraeus, for some reason, politely declined to start a third contemporaneous U.S. war."[t]
A staunch supporter of the Iraq war, Lieberman recently traveled to Baghdad with McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina. Though he commended Hillary Clinton for her vote on declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist group, he slammed both Democratic presidential candidates on their foreign policy positions.[n]
Lieberman has been drinking the neocon koolaid for several years now. Even his hometown paper has disavowed Neocon Joe[t]
Posted here by Terry Bankert ...
http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference,
http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
—
[b] Boston.com http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/31/independent_lieberman_calls_democratic_party_hyperpartisan/ [bh] Boston Herald http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/general/view.bg?articleid=1084001&srvc=rss
[n] Newsday http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--lieberman0330mar30,0,4037016.story
[t] Time
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/03/say_it_aint_so_joe.html
46464
Monday, March 31, 2008
DEMOCRATIC OBJECTIVE:REPUDIATION OF BUSH THROUGH MCCAIN!
Sunday, March 30, 2008
BREWER SHOULD RESIGN, OR BE THROWN OUT!
Brewer should resign post!!!!
__________________________
GOOD MORNING FLINT!
BY Terry Bankert 3/30/08
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
And Flint Talk http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26737#26737 __________________________
Great letter Ryan
Letter To The Editor
http://www.mlive.com/news/flintjournal/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1206850978315820.xml&coll=5
FLINT THE FLINT JOURNAL FIRST EDITION
Sunday, March 30, 2008 Journal Reader
I am calling for Mark Brewer to resign as chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party.
He and the central committee got us into this mess and need to do us a favor and resign.
This is only hurting us more and more, and I feel like my vote is being disenfranchised.
The vote of the people cannot stand because Brewer and a committee violated the national party rules and our Michigan delegates will not be seated.
Ryan M. Eashoo
–end–
I agree with this position, see links below. [Terry Bankert]
DO you?
- http://www.flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26692#26692
- http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26292#26292
_____ http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26413#26413
_____ Here is what you can do:
Call ,
write,
email,
letter to editor,
or show up in the office of any democratic party leasder or elected offical
and protest the Michgigan Democratic Party Disenfranshisement of 500,000 Michigan voters and the need for the party to Get it Right!
Posted here by Terry Bankert ...
http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference,
http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
46321
Saturday, March 29, 2008
DEMOCRATS IN FRYING PAN:DAN KILDEE CALL HIM......
Democrats in a frying pan and ,DAN KILDEE ON DEMOCRATIC DELEGATE SELECTION! __________________________
GOOD MORNING FLINT!
BY Terry Bankert 3/29/08
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
SUMMARY ON Flint Talk http://www.flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26692#26692 __________________________
JUST PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL ME!
SPECIAL GUEST-WFLT 1420 AM 9 AM 3/29/08-
PROGRAM “ KNOW THE LAW”
On Saturday 3/29/08 from 9:am until 9:30 am Daniel Kildee Genesee County Treasure will be my guest on my radio program “ Know the Law” WFLT 1420 am radio.
This is a call in program and you may ask Mr. Kildee question on the air by calling 810-239-5733. We will be talking about the Michigan Democratic Delegate selection process.
*****
Kildee is General Chairperson on the 5th Congressional District Democratic Party and he is responsible for organizing the local Delegate Selection Convention. 4/19/08 10 Am Saturday 9:15 registration UAW Local 599 , 812 Leith ST, Flint MI 48505.
******
Daniel T. Kildee was elected Genesee County Treasurer in November 1996, and took office on January 1, 1997. Mr. Kildee currently serves as Chairman of the Fifth Congressional District Democratic Party. Before his election as Treasurer, Mr. Kildee served for 12 years as a Genesee County Commissioner, including 5 years as Chairman of the Board of Commissioners.
******
WHY IS THE GUY WHO LOST MICHGAN FOR US TALKING?
Blanchard: DNC 'flirting with a McCain victory'[fp]
PEOPLE CAN’T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!
Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean has finally recognized that the sparring between Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and their backers has grown a tad disruptive. [n]
BLANCHARD A KNOW CLINTON LACKEY COMES TO HER NEEDED DEFENSE AND HER INTENT TO KEEP FIGHTING A LOST CAUSE.
Former Gov. James Blanchard blamed the Democratic National Committee’s rigid rules for the party’s presidential deadlock, saying its refusal to seat Michigan and Florida delegates at the national convention could hand Republicans the White House.[fp]
CLINTONS ONLY HOPE IS THAT HER ELITE FRIENDS WILL STOMP ON THE COMMON DEMOCRATS
Clinton said the rules applying to super delegates having a right and responsibility to pick the best candidate for president also applies to the regularly elected delegates—those who are pledged to support a particular candidate for nomination. She indicated that delegates elected to support Obama, who outnumber those elected to back Clinton, could end up supporting her based on the outcome of upcoming state contests.[BS]
BILL JUST WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT AGAIN
Just in case you were wondering what Hillary Clinton's No. 1 fan thinks of recent calls for her to drop out of the race for the Democratic nomination, Bill Clinton has three words for you: "Bunch of Bull." [MS]
"All these people tell you, 'Aw, we oughta shut this thing down now; the Democrats are so Divided,'" Clinton said at a campaign event here. "That’s a bunch of bull." [MS]
BLANCHARD WAS PRESENT WHEN THESE RULES WERE ADOPTED AND NOR IS MCCAIN FEAR MONGERING
“The national Democratic Party is flirting with a McCain victory if someone doesn’t step in and make sure Michigan voters’ voices are heard,” said Blanchard, co-chairman of Hillary Clinton’s Michigan campaign.[fp]
MARK BREWER MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC CHAIRPERSON DID NOT FOLLOW THE RULES, HE NEEDS TO GO!
The national party won’t recognize delegates from Michigan’s Jan. 15 primary because it was held too early, in violation of party rules. But there’s been no agreement on holding a second primary or Democratic caucus that would be recognized by the natinoal party.[fp]
Michigan and Florida lost their convention nominating delegates when their party primaries were moved up in advance of the Feb. 5 “Super Tuesday” contests. Clinton “won” in both states but efforts between the camps of Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois to try to reach agreement with Democratic officials in both states on how to make their delegations count at the national convention in Denver have come to naught.[BS]
BLANCHARD, LEVIN,THE MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY REPRESENTATIVE ON THE DNC AND THE MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE NEED TO BE SANCTIONED FOR THE DISENFRANCHISEMENT OF 500,000 MICHIGAN DEMOCRATS!
“They’re treating the rules like the U.S. Constitution or the 10 Commandments. They’ve lost their way,” Blanchard said of the DNC. He added, “I do think the presidential election process is broken. It’s broken, we have a heck of a mess.” [fp]
BLANCHARD AND HIS BUDDIES LEVIN,BREWER ET AL SHOULD PAY FOR IT!
Blanchard, during a taping of Michigan public television’s “Off the Record” this morning, said the state Legislature should reconsider holding another Democratic primary when it returns from its spring break. [fp]
IT’S A NO BRAINER THAT THE MICHGIAN DEMOICRATIC LEADERSHIP SHOULD HAVE FOLLOWED THE RUILES.
“I think, if you’re a legislator, it’s an absolute no-brainer to say, ‘Let the voters decide,’” he said. “The issue is not what’s good for Hillary or good for Obama, it’s what’s good for the voters of Michigan.” [fp]
WHY IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY NOW A PARTY LED MY THESE ELITE SUPER DELEGATES?
Blanchard also said he likes a proposal for a separate, national convention of Democratic superdelegates in June to break a deadlock and decide whether Clinton or Barack Obama is the nominee, before the Democratic National Convention in August.[fp]
Clinton maintained that the nearly 800 top party officials and members of Congress who make up the superdelegates to the national convention will ultimately decide the nominee since neither the New York senator nor Obama will have crossed the 2,024 delegate threshold needed to sew up the nomination.[BS]
“I think that’s a very important fact: Neither one of us can be nominated without super delegates and super delegates should exercise their right and their responsibility to determine who they think would be the best president and who would be the best nominee to defeat John McCain in the fall,” she said. “That’s the way our process is set up. That’s the way it will operate.”[BS]
I THINK THE SUPER DELEAGTES SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE National Democratic Convention.[trb]
B.S., THE DEMOCRATIC VOTER IS LOVING THIS. A REAL CONVENTION WHERE THE OUT COME IS NOT DICTATED BY A BUNCH IF INBREAD ELITES. GREAT STUFF WE WILL ALL WATCH!
Unless it’s resolved, he said, the ultimate nominee will be severely weakened heading into Labor Day, the unofficial kickoff of the general election campaign. [fp]
EVEN CLINTON DISAGREES WITH HER LAP DOG BLANCHARD
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said party leaders are free to voice their feelings about the prolonged race for the nomination but she has no intention to drop her bid and she disagrees that it will take a toll on the eventual nominee.[BS]
Clinton disagreed with those who have said the continued contest could end up tearing the Democratic Party apart and said it will “strengthen our eventual nominee.”[BS]
‘I just think this spirited exciting contest is a real plus for us and I just don’t have the worries that some people either are talking about or feeling. I think we’ll go on until it’s clear who the nominee is,” she said.[BS]
WHO THE HADIES IS BLANCHARD TO PRE JUDGE THE GREAT MAYOR OF DEETROIT!
On Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, Blanchard said he agrees with Gov. Jennifer Granholm to defer a decision to boot Kilpatirick from office until his criminal case is decided. He said if Kilpatrick is convicted of a felony, he will be forced to resign anyway.
THEN WHY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THIS?
Blanchard said if Granholm attempted to oust the mayor now, he would challenge her in court – and probably win. [fp]
BUT FOR BLANCHARDS INEPTNESS ENGLER WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN GOVERNOR , NOW HE IS GIVING DIRECTIONS?
“And that,” Blanchard said, “would weaken the governor and continue to add to the problem and do nothing for economic development,” Blanchard said. “What the governor is doing and should do is to meet with business leaders and continue plans to diversify the economy, take a look at alternative energy research and not get mired in this, which is going to be in the courts anyway and resolved there.”[fp]
BLANCHARD AND CLINTON TWO PEAS IN A POD
Does Hillary really believe Indiana will support a LIAR like her?[BS]
NOW A WORD FROM THE HILLARY AND JIMMY SPONSOR
The former president went on to note that he did not earn enough delegates to clinch the 1992 nomination until June of that year, around the same time that the final primary votes will be cast this year. [MS]
He also argued, as he often does, against the "disenfranchisement" of voters in Michigan and Florida. "She wants you to have your say," he added. [MS]
Notably, Clinton described the remaining primaries as contests for the popular vote (not for delegates.) "Now we’re going to have to go all the way through to the end to see who has the most popular votes," he said. "And that’s good."[MS]
BILL GET A GRIP
"You do not want to demoralize the base of the Democratic Party by having the Democrats attack each other," Dean told the Associated Press. "Let the media and the Republicans and the talking heads on cable television attack and carry on, fulminate at the mouth. The supporters should keep their mouths shut about this stuff on both sides because that is harmful to the potential victory of a Democrat."[N]
Ya think?[N]
Posted here by Terry Bankert ... http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference, http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
—where did this stuff come from---
[fp] Freep.com http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080328/NEWS06/80328018/1008/news06
[trb] Comments of Terry Bankert along with unattributed CAP headlines http://attorneybankert.com/
[bs] Baltimore Sun http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/clinton_not_quitting_i_like_lo.html [ms]] MSNBC http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/28/834235.aspx
[N] The Nation http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080328/cm_thenation/45303979
46015/12410
Friday, March 28, 2008
Questions on Democratic Delegate Selection , call in program
On My Sat. 3/29/08 Show
" Know the Law"
Daniel Kildee will discuss "live" Democratic Delegate Selection
810-239-5733
9am 1420AM Flint WFLT Radio,
call in your questions.
810-239-5733
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Lee Gonzales a good man for the job.
__________________________
GOOD MORNING FLINT! BY Terry Bankert
Posted here by Terry Bankert .
.. http://attorneybankert.com/ http://attorneybankert.com/
3/28/08 early edition You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
This article posted to Flint Talk at http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26627#26627 __________________________
I am going to the fundraiser of my friend tonite 3/27/08 at the White Horse about 6 pm. I thought I would share some information about him Lee Gonzales
see his web site http://049.housedems.com/
Lee is a Democratic Party member of the Michigan State House of Representatives. He represents the 49th District, which is located in Genesee County and includes part of the city of Flint.
He is one of only two Hispanic members of the Michigan House, along with Rep. John Espinoza. Gonzales received his bachelor’s degree in urban studies and urban administration and a master’s of public administration from the University of Michigan-Flint. He completed the Senior Executive Program at Harvard University.
He is a member of the Hispanic Caucus of Genesee County, which he formerly chaired. Political career For seven years Gonzales was the assistant Treasurer for Genessee County.
Gonzales served as Genesee County’s development director from 1992-1996. During this time he was responsible for writing the grant application resulting in the $25 million Flint/Genesee Job Corps Center. He worked as a local Government Liaison for Governor James Blanchard and as an aide to Rep. Dale Kildee.
He was elected to the state House in 2004 and re-elected in 2006. He is the Chairman of the House Transportation Sub-Committee. Personal Gonzales and his wife Brenda have been married for 33 years.
They have three children and one grandson.
Office Address N0898 House Office Building 1
Mailing Address P.O. Box 30014 Lansing, MI 48909-7514
Phone: (517) 373-7515 Fax: (517) 373-5817 Toll-Free (800) 354-6849 Email leegonzales@house.mi.gov
Posted here by Terry Bankert .
.. http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference,
http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
KILDEE EXPLAINS DEMOCRATIC DELEGATE SELECTION!
DAN KILDEE ON DEMOCRATIC DELEGATE SELECTION!
__________________________
GOOD MORNING FLINT!
BY Terry Bankert 3/27/08 You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
SUMMARY ON Flint Talk http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26578#26578 __________________________
SPECIAL GUEST-WFLT 1420 AM 9 AM 3/29/08- PROGRAM “ KNOW THE LAW” On Saturday 3/29/08 from 9:am until 9:30 am Daniel Kildee Genesee County Treasure will be my guest on my radio program “ Know the Law” WFLT 1420 am radio. This is a call in program and you may ask Mr. Kildee question on the air by calling 810-239-5733.
We will be talking about the Michigan Democratic Delegate selection process.
Danile Kildee is General Chairperson on the 5th Congressional District Democratic Party and he is responsible for organizing the:
local Delegate Selection Convention.
4/19/08
10 Am Saturday 9:15 registration
UAW Local 599 ,
812 Leith ST, Flint MI 48505.
******
Daniel T. Kildee was elected Genesee County Treasurer in November 1996, and took office on January 1, 1997.
Mr. Kildee currently serves as Chairman of the Fifth Congressional District Democratic Party. Before his election as Treasurer, Mr. Kildee served for 12 years as a Genesee County Commissioner, including 5 years as Chairman of the Board of Commissioners. Mr. Kildee, 46, is a lifelong resident of the Genesee County, and in 1977 became the one of the youngest people ever elected to public office in the nation when he was elected to the Flint Board of Education at age 18.
He is an honors graduate of Flint Northern High School, and attended Mott Community College and the University of Michigan-Flint. Kildee was employed for 10 years as a member of the staff of the Donald M. Whaley Children's Center, a residential treatment facility for emotionally disturbed children, and now serves on the Board of Directors of Whaley.
He was part-time instructor in the corporate services division of Baker College of Flint from 1992-1998. He and his wife Jennifer have three children: Ryan, age 26, a graduate of Michigan Technological University, and works in the private sector in El Paso, Texas; Kenneth, age 14; and Katy, age 12.
Kildee initiated an effort to use Michigan’s new tax foreclosure law as a tool for community development and neighborhood stabilization. He founded the Genesee Land Bank - Michigan’s first land bank - and serves as its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Kildee is President of the Genesee Institute, a research and training institute focusing on Smart Growth, urban land reform, and land banking.
In 2003 Governor Granholm and legislative leaders appointed Kildee to the Michigan Land Use Leadership Council, which made 160 recommendations to deal with urban sprawl and other land use issues. In 2005 Governor Granholm appointed Kildee as one of the initial directors of the Michigan Land Bank Fast Track Authority, the nation’s first statewide Land Bank.
Kildee is a member of the Michigan Economic and Environmental Roundtable, is Co-chair of the Michigan Redevelopment Readiness Advisory Council, and serves on the Board of Directors of the Land Information Access Association and the Board of Directors of Automation Alley, southeastern Michigan’s regional technology cluster designed to attract technology based industry to the region.
He is also on the Advisory Board for the National Vacant Properties Campaign. Kildee recently accepted a month-long Fellowship at the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government.
Posted here by Terry Bankert
... http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference,
http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY...BUSH PARDON?
INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY: Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick
______________________
GOOD MORNING FLINT! BY Terry Bankert 3/26/08
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
SUMMARY ON Flint Talk
__________________________
Mayor's Perjury Case Not Open and Shut [g]
Legal experts said Tuesday that the heart of the perjury case against Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick - steamy text messages that seem to contradict his sworn denials of an affair with an aide - might be less open-and-shut than many believe. [g]
Kilpatrick's lawyer, meanwhile, has suggested the prosecutors' case hinges on "vague, indefinite and ambiguous" questions that hardly resulted in enough evidence to warrant the charges. [t]
The two were charged on Monday, when prosecutor Kym Worthy announced that she had authorised a 12-count criminal indictment. [b]
Kilpatrick: 8 charges Conspiracy to obstruct justice: 1 charge; 5-year felony Obstruction of justice: 1 charge, related to the firing former Deputy Chief Gary Brown, interfering with Brown's investigation of him and perjury about his alleged affair with Beatty; 5-year felony Misconduct in office: 2 charges, related to Brown's firing, perjury and authorizing an $8.4 million settlement of whistle-blower lawsuits by Brown and two other cops to hide incriminating text messages; each charge a 5-year felony Perjury: 4 charges, related to trial and deposition testimony relating to his alleged affair with Beatty and Brown's firing, each charge a 15-year felony Beatty: 7 charges Conspiracy to obstruct justice: 1 charge; 5-year felony Obstruction of justice : 1 charge, 5-year felony related to the firing of Brown, interfering with his investigation of the mayor and perjury about her affair with Kilpatrick Misconduct in office: 1 charge, 5-year felony related to Brown's firing and perjury about her alleged affair with mayor Perjury: 4 charges, related to trial and deposition testimony relating to Brown's firing and her affair with Kilpatrick; each charge a 15-year felony[d]
HIGH TEXT AND AMBIGUITY, Plenty of room to extract innocence.[trb]
Kilpatrick's attorneys want to keep the intimate and sexually explicit text messages out of a trial, and at least one outside defense lawyer says the admissibility of such high-tech communications is an unsettled legal question. Even if they are admitted, experts say the defense will exploit any ambiguity in the messages, in the questions the mayor and former Chief of Staff Christine Beatty were asked under oath, and in their answers. [g]
IS REASONABLE DOUBT, REASONABLE?
