Feature Cause

Donate & Help

Save a Life

Medecins du Monde Jane Addams reduce child mortality challenges Ford Foundation. Diversification shifting landscape advocate pathway to a better life rights international. Assessmen

Donate Now
Feature Cause

Explosions

The Risks, Facts and Challenges e

The cover image suggests attorneys are the real culprits which is possible given the fact the man in the suit is an attorney. I suspect his offices were once shared with my attorney who offices wer torched in 2001

Donate Now
Feature Cause

Save Humanity

My 1% Connections

A 1995/96 Software/Database/Reporting project revealed what I believe is a fraud case. Today you'd have the SEC Whistleblower on your side

Learn More
Feature Cause

Donate & Help

To Give Them a Life

Medecins du Monde Jane Addams reduce child mortality challenges Ford Foundation. Diversification shifting landscape advocate pathway to a better life rights international. Assessmen

Donate Now

The Contra Costa Narcotics Enforcement Taskforce The Dirty DUI

  • Decades of murders, fires and accidents

  • Medecins du Monde Jane Addams reduce

  • Medecins du Monde Jane Addams reduce

  • Medecins du Monde Jane Addams reduce

  • Medecins du Monde Jane Addams reduce

Our Latest Blog

Saturday, September 10, 2016

EBMUD Murders - getting the attention of Ward Members


Saturday, August 27, 2016

Thursday, August 11, 2016

ss

Aug. 11, 2016 - 3:53 - Former DC homicide detective Rod Wheeler provides insight on 'Fox & Friends'
Video


Friday, August 5, 2016

OBIT: Michael Ruppert @hillaryclinton @realdonaldtrump @fbi @secretservice

Uploaded on Jan 5, 2008

Michael Rupert ex CIA officer / narcotics whistleblower shows why the 9/11 attacks had to happen for the good of the US economy.

CIA Terrorism @

Guerrilla News Network's design-rich, beat-driven documentary, Crack the CIA, traces the dark history of CIA drug importation: exposing a covert operation being run from Mena Air Force Base in Arkansas that delivered tons of high grade cocaine into the U.S. inner cities. Features, Cele Castillo, Mike Ruppert, and Mara Leveritt.


Saturday, July 2, 2016

Civil Code - CIVDIVISION @hillaryclinton @fbi @realdonaldtrump @DWStweets @salesforce @sharynbovat @SassCBrown

Every Single Face is Deceased - see Clinton Murders

 

Civil Code - CIV

DIVISION 3. OBLIGATIONS [1427 - 3272.9]

  ( Heading of Division 3 amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 160, Sec. 14. )

PART 4. OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM PARTICULAR TRANSACTIONS [1738 - 3273]

  ( Part 4 enacted 1872. )

TITLE 1.8. PERSONAL DATA [1798 - 1798.78]

  ( Title 1.8 added by Stats. 1977, Ch. 709. )

CHAPTER 1. Information Practices Act of 1977 [1798 - 1798.78]

  ( Chapter 1 added by Stats. 1977, Ch. 709. )

ARTICLE 7. Accounting of Disclosures [1798.25 - 1798.29]
  ( Article 7 added by Stats. 1977, Ch. 709. )

  
1798.29.  

(a) Any agency that owns or licenses computerized data that includes personal information shall disclose any breach of the security of the system following discovery or notification of the breach in the security of the data to any resident of California whose unencrypted personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person. The disclosure shall be made in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay, consistent with the legitimate needs of law enforcement, as provided in subdivision (c), or any measures necessary to determine the scope of the breach and restore the reasonable integrity of the data system.

(b) Any agency that maintains computerized data that includes personal information that the agency does not own shall notify the owner or licensee of the information of any breach of the security of the data immediately following discovery, if the personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person.
(c) The notification required by this section may be delayed if a law enforcement agency determines that the notification will impede a criminal investigation. The notification required by this section shall be made after the law enforcement agency determines that it will not compromise the investigation.
(d) Any agency that is required to issue a security breach notification pursuant to this section shall meet all of the following requirements:
(1) The security breach notification shall be written in plain language, shall be titled “Notice of Data Breach,” and shall present the information described in paragraph (2) under the following headings: “What Happened,” “What Information Was Involved,” “What We Are Doing,” “What You Can Do,” and “For More Information.” Additional information may be provided as a supplement to the notice.
(A) The format of the notice shall be designed to call attention to the nature and significance of the information it contains.
(B) The title and headings in the notice shall be clearly and conspicuously displayed.
(C) The text of the notice and any other notice provided pursuant to this section shall be no smaller than 10-point type.
(D) For a written notice described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (i), use of the model security breach notification form prescribed below or use of the headings described in this paragraph with the information described in paragraph (2), written in plain language, shall be deemed to be in compliance with this subdivision.