``If the questions were not clear, and that's going to be used to prove the case, then that's another avenue in trying to establish a reasonable doubt,'' former federal prosecutor Matthew Orwig said Tuesday. [g]
SPEECHLESS IN DETROIT
On Tuesday, the usually gregarious Kilpatrick was subdued as he stood mute to eight felony charges of perjury, conspiracy, obstruction of justice and misconduct in office during his arraignment in Detroit. Beatty also stood mute to seven of those charges. [g]
In a Monday morning press conference, Wayne County's top prosecutor, Kym L. Worthy, charged Kilpatrick with eight felonies, including perjury, obstruction of justice and misconduct for the text messages he allegedly traded with his paramour, Christine Beatty. (Beatty was also charged with seven felonies, including perjury.) Worthy also said several other individuals may be charged in connection with the case. [t]
WILL NOT RESIGN
The charismatic Kilpatrick, 37, who was happy to be known as the nation's first "hip-hop mayor," today dismissed Worthy's investigation as "flawed" and indicated he has no plans to resign, even after Detroit's city council passed a resolution urging him to do so last week. Kilpatrick and Beatty surrendered to Wayne County authorities Monday afternoon for booking. If found guilty of the perjury charges, he could face a maximum of 15 years in prison.[t]
PERSONAL BOND GETS PERSONAL BONDS
Not guilty pleas were entered for both. They were released on personal bonds and are expected to appear at a June 9 preliminary examination that will determine if they will face trial in Wayne County Circuit Court.[g]
A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS
The charges stem from a lawsuit filed by two former police officers who won a jury verdict last year. They said they were fired for investigating claims that the mayor used his security unit to cover up extramarital affairs.[g]
Kilpatrick has also tried to dismiss the charges as racially motivated. But prosecutor Worthy is also African American[T] Mabey the charges are motivated because he is FAT. A fatally based discrimination.[trb]
I THOUGHT ONLY KIDS DID THAT STUFF- PAGERS AND TEXTING!
Kilpatrick had said he would challenge the verdict, but prosecutors allege that a multimillion-dollar settlement was reached after the officers' attorney showed the mayor's lawyers references to the text messages, which had been left on Beatty's city-issued pager. [g]
The Detroit Free Press published excerpts of the messages in January, prompting an investigation that led to charges against Kilpatrick and Beatty on Monday.[g]
Kilpatrick's lawyer Dan Webb is a former U.S. attorney known for his three-hour cross-examination of former President Ronald Reagan in the Iran-Contra scandal. Webb won a conviction, later reversed, against Admiral John Poindexter on charges linked to the scandal. [g]
Webb also was the chief defense attorney in the corruption trial of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, who is now in prison. [g]
BRING IN THE FEDERALLIES
Webb says the release of the text messages violates federal law. [g]
``Under the Stored Communications Act they absolutely should not have been produced in civil litigation,'' Webb said Monday. ``Because of that, everyone who sees them is clearly tainted because the initial production was illegal.'' [g]
BROTHERS UNITED
Miami criminal defense lawyer Milton Hirsch said Webb's effort to bring the 1986 act into play is a good move. [g]
``He's a very fine lawyer,'' said Hirsch, who specializes in defending public corruption cases. ``There is very little law on this, but I think it's a motion worth filing. It could make good law and could establish an important point.'' [g]
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF INTIMATE?
Kilpatrick and Beatty denied having an intimate relationship when they testified in the police officers' lawsuit. [g]
IS CASUAL SEX ROMATIC?
``Mayor Kilpatrick, during 2002 and 2003, were you romantically involved with Christine Beatty?'' asked Mike Stefani, who represented the police officers. [g]
Kilpatrick's response: ``No.'' [g]
Beatty said ``no'' and rolled her eyes when asked if she and the mayor were ``either romantically or intimately involved'' during the period covered by the case. [g]
Text messages published by the Free Press told a different story. [g]
A METAPHYSICAL TYPE OF ATTRACTION
``I'm madly in love with you,'' Kilpatrick wrote on Oct. 3, 2002. [g]
``I hope you feel that way for a long time,'' Beatty replied. ``In case you haven't noticed, I am madly in love with you, too!'' [g]
I HAVE SINNED IN MY MIND? WAS THAT SWAGGART OR CARTER?
On Oct. 16, 2002, Kilpatrick wrote Beatty: ``I've been dreaming all day about having you all to myself for 3 days. Relaxing, laughing, talking, sleeping and making love.'' [g]
YOU CANNOT TRUST A TRYST
The messages also included dialogue about where to meet and how to conceal their trysts. Hirsch, however, said the messages may not be enough to prove perjury. [g]
THEY DID NOT SAY WHAT?
``The world is full of people who are in the habit of exchanging salacious phone calls, e-mails and text messages,'' he said. ``It doesn't mean they are having an actual relationship. Did they say (under oath) they didn't have physical sex, or have no personal relationship or interaction, at all? [g]
``If the witnesses testified 'we have nothing but a business relationship, we scarcely even talk about anything besides business matters,' that's a different matter,'' Hirsch said. [g]
BYE BYE BABY GOODBYE
Sex is not the only issue surrounding the text messages. The prosecutor's office filed an investigative report Tuesday that included an excerpt of a text message from Kilpatrick asking members of his staff for help in explaining the departure of former Deputy Chief Gary Brown, one of the former officers who sued. [g]
On June 24, 2003, he wrote: ``We must answer the question? Why was Gary Brown fired. It will be asked, I need short, powerful answer ... I just need a good answer. Whatever it might be.'' [g]
UN COLA
During the whistle-blower suit, Kilpatrick said Brown was ``un-appointed.'' [g]
``He was not fired,'' he testified. [g]
IS A HORMONE DRIVEN STATEMENT WILLFUL?
Perjury, under Michigan law, is defined as ``willfully'' swearing falsely while under oath and is punishable by up to 15 years in prison. [g]
CONTEMPT CHARGES PENDING
Worthy would not elaborate but said some of her concerns may be revealed at a court hearing Friday at which a judge has been asked to consider finding two city officials in contempt of court. She would not specify which records she has been unable to obtain from the city. Frustration in obtaining certain records has caused county prosecutors in recent weeks to take action in the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court and to launch contempt proceedings against Detroit Corporation Counsel John E. Johnson and Deputy Human Resources Director Patricia Peoples. [d]
BUSH DID NOT PARDON DETROITS MAYOR?
DETROITS MAYOR SHOULD ASK FOR A PARDON BUSH IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS!
On the new friend list for George W. Bush were:
• William L. Baker of Spokane, Wash., who was sentenced in 1980 to two years prison for falsifying records.
• George Francis Bauckham of Oak Ridge, N.J., who received five years probation in 1958 for the unlawfully detention or delay of the mail by a postal employee.
• Kenneth Charles Britt of White City, Kan., who was sentenced to three years probation in 1998 for conspiracy to violate fish and wildlife laws.
• William Bruce Butt of London, Ky., who received three years probation in 1990 for bank embezzlement.
• Mariano Garza Caballero of Brownsville, Texas, who was sentenced in 1984 to 34 days in prison and four years probation for dealing in firearms without a license.
• Anthony C. Foglio of Santee, Calif., who was sentenced to three years probation in 1996 for distributing marijuana. He is also known as Tony Foley.
• Marvin Robert Foster of Boca Raton, Fla., who was sentenced to a year of probation in 1968 for making a false statement in connection with a Federal Housing Administration loan.
• Carl Harry Hachmeister of Denton, Texas, who was sentenced to three years probation in 1985 for conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud.
• William Marcus McDonald of Wetumpka, Ala., who was sentenced two four years confinement with hard labor by an Air Force court-martial in 1984 for cocaine and marijuana charges. His pay was docked, his rank was reduced and he was given a discharge for bad conduct.
• Robert Michael Milroy of Cinnaminson, N.J., who was sentenced to 7 1/2 years prison in 1975 for heroin importation.
• Jerry Lynn Moldenhauer and Thomas Donald Moldenhauer of Colorado Springs, Colo., who each received three years probation in 1994 for selling migratory bird parts in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
• Richard James Putney of Woodbridge, Va., who received one year of probation in 1996 for aiding and abetting the escape of a prisoner.
• Timothy Alfred Thone of Woodbury, Minn., who was sentenced in 1987 to two years probation for making a false statement to the Department of Housing and Urban Development to obtain a mortgage.
• Lonnie Edward Two Eagle Sr. of Parmelee, S.D., who was sentenced to two years probation in 1976 for misdemeanor simple assault on an Indian reservation.
Bush also commuted the sentence of Patricia Beckford of Portsmouth, Va., who since 1992 has been serving a 23-year prison sentence for conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine. Bush left intact a five-year term of probation.[Y]
SEE [y]
Yahoo News
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080325/ap_on_go_pr_wh/presidential_pardons
OH....GOOD CALL SUPREME COURT
A 2004 Michigan Supreme Court ruling could help prosecutors' case. Reversing more than 150 years of precedent, the court said prosecutors don't have to prove that a lie was material to a case.[g]
Posted here by Terry Bankert ...
http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference, http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
—
[g]
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/7411497
[T]
Time Magazine
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1725259,00.html?imw=Y
[b]
BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7313516.stm
[d]
The Detroit News
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080325/METRO/803250442/1361
DUMP NAFTA!
NAFTA foes hope Dems' words turn into action ( C )
GOOD MORNING FLINT!
BY Terry Bankert 3/25/08
http://attorneybankert.com/
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
SUMMARY ON Flint Talk http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26508#26508
_____
When the nation gets a cold Flint MI USA get phenomena. If NAFTA hurt your working men and women a little it devastated us. So we have a right to complain. Now I understand macro economics but trade policy should be challenged and open to modification at all times. To cry protectionism now simply will fuel a debate and resulting in reasonable modification to or elimination of NAFTA which has devastated the working men and women of this country. I guess I have an opinion.[trb)
TAPS FOR NAFTA
Is the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) dying? Both Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama have made campaign promises to “renegotiate” the 14-year-old trade agreement that generally has resulted in a boom for U.S. trucking and railroad interests.(T)
ANOTHER STAIN ON BILLS RECORD
Since NAFTA was adopted in 1994 under the first Clinton administration, it basically created open trade, free of duties and tariffs, among the U.S. Mexico and Canada. But both Democratic candidates have sounded a protectionist tone during their campaign, threatening to renegotiate NAFTA and other free trade agreements to make them more favorable on labor and environmental grounds.(T)
NAFTA INTENDED TO KILL ORGANIZED LABOR IN THE USA
Sen. Bernie Sanders believes the country is ready to join his fight to overhaul American trade policy. He wants to believeBarrack Obama and Hillary Clinton are too.©)
A LIBERAL VIEWPOINT (FINALLY WE CAN BE SEEN IN PUBLIC AGAIN)
Sanders, a liberal Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats, is a leader in the growing group of lawmakers who blame expanded trade for lost manufacturing jobs and stagnant wages for American workers. The campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination would appear to promise them a crowning achievement: Both Obama and Clinton say they'll renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement and push for a more worker-friendly trade model if elected.©)
A POLICY THAT FORCED LOWER WAGES ON YOUR FAMILY!
Opponents of NAFTA take a starker position.Thea M. Lee is policy director for the AFL-CIO, which opposes NAFTA and lobbies against other free trade agreements as unfair to U.S. workers and corporations unless they include provisions that require signatory countries to raise labor and environmental standards. Lee argues one of the main upshots of the deal has been to "force workers into more direct competition with each other, while assuring them fewer rights and protections." The Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning research organization, says in a policy paper on NAFTA that the deal's trade agenda has served to widen U.S. trade deficits and has indirectly pushed some U.S. workers into lower-paying jobs. (w)
WE ARE AT ECONOMIC WAR WITH THE COUNTRIES THAT HAVE OIL OR CHEAP LABOR.
But many in the "fair trade" crowd aren't celebrating yet, and free-traders, particularly among Democrats, don't look worried. They have heard this before, and many of them doubt Obama or Clinton would make good on their tough talk.©)
WE HAVE TO MAKE THEM SERIOUS
"I don't know if they're really serious about going back and redoing NAFTA," said Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), the House majority leader. Hoyer supports increased trade, as does Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), the House Democratic Caucus chairman. Emanuel notes that both Clinton and Obama backed a recent trade deal with Peru. "That's all I have to say," he said.©)
What is NAFTA?(W) NAFTA is a trilateral free trade deal that came into force in January 1994, signed by Democratic President Bill Clinton. The central thrust of the agreement is to eliminate the vast majority of tariffs on products traded among the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The terms of the agreement called for these tariffs to be phased out gradually, and the final aspects of the deal weren't fully implemented until January 1, 2008. The deal swept away export tariffs in several industries: agriculture has been a major focus, but tariffs have also been reduced on items like textiles and automobiles. NAFTA also implemented intellectual-property protections, established dispute-resolution mechanisms, and put into place regional labor and environmental safeguards, though some critics now lobby for stronger measures on this front. (W)
NEEDED: A NAFTA MAKE OVER
"I don't know if they're really serious about going back and redoing NAFTA," said Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), the House majority leader. Hoyer supports increased trade, as does Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), the House Democratic Caucus chairman. Emanuel notes that both Clinton and Obama backed a recent trade deal with Peru. "That's all I have to say," he said.©)
WHY ARE WE BUYING CHINESE JUNK PRODUCTS? ARE YOU AN ECONOMIC TRAITOR TO SHOP IN A DOLLAR STORE?
Sanders seems cautiously optimistic at best. "It doesn't take a PhD in economics to see when you go shopping the only products you can afford are made in China," he said. "The American people know it, and I hope our candidates learn it."©)
Some of his allies are more hopeful: "The winner, Hillary or Barrack, will come to Congress [as president] with a different trade policy," said Sen.©)Sherrod Brown (D- Ohio). "They'll follow through." A winning issue?©)
Brown, Sanders and other Senate and House candidates ran on trade reform in their winning 2006 campaigns. Clinton and Obama began to pound the issue in the run-up to Ohio's March 4 presidential primary. They denounced "job-killing" trade deals and promised to crack down on companies that ship factory work overseas, drawing cheers in a state where dwindling manufacturing employment and soaring foreclosure rates have ratcheted up voters' anxieties.©)
VOTERS THINK THESE TRADE DEALS HAVE COST AMERICA ITS JOBS
Exit polls showed 4 of 5 voters in Ohio's Democratic primary believe trade deals with other countries take jobs from their state. The numbers figure to look similar in Pennsylvania, which is one state east of Ohio in the Rust Belt and holds its primary April 22. Nationwide, a Wall Street Journal poll last fall found 6 in 10 Republicans say trade deals have been bad for the U.S. economy.©)
Before the Ohio primary, which Clinton won by 10 percentage points, each Democrat accused the other of saying one thing on trade but meaning another. Those criticisms persist.©)
SOME ECONOMISTS DISAGREE
A paper from three prominent trade experts, C. Parr Rosson, III, C. Ford Runge, and Kirby S. Moulton, notes that the idea of trade blocs is relatively new in North America, but argues that similar arrangements elsewhere in the world have shown consistent gains when viewed from a long-term perspective. The report outlines different forms of "preferential trading arrangements," from free trade deals like NAFTA to more limited customs unions and economic unions, which have been successful in parts of Europe. The report notes that preferential trading arrangements can actually divert trade in the short term -- and can cause labor-market disruptions that are painful to some workers -- but also "can be expected to have major long-term benefits." (w)
SIDE DEALS WITH CANADA
Clinton's campaign cites news reports that Obama's top economic adviser met with Canadian officials to reassure them over not wanting to change NAFTA. Obama's campaign says Clinton advocated for NAFTA when her husband, then- President Bill Clinton, was pushing the deal through Congress. Each candidate denies the other's charge.©)
Both Clinton and Obama voted for a trade deal with Oman in 2006. They both supported the Peru agreement last year, though they missed the Senate's vote to approve it while campaigning. Both voted against the signature trade deal of the Bush administration, the Central American Free Trade Agreement.©)
THE RUSTIES SHOULD NOT BLAME THE NAFTEES
Experts disagree on how trade has affected the nation. Liberal economists, for example, blame NAFTA alone for the loss of tens of thousands of Ohio jobs. More conservative economists say Ohio's increased exports due to trade agreements have created more than enough jobs to make up for those lost to outsourcing. A wealth of data suggest the deepest sources of Rust Belt decline are a lack of educated residents and marketable ideas.©)
'A stark difference' Analysts expect trade to factor heavily in swing manufacturing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan this fall. The differences will be clear: Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, has a pro-trade voting record. He extolled its benefits during the Ohio primary campaign.©)
MC CAIN: LET THEM EAT CAKE
"There will be a stark difference" on trade in the general election, said Scott Paul, director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, which supports revamping trade deals to benefit domestic workers. "John McCain has made it clear that he is philosophically disinclined to do anything on this issue."©)
MC CAIN: I’M STUPID ON ECONOMIC POLICY, REMEMBER 911....PLEASE!
McCain has acknowledged in the past that he knows less about economics than he does about national security and foreign policy, and Democrats have seized on such remarks to argue that the Republican is a novice on bread-and-butter issues that voters care about most.(a)
BOYCOTT ANYTHING MADE IN CHINA
Still, Paul said this week he hasn't heard the detail he'd like from Obama or Clinton on how they would change America's trading relationship with China, which ranked as the chief concern among those who attended a series of trade "town halls" his group had in the past six months. Asked if he believes either Democrat would fundamentally alter trade policy, Paul said, "It's too early to tell."©)
The Democrats' rhetoric has jarred some trade proponents. But for the most part, it hasn't worried them.©)
A GRAIN OF SALT OR ECONOMIC REVOLUTION?
"There obviously has been a lot of rhetoric and discussion on the campaign trail," said Christopher Wenk, the senior director for international policy of the pro-trade U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "You talk to anybody in Washington; I think there are concerns there about what's being said. But many of us, myself included, are taking this with a grain of salt. ... Bashing NAFTA plays well with Ohio voters."©)
FREE MARKETS OR EXPLOITATION
Decades of bipartisan consensus on free trade are "under pressure" in Washington, said Peter Orszag, a former Clinton administration adviser who now directs the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. Economic uncertainty, he said, is causing many voters to consider "throwing sand in the wheels of markets."©)
"My experience suggests," he continued, "when perceptions shift, policy proposals are not far behind."©)
NO TO NAFTA...NO TO NAFTA....NO TO NAFTA!!!!