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996

 

 

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
Great Seal of the United States
Long title An Act to deter terrorism, provide justice for victims, provide for an effective death penalty, and for other purposes.
Acronyms (colloquial) AEDPA
Citations
Public law Pub.L. 104–132
Statutes at Large 110 Stat. 1214
Legislative history
  • Introduced in the Senate as S. 735 "Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act of 1995" by Bob Dole (R-KS) on April 27, 1995
  • Passed the Senate on June 7, 1995 (91–8)
  • Passed the House on March 14, 1996 (without objection)
  • Reported by the joint conference committee on April 15, 1996; agreed to by the Senate on April 17, 1996 (91-8) and by the House on April 18, 1996 (293–133)
  • Signed into law by President Bill Clinton on April 24, 1996
United States Supreme Court cases
Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651 (1997)
Rice v. Collins, 546 U.S. 333 (2006)
Jimenez v. Quarterman, 555 U.S. 113 (2009)
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, (also known as AEDPA) is an act of the United States Congress signed into law on April 24, 1996. The bill was introduced by former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, passed with broad bipartisan support by Congress (91-8 in the United States Senate, 293-133 in the House of Representatives) following the 1990s World Trade Center and Oklahoma City bombings, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.[1][2]
Although controversial for its changes to the law of habeas corpus in the United States (Title I), upheld in Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651 (1997), the AEDPA also contained a number of provisions to "deter terrorism, provide justice for victims, provide for an effective death penalty, and for other purposes" in the words of the bill summary. Provisions include
  1. providing restitution/assistance for victims of terrorism (Title II),
  2. designation of foreign terrorist organizations and prohibitions on funding (Title III),
  3. removal or exclusion of alien terrorists and modifications of asylum procedures (Title IV),
  4. restrictions on nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons (Title V),
  5. implementation of the plastic explosives convention (Title VI),
  6. changes to criminal law involving terrorist (or explosives) offenses, including increased penalties and criminal procedures changes (Title VII),
  7. commissioning a study to determine the constitutionality of restrictions on bomb-making materials (Title VII - A - Sec. 709),
  8. funding changes and jurisdiction clarifications for law enforcement related to terrorism threats (Title VIII),
  9. and miscellaneous provisions in Title IX.

Contents

Habeas corpus

The AEDPA had a tremendous impact on the law of habeas corpus in the United States. One provision of the AEDPA limits the power of federal judges to grant relief[3] unless the state court's adjudication of the claim resulted in a decision that was
  1. contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or
  2. based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceeding.
In addition to the modifications that pertain to all habeas cases, AEDPA enacted special review provisions for capital cases from states that enacted quality controls for the performance of counsel in the state courts in the post-conviction phase. States that enacted these quality controls would see strict time limitations enforced against their death-row inmates in federal habeas proceedings coupled with extremely deferential review to the determinations of their courts regarding issues of federal law. Only Arizona has qualified for these additional provisions, but it has not been able to take advantage of them because it has not followed its own procedures.
Other provisions of the AEDPA created entirely new statutory law. For example, the judicially created abuse-of-the-writ doctrine had restricted the presentation of new claims through subsequent habeas petitions. The AEDPA replaced this doctrine with an absolute bar on second or successive petitions. Petitioners who attempted to bring claims in federal habeas proceedings that have already been decided in a previous habeas petition would find those claims barred. Additionally, petitioners who had already filed a federal habeas petition were required to first secure authorization from the appropriate federal court of appeals. Furthermore, the AEDPA took away from the Supreme Court the power to review a court of appeals's denial of that permission, thus placing final authority for the filing of second petitions in the hands of the federal courts of appeals.