Posted here by Terry Bankert ... http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference, http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
--- WHERE DID THIS STUFF COME FROM---
©) The Chicago Tribune http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-trade25mar25,0,3452426.story
(TRB) Comments of Terry Bankert and BLOCK headlines http://attorneybankert.com/
(T) The Truth About Trade http://www.truthabouttrade.org/content/view/11349/54/ (A) Associated press http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iNxTApa2sQRu0Xx99P3jt2bEXw7gD8VKAI080
(W) The Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/24/AR2008032401562.html
(g) The Gazette http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/letters/story.html?id=82f25aee-d8e7-4235-8491-6f5b762e81f4
45460
Sunday, March 23, 2008
DEMOCRATS STOP THIS GAME!
SUPER DELEGATES, IN A COMIC SOAP OPERA
MORNING FLINT! Early edition
BY Terry Bankert 3/24/08
http://attorneybankert.com/
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
SUMMARY ON Flint Talk http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26445#26445 _____
THE PLOT THICKENS Readers of a certain age might remember the hit American television show Dynasty. It was originally conceived of as a rival to Dallas, with all those Texan oilmen types, but fast established itself as the most lavish and ludicrous of soap operas. The plot operated around Blake (John Forsythe), his wife Krystle (Linda Evans) and his former bride Alexis (Joan Collins) and others who constituted the rival Carrington and Colby families. [t]
SPELLBINDING GREAT ENTERTAINMENT BUT NO WAY TO PICK A PRESIDENT!
It had Americans under its spell in the mid 1980s, but the combination of ever more insane storylines and endless pay disputes among its performers undermined it. Eventually the plug was pulled in 1989 with a cliffhanger tale in which the stars were imperilled but viewers never found out what happened to them. [t]
DENVER THEN AND NOW
Dynasty was set in Denver, Colorado. By appropriate coincidence, the Democratic national convention will occur in the same city in late August. [t]
The party is now under intense pressure to forge a solution that backers of both Senator Clinton and Barack Obama see as fair. "The real danger is a 1968 convention for the Democrats, where people felt cheated," says Ronald Rapoport, a political scientist at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Va., alluding to one of recent history's most divisive and damaging conventions. [c]
OUR GRANDCHILDREN WILL NOT BELIEVE THIS STORY
It is already evident that the contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will match anything created by fiction. Yet as the next few weeks will demonstrate, their competition will soon make Dynasty look like gritty social realism.[t]
FIRE ON THE HORIZON
This is a battle destined to become both extremely close and exceptionally combustible. It is hard to believe that Democrats will benefit from it. [t]
DO THE MATH.
Pledges (common democrats) plus Supers (elite Democrats) =nominee. The situation today is as follows. It takes 2,025 delegates to secure a majority and with it victory. About 80 per cent of these Democratic stalwarts will be chosen by voters through primaries and caucuses (“pledged delegates”), the remaining 20 per cent are party leaders of various sorts (“super delegates”). [t]
COMMON DEMOCRATS WANT OBAMA,...SO FAR.
As of now, Mr Obama has won 1,414 pledged delegates to Mrs Clinton’s 1,246, which looks like an imposing lead. [t] In the states that chose their representatives by primaries (open ballots, much like local or general elections here), though, they are almost even. Mr Obama has a clear lead because of his success in caucuses (formal meetings in which the turnout is far lower than primaries and dominated by the most dedicated activists), which are arguably less legitimate indications of general support.[t]
MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA ARE HELPING CLINTON,....NOT
Furthermore, two big states – Florida and Michigan – held primaries (in which Mrs Clinton did best) but have been barred from participating in the convention because they held them earlier than they had been instructed.[t]
With Obama's nearly insurmountable lead in pledged delegates, a revote in Florida and Michigan – or a recognition of the January results – was viewed as Clinton's best chance to narrow the gap and persuade superdelegates of a popular mandate for her candidacy.[c]
THIS IS CLEAR AS MUD
If this all sounds murky, it is about to become much, much worse. There are still a number of ballots to be held. The first is in Pennsylvania, which Mrs Clinton must, and probably will, win. Her rival then has a decent chance to hit back in North Carolina on May 6, where a large proportion of the electorate are African-Americans. Most of the remaining states (Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota) are likely to be inclined towards Mrs Clinton. [t]
Theoretically, there are two forums where the dispute could be resolved: inside the Democratic Party, first in the Credentials Committee and ultimately at the Convention; or in the courts.[f]
WILL IT BE DOOR #1, #2 OR #3?
Such an outcome would result in three intriguing consequences.[t]
#1 MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA MESSED THIS UP
The first is that there could almost be a tie over the number of pledged delegates. Mr Obama, thanks to the proportional representation rules his party uses, will probably have the greatest number in straightforward terms, but will be behind among those secured in primaries, rather than caucuses. Mrs Clinton would also be able to assert that, if the votes cast in Florida and Michigan were included, then she would be the stronger. In that case she would have finished more impressively than her opponent. [t]
#2 THE SUPERS HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION TO DECIDE FOR US, THE RACE IS NOT OVER UNTIL THE xxx LADY SINGS.
Secondly, the nomination will have to be settled by the super delegates. There are almost 800 of these and more than 300 have still to state their position. Not that it would matter if they had done so, because super delegates are allowed to change their minds right up until the official count at the convention. That being so, even if either Mr Obama or Mrs Clinton were to calculate that they were in second place when the very last primary had been completed in early June, they would have no good reason to abandon their campaigns. [t]
Why not hang on and see if events were to turn up another version of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the pastor who has embarrassed Senator Obama recently, or produce an issue that could be exploited? In a further quirk, the convention is being held later than usual because the Democrats decided that it would “maximise momentum” to defer it. [t]
Mark Penn, her chief strategist, says the campaign will look beyond hard numbers in making its case to the some 300 superdelegates, or party leaders, who remain uncommitted. "It's not a question of a cut and dried calculation at this point," he told reporters on a conference call Friday. The campaign hopes superdelegates will also consider "who they believe can win the general election" and who is better "for the good of the country and the good of the party." [c]
But the Clintons won’t be muzzled and are fighting for their political lives. They obviously don’t care if their vicious attempt to win their nomination battle may end up costing the party the war.[N]
#3 VERY LITTLE TIME TO CLEAN THE MESS UP BEFORE THE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.
Which means, thirdly, that it may be a convention like no other in recent decades. These occasions are normally totally controlled by the presumptive nominee and orchestrated to suit him (or her). They decide who will make the big speeches, impose the policies to be adopted, and the delegates confirm a vice-presidential selection that the candidate has announced to the world a while earlier. The convention is thus simply a vast rally. [t]
FIFTY DELEGATES MAY DECIDE WHO THE NOMINEE IS
That cannot occur if it is uncertain who the champion will be. The party itself will have to run the convention in close, if tense, consultation with the two contenders. The policy details will become a proxy for the fight between the Clinton and Obama camps. No vice-presidential name can be put forward until the top of the ticket is determined. It is entirely possible that the nomination will be awarded on the basis of a margin of as few as 50 delegates, or fewer, out of more than 4,000 present. [t]
THOSE ELITE ENTITLED SUPER DELEGATES MAY DECIDE,PRIVATELY
The super delegates might overrule the pledged delegates, as they are entitled to, attracting intense controversy. [t]
HILLARY MAY BE LOSING THE SUPER DELEGATES SHE HAS SPENT A LIFE TIME CULTIVATING. HERE’S WHY.
The Hillary and Bill Clinton scorched-earth strategy of laying waste to Obama, or his supporters like Bill Richardson, is going to backfire among those in the only constituency who can put Hillary in the saddle. The super delegates.[N]
These people are professional politicians, officials and operatives who are horrified that the Clintons et Co. are producing negative soundbytes which will become fodder for the McCain side come the real contest in the fall. But this should come as no surprise .[N]
AFTER CONVENTION 8 WEEKS TO ELECTION
A bitterly divided party would then have about two months to bind its wounds before polling day in November.[t]
THE REPUBLICANS WILL LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK, AGAIN.
Meanwhile, a few days later, the Republican convention will open in Minneapolis, a model of love, peace and unity compared with the Democratic showdown. [t]
MCAIN A BUSH SUPPORTING WAR MONGERING ,ECONOMY DEVASTOR, HAS BEEN, COULD WIN BECAUSE OF WHAT THE DEMOCRATS DO THEMSELVES
In one of the more crackpot Dynasty plotlines, Blake and Alexis end up running against each other for public office (the post of Governor of Colorado) but their expensive feud serves only to allow another candidate to emerge triumphant. John McCain has reason to hope that Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton are poised to do exactly the same, to his advantage. [t]
That leaves Democrats without delegates for the August national convention, the prospect of disillusioned voters — and an opening for Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, in a state that has not gone Republican since 1988.[h]
"It's not breaking my heart," said Kent County GOP Chairman Dave Dishaw. "From a John McCain perspective, obviously I'm very excited that they can't get their act together."[h] Jeff Williams, a senior vice president with Public Sector Consultants in Lansing, said it would be premature to assume all this chaos means the GOP will win Michigan. He believes the advantage still is with the Democrats.[h] But he agrees McCain's image as a political maverick could help him win independents. His chances improve each week and month the Democrats fail to find a candidate, he believes.[h]
WOULD A REAL NON CANDIDATE LEADER STEP FORWARD, BUILD A COALITION AND GET THIS RIGHT....OUR FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT...AL GORE WHERE THE HADIES ARE YOU?
Meanwhile, party leaders in Florida and Michigan are adamant that their delegations be seated according to the popular vote. "I am deeply disappointed," Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm said in a statement after talks collapsed for a state-run, privately funded primary on June 3. "Now that the Legislature has decided not to act, we will turn our attention to other options." [c]
A ROUGH END GAME WILL BACK FIRE AND GIVE OBAMA THE NOMINATION
Short of a Hail Mary Pass, the Clintons are digging themselves an early, and permanent, party grave. More super delegates are going to follow Richardson’s lead even if Hillary pulls off Pennsylvania on April 22.[N]
National polls, after a rough week for Obama, have them tied and he is gaining again at her expense. But Obama has 730,000 more votes and 131 more super delegates than her and has it bagged even if she wins everything else in huge numbers.[N]
BUT WITH THIS DAMAGE CAN WE WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION
Posted here by Terry Bankert ... http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference, http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
—WHERE DID THIS STUFF COME FROM---
[t] The Timesonline http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/tim_hames/article3607493.ece?openComment=true
[TRB] Comments of Terry Bankert and CAP headline unattributed. http://attorneybankert.com/
[F] The Fox Network http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,340792,00.html
[c] The Christian Science Monitor http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0324/p03s03-uspo.html [h] Houston Chronicle.com http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/5639458.html
[n] The National Post http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/francis/archive/2008/03/23/mccain-s-preachers-scary-too.aspx
45202
FLINT CITIZENS DEMAND DEMOCRATS REVOTE BY CAUCUSES!
FLINT CITIZENS CALL FOR STATE WIDE DEMOCRATIC PARTY CAUCUSES!
See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Flintcitizen/message/1489
________
GOOD MORNING FLINT!
BY Terry Bankert 3/23/08
http://attorneybankert.com/
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362 ___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
SUMMARY ON Flint Talk http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26413#26413
_____
Revolt of Michigan’s Common Democrats![trb] DNC Rules Chair says Michigan; Hold caucuses.[D2] for the common democrat.[trb]
Roosevelt encouraged Michigan to return to its original plan, adopted before the Jan. 15 primary was set. Party caucuses had been planned for Feb. 9, and Roosevelt suggested the party could hold caucuses sometime in May or June. "The Michigan party knows how to run an alternative process," he said. [d2]
I am for the little (d) common Democrat. Its time we show up, stand up and speak up. What is needed is a demonstration of support for the proposition that Michigan must hold a caucus to re franchise Michigan at the National Democratic Convention. Forward this article to all of your democratic friends.[trb]
James Roosevelt Jr., a Massachusetts health-care executive is co-chair of the DNC's rules committee. [D2]
CALL TO ACTION FOR PRECINCT DELEGATES TO TAKE OVER THE MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY!
The current non-leadership of the Michigan Democratic party wants to broker a Democratic Convention by leveraging its superdelegate vote.[trb]
The last thing they want is for the common democrat to assert its democratic voice at a caucus. Jesse Jackson taught the non-leaders currently in control of the Michigan Democratic party that they lose control if too many regular democrats get involved in the process. [trb]
This is about power, control and the maintenance of special privilege of the super delegates and their employees that currently run the Michigan Democratic Party. [trb]
The States precinct delegates should rise up and take over the Michigan Democratic party. Where is Sam Riddle when you need him?[trb]
THE CANDIDATES SHOULD FOLLOW US!
Who cares what the candidates think. This is our party and the Michigan leadership has screwed up and disenfranchised 500,000 voters. We need to throwout ( hold accountable) our leadership and gerterdone ASAP![trb]
Even if the candidates could agree, there were serious questions about whether party officials could conduct caucuses. In 2004, about 163,000 people voted at about 250 Democratic caucus sites. Party officials estimate that 2008 caucuses -- amid the closest nomination fight in recent history -- could attract as many as 2 million voters, requiring 1,000 or more caucus sites. [d2]
State Democratic Party postpones district conventions [D]did you know this?[trb]
Dems look at divvying up delegates Candidates nix mail-in or caucus voting, so attention turns to a negotiated division.[d2]
WHO IS THIS PANEL?
The panel of four influential Democrats who proposed the do-over primary conferred again Friday afternoon, searching for an alternative that would be acceptable to the state and national parties, and Obama and Clinton. [d2]
WE MUST HOLD OUR LEADERSHIP ACCOUNTABLE TO REGAIN THE TRUST OF MICHIGAN VOTERS
Acknowledging that Michigan's delegate selection mess is unlikely to be resolved in the coming week, the state Democratic Party decided to postpone its congressional district conventions. [d]
A process of elimination is leaving Michigan Democratic leaders with a series of unappetizing choices: accept a negotiated split of the state's convention delegates, hope a nominee emerges who can lift the national party's ban on Michigan, or pursue a divisive, long-shot fight for the state's place in Denver[d2]
15 district gatherings, at which more than half of the Democratic delegates are elected to the Democratic National Convention in August, had been slated for March 29. [d]
Without a new election, Michigan could follow the path of Florida, which like Michigan held an unauthorized January primary and drew the delegate equivalent of the death penalty. Officials in Florida are working to strike a deal with the campaigns and the national party that would seat its delegates on a formula based only partially on the results of the state's Jan. 29 contest. [d2]
"Caucuses necessarily exclude too many people," said Clinton spokesman Phil Singer. Obama has consistently out-performed Clinton in caucus states[d2]
The state party's executive committee late Friday postponed the conventions until April 19. [d]
It remains to be seen whether the delegate picture will be any clearer by then. The national party stripped Michigan of its delegates because its Jan. 15 primary was held three weeks earlier than party rules allowed. [d]
An effort to have a do-over primary died in the Legislature earlier this week. On Friday, the Obama and Clinton campaigns ruled out two other options: a mail-in vote and a party caucus. [d]
That leaves as the only choices for seating delegates: Accepting a negotiated split of delegates; hoping a candidate emerges who will lift the party's ban on the seating of the delegates; or pursuing a long-shot appeal of party rules. [d]
Michigan is supposed to have 156 delegates to the national convention. Of that total, 83 are to be elected at congressional district conventions. Another 45 are picked at the State Party Central Committee meeting on May 17. The other 28 are uncommitted superdelegate, including elected officials and state and national party officials. [d]
WHO TOLD MARK BREWER TO VIOLATE THE RULES OF THE DNC THAT DISENFRANCHISED 500,000 MICHIGAN DEMOCRATS?
Levin and others have argued that New Hampshire and other states also changed the dates of their contests, violating party rules, and should have been punished as well. Michigan set its Jan. 15 contest only after New Hampshire's top election official announced in August that his state would move up. [D2]
With efforts to set up a June 3 state-run primary dead in Lansing, aides to presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on Friday ruled out two likely alternatives: a mail-in primary or caucuses run by the Michigan Democratic Party. Even with approval from the candidates, either plan would face steep logistical hurdles. And there were few ideas beyond those two for how the state could hold a nomination contest that would bring it back within the national party's rules. [d2]
COMMON DEMOCRATS MUST FORCE THE MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND ITS SUPER (duper) DELEGATES TO FOLLOW THE SUGGESTION , RULES,ORDERS,OF THE DNC, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
Roosevelt encouraged Michigan to return to its original plan, adopted before the Jan. 15 primary was set. Party caucuses had been planned for Feb. 9, and Roosevelt suggested the party could hold caucuses sometime in May or June. "The Michigan party knows how to run an alternative process," he said. [d2]
THE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN MUST STEP FORWARD TO STRAIGHTEN THIS MESS UP AND REGAIN VOTER CONFIDENCE.
As always I am available to help.[trb]
Posted here by Terry Bankert ...
http://attorneybankert.com/
Join my political party of preference,
http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
—where did this stuff come from---
[d] Detroitnews.com http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080322/POLITICS01/803220419/1361
[d2] Detroitnews.com http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080322/POLITICS01/803220320
[trb] Coments of Terry Bankert to nclude CAP headlines http://attorneybankert.com/
45065
Friday, March 21, 2008
WFLT 1420 AM, SATURDAY 9:00 AM BANKERT ON FAMILY LAW CALL IN PROGRAM 239-5733
Issues: Divorce; Motion to terminate spousal support;
________
GOOD MORNING FLINT!
BY Terry Bankert 3/22/08
http://attorneybankert.com/
You are invited to join me at Face Book http://www.facebook.com/people/Terry_Bankert/645845362
___________________________
Full article at http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
SUMMARY ON Flint Talk http://flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?p=26379#26379
_____
The following is a recent Court of Appeals case that I will present on WFLT 1420 A.M. radio Flint MI Saturday 3/22/08 9:00 am until 9:30 am. It is a call in program. Questions will be fielded by calling 810-239-5733
____________________________
In the case we will talk about today the issues are.