History

The bill was introduced by Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, passed with broad bipartisan support by Congress (91-8 in the United States Senate, 293-133 in the House of Representatives) following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on April 24, 1996.[1][2]
Soon after it was enacted, AEDPA endured a critical test in the Supreme Court. The basis of the challenge was that the provisions limiting the ability of persons to file successive habeas petitions violated Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the US Constitution, the Suspension Clause. The Supreme Court held unanimously in Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651 (1997), that these limitations did not unconstitutionally suspend the writ.
In 2005, the United States Ninth Circuit indicated that it was willing to consider a challenge to the constitutionality of AEDPA on separation of powers grounds under City of Boerne v. Flores and Marbury v. Madison,[4] but has since decided that the issue had been settled by circuit precedent.[5]
Basketball player and later coach Steve Kerr and his siblings and mother sued the Iranian government under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, for the 1984 killing of Steve Kerr's father, Malcolm H. Kerr, in Beirut, Lebanon.[6]

Reception

While the act has several titles and provisions, the majority of criticism stems from the act's tightening of habeas corpus laws. Those in favor of the bill say that the act prevents those convicted of crimes from "thwart[ing] justice and avoid[ing] just punishment by filing frivolous appeals for years on end,"[7] while critics argue that the inability to make multiple appeals increases the risk of an innocent person being killed.[3][8]
Other, more recent criticism centers on the deference that the law requires of federal judges in considering habeas petitions. In Sessoms v. Grounds (Ninth Circuit), a majority of the judges believed that the state erred in not throwing out testimony made in the absence of the defendant's attorney after he had requested counsel, but were forced to overturn his appeal. The dissenting opinion said that federal courts can only grant habeas relief where "there is no possibility fairminded jurists could disagree that the state court's decision conflicts with [the Supreme] Court's precedents."[9]

See also

References




  • Lundin, Leigh (2009-06-28). "Dark Justice". Criminal Brief.

  • Holland, Joshua (2009-04-01). "A Tale of Two Justice Systems". AlterNet. Prison Legal News. Retrieved 2009-06-29.

  • Lundin, Leigh (2011-10-02). "The Crime of Capital Punishment". Death Penalty. Orlando: SleuthSayers.

  • Denniston, Lyle (2005-05-05). "Is AEDPA unconstitutional?". SCOTUSblog. Archived from the original on 20 March 2011. Retrieved 2011-04-18.

  • "Irons v. Carey". 2007-03-06. Retrieved 2011-04-18.

  • "NBA Finals' Rookie Coaches: Golden State Warriors' Steve Kerr and Cleveland Cavaliers' David Blatt". ABC News.

  • "Congressional Record for April 17, 1996, page S3476" (PDF). 1996-04-17. Retrieved 2011-04-25.

  • Rankin, Bill; Judd, Alan (2003-09-21). "Witnesses Recant; Law Stymies Death Row Appeal". The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Retrieved 2011-04-25.


    1. Peacock, William (2014-09-24). "5 Judges Issue 3 Dissents From Habeas Grant to Interrogated Teen". FindLaw.

    External links

    2405. Form Indictment -- Interference With Commerce By Extortion Consisting Of Threats, Violence Or Fear (18 U.S.C. 1951)

    2405. Form Indictment -- Interference With Commerce By Extortion Consisting Of Threats, Violence Or Fear (18 U.S.C. 1951)

    THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:
    1. That at all times material to this Indictment (victim whose property was to be obtained) was engaged in (describe commercial activities) , in [interstate][foreign] commerce and an industry which affects [interstate][foreign] commerce.
    2. That on (date) in the ____________ District of ______________ the defendant _________________ did unlawfully obstruct, delay and affect, and attempt to obstruct, delay and affect, commerce as that term is defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951, and the movement of articles and commodities in such commerce, by extortion, as that term is defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951, in that the defendant ____________ did obtain and attempt to obtain (tangible or intangible property) the property of (victim with connection to commerce) with his/her consent having been induced by the wrongful use of actual and threatened force, violence and fear, [including fear of economic harm,] in that the defendant did (describe defendant's wrongful use of force, violence or fear) .
    All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951.
    ** See United States v. Enmons, 410 U.S. 396 (1973), holding that violence undertaken by the parties to labor-management relations is "wrongful" only if they have no legitimate claim under the federal labor laws to the wages, benefits, and other property which they seek to obtain.
    [cited in Criminal Resource Manual 2402; USAM 9-131.010]