WHAT IS COHABITATION
Whether the trial court properly interpreted the term "cohabitation" as used in the judgment of divorce; Beason v. Beason; Birthelmer v. Birthelmer (Unpub. Ohio App.);
Whether the defendant-wife and her boyfriend were cohabiting; In re BZ; Attorney fees and costs under MCR 3.206(C); Gates v. Gates; Maldonado v. Ford Motor Co.; Reed v. Reed;
Whether the trial court properly relied on the "American rule" in denying defendant's request for attorney fees; Haliw v. City of Sterling Heights
THE CASE REVIEWED
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N
C O U R T O F A P P E A L S
WILLIAM JEFFREY SMITH,
Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
FOR PUBLICATION
March 18, 2008
9:05 a.m.
v No. 273547
Kent Circuit Court
BETTY LEE SMITH, a/k/a BETTY LEE
JENKINS,
LC No. 98-004557-DM
Defendant-Appellee/Cross-
Appellant.
Before: Bandstra, P.J., and Meter and Beckering JJ.
BECKERING, J.
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Published)
Case Name: Smith v. Smith
e-Journal Number: 38794
Judge(s): Beckering, Bandstra, and Meter
MULTI FACTOR TEST
The court held the trial court properly employed a multiple-factor test in determining whether the defendant-wife and her boyfriend were cohabitating and properly denied the plaintiff-husband's motion to terminate spousal support, finding defendant and her boyfriend were not cohabitating.
17 YEAR MARRAIGE
The parties were divorced following a 17-year marriage during which they had 5 children.
$3,500 PER MONTH IN SPOUSAL SUPPORT
The judgment of divorce required plaintiff to pay defendant $3,500 per month in spousal support, but provided his obligation to pay spousal support would terminate "upon such time as the Defendant cohabitates with a non-related male."
COHABITATE AND YOU GET NO SUPPORT.
Cohabitation requires more than briefly living together or regularly engaging in sexual activity. Whether cohabitation exists is a factual determination based on the totality of the circumstances. No one factor defining a couple's relationship is dispositive on the question of cohabitation.
LONG-DISTANCE RELATIONSHIP
Defendant's relationship with her boyfriend was more accurately characterized as a committed, long-distance relationship, involving regular overnights together, than as two people "living together . . . as partners in life," or "dwelling together . . . in the manner of husband and wife."
THE BOYFRIEND HAD HISOWN HOME
The boyfriend maintains a separate residence in Georgia, does not keep personal items at defendant's house, does not regularly receive mail there, the couple does not share personal property, they do not hold themselves out as living together, and they are not financially interdependent. Affirmed.
—
PROCEDURE
Plaintiff appeals by leave granted the trial court order denying his motion to terminate
spousal support. Defendant cross-appeals the trial court’s denial of her request for attorney fees
and costs. We affirm.
=
DIVORCED 1999 AFTER 17 YEARS
The parties were divorced in June of 1999, following a seventeen-year marriage during
which they had five children. The judgment of divorce required plaintiff to pay defendant
$3,500 per month in spousal support, but provided that plaintiff’s obligation to pay spousal
support would terminate "upon such time as the Defendant cohabitates with a non-related male."
SHES LIVING WITH A GUY I WANT SUPPORT STOPPED...NOW!
In January of 2005, plaintiff moved to terminate spousal support, asserting that defendant was
cohabitating with her boyfriend, Philip J. Walsh II. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial
court denied plaintiff’s motion to terminate spousal support, finding that defendant and Walsh
were not cohabitating.
I THINK THE COURT MESSED UP
Plaintiff first argues that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the term
"cohabitation," as used in the parties’ judgment of divorce. A judgment of divorce is to be
construed in light of the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. Beason v Beason,
435 Mich 791, 798-799 n 3; 460 NW2d 207 (1990). A trial court generally interprets the terms
of a divorce judgment, such as the term "cohabitation," in the same manner that it interprets a
contract. Id. If the term’s meaning is unclear or it is equally susceptible to more than one
meaning, as is the case here, interpretation is a question of fact, and the trial court may consider
extrinsic evidence to determine the intent of the parties. Id.; Brucker v McKinlay Transport, Inc (On Remand), 225 Mich App 442, 448; 571 NW2d 548 (1997). A trial court commits legal error
when it incorrectly chooses, interprets, or applies the law. Fletcher v Fletcher, 447 Mich 871,
881; 526 NW2d 889 (1994).1
THE JUDGEMENT DID NOT SAY WHAT COHABITATION MENT
The parties’ judgment of divorce did not define the term "cohabitation," and there are no
authoritative Michigan cases that define the term in the context of terminating an award of
spousal support.2
Therefore, it was appropriate for the trial court to consider the dictionary
definition of the term "cohabitation" and case law from other jurisdictions that have interpreted
the term in a similar context. See Henderson v State Farm Fire & Cas Co, 225 Mich App 703,
710; 572 NW2d 216 (1997), rev’d on other grounds 460 Mich 348 (1999) (where no Michigan
cases are directly on point regarding the meaning of a phrase, it is appropriate to turn to
dictionary definitions and case law from other jurisdictions).
THE DICTIONARY SAID
In making its findings, the trial court referenced Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed) which
defines "cohabitation" as "[t]he fact or state of living together, esp. as partners in life, usu. with
the suggestion of sexual relations." Similarly, Ballentine’s Law Dictionary (3rd ed) defines
"cohabitation" as "[a] dwelling together of man and woman in the same place in the manner of
husband and wife." After considering the dictionary definition of "cohabitation," the trial court
adopted the definition for the term articulated in Birthelmer v Birthelmer, unpublished opinion
OF the Court of Appeals of Ohio for the Sixth District, issued July 15, 1983 (Docket No. L-83-046),
1 Defendant argues that the term "cohabitation" should be construed against plaintiff, as the
drafter of the judgment of divorce. Our Supreme Court has held, however, that the rule of contra proferentem, i.e., that ambiguities are to be construed against the drafter of the contract, should
only be applied if all conventional means of contract interpretation, including the consideration
of relevant extrinsic evidence, have left the finder of fact unable to determine what the parties
intended their contract to mean. Klapp v United Ins Group Agency, Inc, 468 Mich 459, 470-471, 474; 663 NW2d 447 (2003). Because the trial court relied on conventional rules of contract
interpretation, construing the term "cohabitation" against plaintiff as the drafter of the judgment was unnecessary.
2 In Passwaters v Passwaters, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued
September 3, 1999 (Docket Nos. 204310, 204311), slip op p 6, this Court found no error in the
trial court’s interpretation of the term "cohabitation" in the parties’ judgment of divorce. The
divorce judgment in that case specifically adopted the definition of "cohabitation" in Black’s
Law Dictionary (5th ed). Id., slip op p 5.
WHY DO WE HAVE SPOUSAL SUPPORT
The trial court explained that the purpose of spousal
support was to allow a spouse in need of support to continue to receive support after a divorce,
and that, if the recipient spouse cohabited with another person, such as her mother, the payor’s
responsibility to pay spousal support would not be abrogated. Id., slip op p 6.
COHABITATION MORE THAN LIVING TOGETHER?
That is, "merely
sharing a home and expenses with another person without romantic involvement does not
mandate termination of spousal support." Id. On appeal, this Court found that the trial court’s
reasoning was supported by the dictionary definition of cohabitation, which likens cohabitation
to a marriage relationship. Id.
This Court also pointed out that the term "cohabitation" as used
in Ianitelli v Ianitelli, 199 Mich App 641, 644-645; 502 NW2d 691 (1993), and Petish v Petish,
144 Mich App 319, 321; 375 NW2d 432 (1985), involved situations where the recipient former
spouse admitted to living with another person in an apparently romantic manner. Passwaters,
supra, slip op p 6. as affirmed and applied in Dickerson v Dickerson, 87 Ohio App 3d 848; 623 NE2d 237 (1993) and Moell v Moell, 98 Ohio App 3d 748; 649 NE2d 880 (1994).
THREE ELEMENTS OF COHABITATION
In Birthelmer, supra, the Ohio Court of Appeals set out three elements distinguishing genuine cohabitation relationships from those which are not:
First, there must be an actual living together, that is, the man and woman
must reside together in the same home or apartment.
Secondly, such a living
together must be of a sustained duration.
Thirdly, shared expenses with respect to
financing the residence (i.e., rent or mortgage payments) and incidental day-today
expenses (e.g., groceries) are the principal relevant considerations.
The trial court noted that, in adopting the Birthelmer test, it gave consideration to the fact
that Ohio is geographically proximate to Michigan, the case provided a well-reasoned decision
for selecting the three factors, and it has since been followed by other Court of Appeals decisions
in Ohio that have adopted the three factors and added to them.
OTHER FACTORS IN DETERMINING COHABITATION
In addition to the three elements set out in Birthelmer, supra, the trial court considered
the following factors:
whether defendant and Walsh intended to cohabitate;
whether they held
themselves out as living together;
whether they assumed obligations generally arising from
ceremonial marriage;
whether a sexual relationship existed;
whether marriage was contemplated;
whether they used one another’s addresses;
whether they kept joint accounts;
whether they were
economically interdependent;
and whether defendant used her spousal support to subsidize the
alleged cohabitation.
We find that the trial court properly employed this multiple-factor test in determining
whether defendant and Walsh were cohabitating. Cohabitation requires more than briefly living
together or regularly engaging in sexual activity. Pursuant to the dictionary definition of
cohabitation, the couple must be "living together . . . as partners in life," or "dwelling together . .
. in the manner of husband and wife." As 6 Am Jur Proof of Facts 3d 765, § 2 states,
"[g]enerally, it can be said that courts consider cohabitation to mean a relationship between two
persons of the opposite sex who reside together in the manner of husband and wife, mutually
assuming those rights and duties usually attendant upon the marriage relationship."