    2403. Hobbs Act -- Extortion By Force, Violence, Or Fear

    2403. Hobbs Act -- Extortion By Force, Violence, Or Fear

    In order to prove a violation of Hobbs Act extortion by the wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, the following questions must be answered affirmatively:
    1. Did the defendant induce or attempt to induce the victim to give up property or property rights? "Property" has been held to be "any valuable right considered as a source of wealth." United States v. Tropiano, 418 F.2d 1069, 1075 (2d Cir. 1969) (the right to solicit garbage collection customers). "Property" includes the right of commercial victims to conduct their businesses. See United States v. Zemek, 634 F.3d 1159, 1174 (9th Cir. 1980) (the right to make business decisions and to solicit business free from wrongful coercion) and cited cases). It also includes the statutory right of union members to democratically participate in union affairs. See United States v. Debs, 949 F.2d 199, 201 (6th Cir. 1991) (the right to support candidates for union office); United States v. Teamsters Local 560, 550 F. Supp. 511, 513-14 (D.N.J. 1982), aff'd, 780 F.2d 267 (3rd Cir. 1985) (rights guaranteed union members by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. §  411).
    2. Did the defendant use or attempt to use the victim's reasonable fear of physical injury or economic harm in order to induce the victim's consent to give up property? A defendant need not create the fear of injury or harm which he exploits to induce the victim to give up property. See United States v. Duhon, 565 F.2d 345, 349 and 351 (5th Cir. 1978) (offer by employer to pay union official for labor peace held to be "simply planning for inevitable demand for money" by the union official under the circumstances); United States v. Gigante, 39 F.3d 42, 49 (2d Cir. 1994), vacated on other grounds and superseded in part on denial of reh'g, 94 F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 1996) (causing some businesses to refuse operations with the victim sufficiently induced the victim's consent to give up property, consisting of a right to contract freely with other businesses, as long as there were other businesses beyond defendants' control with whom the victim could do business).
      Moreover, attempted extortion may include an attempt to instill fear in a federal agent conducting a covert investigation or a defendant "made of unusually stern stuff." See United States v. Gambino, 566 F.2d 414, 419 (2d Cir. 1977) (argument that FBI agent pretending to be extortion victim could not be placed in fear is not a defense to attempted extortion of the agent); see also United States v. Ward, 914 F.2d 1340, 1347 (9th Cir. 1990) (an attempt to instill fear included a demand for money from a victim who knew that the defendant was only pretending to be a federal undercover agent when he threatened the victim with prosecution unless money was paid).
      However, the payment of money in response to a commercial bribe solicitation, that is, under circumstances where the defendant does not threaten the victim with economic harm, but only offers economic assistance in return for payment to which the defendant is not entitled, is not sufficient to prove extortion by fear of economic loss. United States v. Capo, 817 F.2d 947, 951-52 (2d Cir. 1987) (solicitation of money from job applicants by persons having no decisionmaking authority in return for favorable influence with employment counselors was insufficient evidence of inducement by fear); but see United States v. Blanton, 793 F.2d 1553, 1558 (11th Cir. 1986) (inducement by fear was proven by the defendant's solicitation of a labor consulting contract, to help employer stop outside union organizing, when the solicitation was accompanied by defendant's threat to form another union and begin organizing employees if the consulting contract was not accepted).
    3. Did the defendant's conduct actually or potentially obstruct, delay, or affect interstate or foreign commerce in any (realistic) way or degree? The Hobbs Act regulates extortion and robbery, which Congress has determined have a substantial effect on interstate and foreign commerce by reason of their repetition and aggregate effect on the economy. Therefore, the proscribed offenses fall within the category of crimes based on the Commerce Clause whose "de minimis character of individual instances arising under [the] statute is of no consequence." United States v. Bolton, 68 F.3d 396, 399 (10th Cir. 1995) (upholding Hobbs Act convictions for robberies whose proceeds the defendant would have used to purchase products in interstate commerce), quoting, United States v. Lopez, --- U.S. ---, 115 S.Ct. 1624, 1630 (1995); material in brackets added; see also United States v. Atcheson, 94 F.3d 1237, 1243 (9th Cir. 1996) (robbery of out-of-state credit and ATM cards); United States v. Farmer, 73 F.3d 836, 843 (8th Cir. 1996) (robbery of commercial business); United States v. Stillo, 57 F.3d 553, 558 n.2 (7th Cir. 1995).
      Hobbs Act violations may be supported by proof of a direct effect on the channels or instrumentalities of interstate or foreign commerce, as for example, where the threatened conduct would result in the interruption of the interstate movement of goods or labor. See United States v. Taylor, 92 F.3d 1313, 1333 (2d Cir. 1996) (extortion of money, unwanted labor, and subcontracts on construction projects by threatened shutdowns and labor unrest); United States v. Hanigan, 681 F.2d 1127, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 1982) (robbery of three undocumented alien farm workers while they were traveling from Mexico to the United States in search of work); United States v. Capo, 791 F.2d 1054, 1067-68 (2d Cir. 1986), vacated on other grounds, 817 F.2d 947 (2d Cir. 1987) (scheme to extort local job applicants had a potential effect on interstate applicants who might otherwise be hired).
      Indirect effects on such commerce are also sufficient, as for example, where the obtaining of property and resulting depletion of the victim's assets decreases the victim's ability to make future expenditures for items in interstate commerce. Taylor, supra (depletion of contractors' assets). However, the Seventh Circuit has distinguished Hobbs Act cases involving depletion of a business' assets from those involving the depletion of an individual employee's assets which, the court has ruled, are not as likely to satisfy the jurisdictional requirement of the Hobbs Act. United States v. Mattson, 671 F.2d 1020 (7th Cir. 1982); United States v. Boulahanis, 677 F.2d 586, 590 (7th Cir. 1982). Other circuits have agreed where the extortion or robbery of an individual has only an "attenuated" or "speculative" effect on some entity or group of individuals engaged in interstate commerce thereby diminishing the "realistic probability" that such commerce will be affected. See United States v. Collins, 40 F.3d 95, 100 (5th Cir. 1994) (conviction for robbery of a computer company employee reversed on grounds that theft of victim's automobile with cellular phone had an insufficient effect on his employer's business); United States v. Quigley, 53 F.3d 909 (8th Cir. 1995) (upholding the acquittal, following guilty verdict, of defendants who beat and robbed two individuals in route to buy beer at a liquor store).
    4. Was the defendant's actual or threatened use of force, violence or fear wrongful? Generally, the extortionate obtaining of property by the wrongful use of actual or threatened force or violence in a commercial dispute requires proof of a defendant's intent to induce the victim to give up property. No additional proof is required that the defendant was not entitled to such property or that he knew he had no claim to the property which he sought to obtain. See United States v. Agnes, 581 F.Supp. 462 (E.D. Pa. 1984), aff'd, 753 F.2d 293, 297-300 (3d Cir. 1985) (rejecting claim of right defense to defendant's use of violence to withdraw property from a business partnership).
      However, the Supreme Court has recognized a claim-of-right defense to Hobbs Act extortion in labor-management disputes. In a 1973 decision, the Court reversed the conviction of union-member defendants who had used violence against an employer's property, during an otherwise legitimate economic labor strike, in order "to achieve legitimate union objectives, such as higher wages in return for genuine services which the employer seeks." United States v. Enmons, 410 U.S. 396, 400 (1973). The Court reasoned that the legislative history of the Hobbs Act disclosed that Congress had been concerned with attempts by union officials to extort wages for unwanted and fictitious labor, to which employees were not entitled, as contrasted with the policing of legitimate labor strikes in general. Therefore, the Court concluded that the union members' use of violence during the strike was not "wrongful" for purposes of Hobbs Act extortion. The Supreme Court also made a broadly worded statement that
      "wrongful" has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the obtaining of the property would itself be "wrongful" because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property.
    Id.
    In its labor-management context, the claim-of-right defense is not applicable where defendants do not have legitimate labor objectives. The labor claim-of-right defense has been held not to excuse the following kinds of coercive demands:
    • payoffs to union officials and employee representatives in violation of the federal labor laws (29 U.S.C. § 186); United States v. Quinn, 514 F.2d 1250, 1259 (5th Cir. 1975) (solicitation of church donation in return for removal of labor pickets); United States v. Gibson, 726 F.2d 869 (1st Cir. 1984) (request for payoff to remove pickets);
    • sham fees which labor unions are not entitled to collect under the labor laws; United States v. Wilford, 710 F.2d 439, 444 (8th Cir. 1983) (economic coercion of dues and initiation fees from truck drivers who were self-employed or who were told they would receive no member benefits);
    • employee payments which violate existing labor contracts; United States v. Russo, 708 F.2d 209, 215 (6th Cir. 1983) (under threat of job loss, employees' payment of health and pension contributions which labor contract required employer to pay);
    • employer payments to labor unions which are not included in existing labor contracts; United States v. Traitz, 871 F.2d 368, 381-82 (3d Cir. 1989) (violence used to collect fines on employers for non-compliance with union rules which were not made part of the labor contract);
    • demands that a non-union employer cease business operations during a sham union organizing campaign; United States v. Edgar Jones, 766 F.2d 994, 1002-03 (6th Cir. 1985) (violent campaign by union officials and union-represented competitor to drive the non-union employer out of business under the pretext of persuading employees to join the union and enforce area wage standards);
    • employer payments for labor consulting to establish a bogus "sweetheart union" and thereby discourage legitimate organizing by other unions; United States v. Blanton, 793 F.2d 1553 (11th Cir. 1986).
    • construction contractors' payments of money, wages for unwanted and superfluous employees, and subcontracts with employee representatives which were unrelated to the hiring of employees. United States v. Taylor, 92 F.3d 1313, 1319 and 1333 (2d Cir. 1996) (extortion of contractors by leaders of minority labor coalitions).
    Several courts of appeals have limited the claim-of-right defense to the context of labor-management disputes by refusing to extend the defense to extortionate violence and economic fear in commercial disputes and public corruption cases. United States v. Debs, 949 F.2d 199, 201 (6th Cir. 1991) (violence against union members in retaliation for support of opposition candidate for union office); United States v. Castor, 937 F.2d 293, 299 (7th Cir. 1991) (violent threats to obtain consent to enter into business arrangement); United States v. Zappola, 677 F.2d 264, 269 (2d Cir. 1982) (beating of debtor to coerce repayment of purported debt); United States v. Porcaro, 648 F.2d 753, 760 (1st Cir. 1981) (franchisor's violence to compel franchisee to vacate premises); United States v. French, 628 F.2d 1069, 1075 (8th Cir.1980) (public official's kickbacks on bail bond settlements); United States v. Cerilli, 603 F.2d 415, 419 (3d Cir. 1979) (solicitation of political contributions); United States v. Warledo, 557 F.2d 721, 729-730 (10th Cir. 1977) (violence by Native Americans to compel railroad to pay reparations for tribal lands).However, other courts have held that the extortionate use of fear of economic harm in commercial disputes is subject to a claim-of-right defense on the grounds that, unlike violence, the use of economic fear is not inherently "wrongful." See United States v. Kattar, 840 F.2d 118, 123-24 (1st Cir. 1988) (threat to expose church to litigation unless purported "award" for information was paid to defendant was not a legitimate use of economic fear where the information was false and defamatory); United States v. Clemente, 640 F.2d 1069, 1077-78 (2d Cir. 1981) (extortion of bogus consulting payments from subcontractor coerced by the threat of labor unrest against the subcontractor's principal).Where the claim-of-right defense applies, courts have generally held that the Government must prove that the defendant knew that he was not entitled to receive the property which he sought to obtain. United States v. Arambasich, 597 F.2d 609, 611 (7th Cir. 1979) (demand by labor union official on employer that the official and others be hired for no-show employment using threat of labor unrest); United States v. Sturm, 870 F.2d 769, 774 (1st Cir. 1989) (in prosecution involving debtor's withholding of property from a creditor-bank, "the term 'wrongful' requires the government to prove, in cases involving extortion based on economic fear, that the defendant knew that he was not legally entitled to the property that he received."); United States v. Dischner, 974 F.2d 1502, 1515 (9th Cir. 1992) (failure to instruct that defendant must know he had no entitlement to property he sought by use of economic fear did not rise to the level of plain error; but "knowledge of the extortion encompasses knowledge of the lack of lawful claim to the property.").
    [cited in USAM 9-131.010]