Accordingly,
courts in other jurisdictions have considered a number of evidentiary factors in determining
whether a couple is cohabitating. See, e.g., Rose v Csapo, 359 NJ Super 53, 60-61; 818 A2d 340
(2002); Sanders v Burgard, 715 So 2d 808, 811 (Ala Civ App, 1998); Baker v Baker, 1997 ND
135; 566 NW2d 806, 811-812 (1997); Moell, supra at 752-753; In re Marriage of Herrin, 262 Ill
App 3d 573, 577; 634 NE2d 1168 (1994); McCarty v McCarty, 29 Pa D & C3d 687, 692 (1984);
Quisenberry v Quisenberry, 449 A2d 274, 276-277 (Del Fam Ct, 1982).
Whether cohabitation exists is a factual determination based on the totality of the
circumstances. In making a finding on cohabitation, courts should consider many factors. The
following are examples:
First, courts may consider the living arrangements of the couple and the
extent to which they shared a common residence.
Did they both keep personal items such as
clothing and toiletries at the residence?
Did they both have keys to the residence?
What mailing
address did each party use?
Did they share automobiles, or other personal property?
Were
household duties shared?
How long did such arrangements exist?
Second, courts may consider
the couple’s personal relationship and whether it appeared relatively permanent.
Did they
engage in sexual relations?
Was their relationship monogamous?
Was marriage contemplated?
Did they spend vacations and holidays together?
How did the couple represent their relationship
to their family, friends, and acquaintances, and how did those people view the relationship?
Third, courts may inquire into the couple’s financial arrangements.
Did they share expenses?
Did they maintain joint accounts?
Did they jointly own real or personal property?
Did one party
support the other?
Whether cohabitation exists is a question for the finder of fact. Because no
one factor defining a couple’s relationship is dispositive on the question of cohabitation, the factfinder
should consider the totality of the circumstances in each particular case.
II
Next, plaintiff argues that the trial court erred in finding that defendant and Walsh were
not cohabitating. We disagree. We review a trial court’s factual findings for clear error. MCR
2.613(C); Brucker, supra at 448. A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when, although there is
evidence to support it, the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a
mistake has been made, giving due regard to the trial court’s special opportunity to observe the
witnesses. In re BZ, 264 Mich App 286, 296-297; 690 NW2d 505 (2004).
TOTALITY OF THE EVIDENCE
In finding that defendant and Walsh were not cohabitating, the trial court properly
considered the totality of the circumstances. Defendant first met Walsh in 2002, and they have
engaged in a monogamous, sexual relationship since 2004. After Walsh’s own marriage failed in
October of 2003, he moved to Georgia, where he lived with his sister and later purchased a
home. He moved back to Michigan for a period of time in May or June of 2004, but returned to
Georgia in September of 2004. He also spent the summer of 2005 living in Grand Rapids where
his ex-wife allowed him to live in their marital home after she moved out, although Walsh had
minimal utility charges at the home during this time period. Walsh obtained a Georgia driver’s
license and has no plans to move back to Michigan. He is the CEO of his own marketing firm
and travels extensively on a regular basis, almost exclusively in connection with business. For
example, a credit card statement revealed that in a single month, Walsh traveled to North
Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Florida, Nevada, Louisiana, Texas, Indiana, Kentucky, and
Alabama. Walsh estimated that he spends 40 weeks each year traveling for business.
When his schedule allows, Walsh stays at defendant’s house in Grand Rapids, Michigan,
where he sleeps in the same bedroom as defendant. Whenever possible, defendant and Walsh
exercise together, share meals, spend vacations and holidays together, and spend time with each other’s children. April Piper, defendant’s housemate in 2004 and 2005, testified that she saw
Walsh’s vehicle parked at defendant’s house overnight between two and four times per week.
Piper was uncertain, however, whether Walsh actually spent the night on all of those occasions,
as she acknowledged there were times when Walsh simply left his vehicle at the house while
away on business travel.
Walsh testified that he does not keep any personal belongings at defendant’s house,
toiletries or otherwise, and that while he brings clothing to defendant’s house, he does not leave
it there and takes it back to his own house for cleaning. He does not receive any mail at
defendant’s home, with the exception of his judgment of divorce and subpoena for this case.
Defendant’s friends testified that they were aware of defendant’s relationship with Walsh, but
that they saw no evidence indicating that Walsh lived with defendant. Walsh estimated that he
spent 30 to 35 nights with defendant in both 2004 and 2005, including vacations. Walsh also
stayed with defendant at her house for four nights in January of 2006, and for a long weekend in March of 2006.
Walsh asked defendant to move to Georgia to live with him on various occasions dating
back to 2004, and asked her to marry him on four or five occasions. However, defendant told
Walsh that she did not want to marry or live together with anyone until her spousal support
ENDS when her youngest child turns eighteen years of age. Defendant and Walsh both testified that
they have a committed, monogamous relationship and love each other. The couple does plan to
marry in the future.
Defendant and Walsh do not share bank accounts, credit cards, or a cellular telephone
plan. They do not contribute to each other’s bills, including daily living expenses or mortgage
payments. When the couple travels together, they share the expenses. Walsh has offered advice
to defendant regarding her rental properties and has assisted her with household projects related
to her own home and the rental properties.
Considering the totality of the circumstances, defendant’s relationship with Walsh is
more accurately characterized as a committed, long-distance dating relationship, involving
regular overnights together, than as two people "living together . . . as partners in life," or
"dwelling together . . . in the manner of husband and wife." Walsh maintains a separate
residence in Georgia, he does not keep personal items at defendant’s house, he does not regularly
receive mail there, the couple does not share personal property, they do not hold themselves out
as living together, and they are not financially interdependent. Accordingly, the trial court did
not clearly err in finding that defendant and Walsh were not cohabitating, and it properly denied
plaintiff’s request to terminate spousal support on that basis.
III
Finally, defendant cross-appeals the trial court’s denial of her request for attorney fees
and costs under MCR 3.206(C).3 We review a trial court’s ruling on a request for attorney fees
for an abuse of discretion. Gates v Gates, 256 Mich App 420, 437-438; 664 NW2d 231 (2003).
An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision falls outside of the range of
reasonable and principled outcomes. Maldonado v Ford Motor Co, 476 Mich 372, 388; 719
NW2d 809 (2006).
"In domestic relations cases, attorney fees are authorized by both statute, MCL 552.13,
and court rule, MCR 3.206(C)." Reed v Reed, 265 Mich App 131, 164; 693 NW2d 825 (2005).
Attorney fees in a divorce action may be awarded "when a party needs financial assistance to
prosecute or defend the suit." Id. That is, "a party should not be required to invade assets to
3 Defendant requested attorney fees and costs in her written closing argument following the
evidentiary hearing. Plaintiff’s argument on appeal that the request was untimely and improperly made is without merit.
MCR 3.206(C) does not require that a request for attorney fees be made
in a separate motion, and provides that a party may request attorney fees "at any time." MCR
3.206(C)(1).
satisfy attorney fees when the party is relying on the same assets for support." Gates, supra at
438. Pursuant to MCR 3.206(C)(2)(a), the party requesting the fees must allege facts sufficient
to show that she is "unable to bear the expense of the action, and that the other party is able to
pay."
We agree with the trial court that defendant did not demonstrate that she was unable to
bear the expense of the action, and that plaintiff was able to pay, in accordance with MCR
3.206(C)(2)(a). Defendant’s request for attorney fees and supporting affidavit were solely
comprised of unsubstantiated assertions that, aside from spousal support used for living
expenses, her income is "minimal," and that she would be unable to defend the action unless the
trial court awarded her attorney fees. The trial court properly concluded that, in light of
defendant’s recent purchase of three income-producing rental properties, she had not
demonstrated a need for financial assistance in defending the action. Defendant also asserted
that there was a wide disparity in the incomes of the parties, but the record does not support this
assertion. While defendant’s affidavit listed plaintiff’s alleged income from 1999-2003,
defendant did not supply income tax returns supporting those figures or any evidence regarding
plaintiff’s income in 2004 and 2005. Nor did defendant supply her own income tax returns to
substantiate the alleged disparity between the parties’ incomes.
Additionally, defendant argues that the trial court improperly relied on the "American
rule" in denying her request for attorney fees. We disagree. "Michigan follows the ‘American
rule’ with respect to the payment of attorney fees and costs.
Under the American rule, attorney
fees generally are not recoverable from the losing party as costs in the absence of an exception
set forth in a statute or court rule expressly authorizing such an award." Haliw v City of Sterling
Hts, 471 Mich 700, 706-707; 691 NW2d 753 (2005). The American rule is codified at MCL
600.2405(6), which provides that "[a]ny attorney fees authorized by statute or by court rule" may
be awarded as costs. See Id. at 707. Here, while the trial court stated that it was "a very big
supporter of the American rule, . . . that everybody has to carry the burden" of litigation, the
court acknowledged that attorney fees are authorized by MCR 3.206(C). The court found that
defendant failed to demonstrate her need for financial assistance in defending the action, as
required by MCR 3.206(C)(2)(a), and denied defendant’s request for attorney fees on that basis.
Affirmed.
/s/ Jane M. Beckering
/s/ Richard A. Bandstra
/s/ Patrick M. Meter
Posted here by Terry Bankert ...
Join my political party of preference, http://www.michigandems.com/join.html
Posts