    2402. Hobbs Act -- Generally

    2402. Hobbs Act -- Generally



    The Hobbs Act prohibits actual or attempted robbery or extortion affecting interstate or foreign commerce "in any way or degree." Section 1951 also proscribes conspiracy to commit robbery or extortion without reference to the conspiracy statute at 18 U.S.C. § 371. The statutory prohibition of "physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section" is confined to violence for the purpose of committing robbery or extortion. United States v. Franks, 511 F.2d 25, 31 (6th Cir. 1975) (rejecting the view that the statute proscribes all physical violence obstructing, delaying, or affecting commerce as contrasted with violence designed to culminate in robbery or extortion).

    The extortion offense reaches both the obtaining of property "under color of official right" by public officials and the obtaining of property by private actors with the victim's "consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear," including fear of economic harm. See this Manual at 2405 and Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255, 265, 112 S.Ct. 1181, 1188 (1992) (only a private individual's extortion of property by the wrongful use of force, violence, or fear requires that the victim's consent be induced by these means; extortion of property under color of official right does not require that a public official take steps to induce the extortionate payment).

    Although the Hobbs Act was enacted in 1946 to combat racketeering in labor-management disputes, the extortion statute is frequently used in connection with cases involving public corruption, commercial disputes, and corruption directed at members of labor unions. Proof of "racketeering" as an element of Hobbs Act offenses is not required. United States v. Culbert, 435 U.S. 371, 98 S.Ct. 1112 (1978). However, a violation of the Hobbs Act may be part of a "pattern of racketeering activity" for purposes of prosecution under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute (18 U.S.C. §  1961, et seq.).
    [cited in USAM 9-131.010]

    Friday, July 1, 2016

    G4S - The mercenaries and snipers among us

    Their superior firepower beyond obvious and with the deaths in Orlando it's time to ask real questions about G4S with their expansive footprint. 

    Sunday, June 26, 2016

    SFSU President's Medal

    061--November 29, 1999; FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    Contact: Merrik Bush-Pirkle
    phone: 415/338-1665
    e-mail: pubcom@sfsu.edu


    Senator Diane Feinstein to receive SFSU President's Medal


    SAN FRANCISCO, November 29, 1999---At the final event celebrating its 100th anniversary, San Francisco State University will honor U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein with the prestigious President's Medal, the highest honor a California State University president can bestow upon an individual.
    On Thursday, December 2, during the university's Centennial Gala at San Francisco City Hall, SFSU President Robert A. Corrigan will present Feinstein with the medal to honor her exemplary career, longstanding service to SFSU and continuing support of higher education.
    "Those who are cynical about politicians and the value of a life spent in public service should look at Senator Dianne Feinstein," said Corrigan. "She reminds us of what a dedicated, principled person can achieve for the common good. She is an inspiration and a splendid model for those who are willing to work actively to make this a better, fairer nation."

    Through Sen. Feinstein's efforts, SFSU was awarded $9.6 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to demolish Verducci Hall, an on-campus residence hall that suffered irreparable damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. The funds will also help the university move forward on a $48 million plan to build a state-of-the-art student residential/services complex that is scheduled to open in August 2000.

    Sen. Feinstein will join SFSU alumna Annette Bening in receiving a President's Medal on Thursday. In addition, 10 living alumni will be recognized for their significant contributions to their fields. They include: Mayor Willie Brown, Jr.; State Senator John Burton; astronaut Yvonne Cagle; author Ernest Gaines; actor Danny Glover; businessman George Marcus; singer Johnny Mathis; poet Janice Mirikitani; music director Kent Nagano; and actor/comedian Ronnie Schell.

    The FICO Connnection - Open Letter to Will Lansing

    OPEN LETTER

    Will Lansing President
    Fair Issac
    200 Smith Ranch Road
    San Rafael, CA 94903 USA

    Dear Mr. Lansing,

    This my second email in regards to my personal story and economic downfall in part facilitated by tactical to disrupt my business, destroy my legal remedies and by whatever means remove me from the media. 

    In my first email a few facts were unknown to me specifically the connections to Richard Blum and Diane Feinstein, their respective connections to my ongoing misery. 

    The power couple sleep in a mansion whereas I sleep on a sheet of plywood but your investors lead to a 2004 attempted murders.  A CBRE SVP knows about the incidents and murder attempts.

    One of Mr. Blum's holdings leads to Telepacific who purchased ATG in Santa Rosa CA.  I was one of their salespeople who was given the corporate haircut.  That event was costly, it affected my family and forced us to get free food. 

    So I live under deplorable conditions and for several years have reached out to Senator Feinstein's office for constituent services and received none, just like my paycheck nothing.

    When you get a chance ask Mr. Blum where in the California Labor Code does it allow not to pay employees or even better, ask the Senator.

    Plain and simple, I was ripped off and would like to be paid as after all it's the debtor is the Husband of U. S. Senator with a net worth of likely over 1 billion, his firm and hedge fund probably burned the sales crew upwards of 500,000.   I am researching the ATG Sale to TPG seeking details on who authorized the very low-ball asset valuation. 

    Next is CBRE
    One person within CBRE organization has my trust documents where I lost my originals to East Bay Mormons who are suspects in my 2004 Arson fire.  It's attempted murder case and has been with the FBI when someone torched offices at 1776 Ygnacio Valley Road where my attorneys offices contained legal files lost in claims against SBC Global, Seeno Construction and smaller skirmish. 

    Zombie Debt Collection Case Chicago 2004
    Once I got on TV a slew of collection activities were aimed at me, morning, noon and night.   During that time I was TV with the Senator.  

    Today with your organizations connection to Richard Blum and my grassroots efforts against the Senator its kind of odd, that I've been arrested, jailed, beaten and set of fire.   That personal life has been in danger for as long I've been on TV perhaps longer. 

    What I've determined is my credit was targeted,  my ability to get work disrupted and my close relatives murdered.

    This is how the circle travels to from the UC System to CBRE to my family.  This business belongs to Cobb Bennett who is my brother. 

    Business Credit Information
    Toll Free:   1.415.861.4224
    Email:         bcicreditreport@2bci.net .
    Address:    251 Rhode Island, Suite 112  San Francisco, CA  94103, USA

    http://www.alumnilocators.com/

    Mr. Blum a regent, my brother works with UC Alumni

    This link is the forged Leslie Milne Bennett trust and you'll quickly realize I'm telling you truth.

    Your data is used against me to steal my trust documents.  With your tools you can easily link the real estate sold in secret, the property sold with the forged document and that forged document was on my trailer and placed in the Truck owner by Russ Darby who knows Mormon Bishop who works for Blum. 

    There is another back story with a murder case near this BOD

    http://ir.blackhawknetwork.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251638&p=irol-govcommcomp

    This is how big your problem is:  This family lived next door but also won a fat settlement without ever filing a case.   Friends of the Bishop who work the Power Couple who allow a vendor steal trust files , file forged papers and stand back when my truck explodes. 
    http://contracostawatch.blogspot.com/2013/12/california-bus-crash-sends-nine.html
    ------
    http://cnetscandal.blogspot.com/2014/09/wills-trust-and-estates-good-will.html

    Putting your analytical prowess for good - the bus accident and the law firms are one in the same.


    http://contracostawatch.blogspot.com/2013/11/twa-flight-800-1989-thefts-from-san.html

    The Bishops kids attended Green Valley Elem, then Los Cerros, then Monte Vista. 

    Several of the victims on this page are well known to the Bishop, who knows your BOD, who also knows Lennar who controls most of Mare Island where once again we've got arson. 

    http://contracostawatch.blogspot.com/2013/06/obituary-nathaniel-james-greenan-mormon.html

    Mr. Blum's wife is stonewalling me for basic constituent services while I endure homelessness, assaults, arson and legal setbacks over and over. 

    Accenture, BRAC, PG&E, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Bishop Lyon's former Accenture Executive who mysteriously dies on the Pacific Coast Trail. 

    The CBRE Bishop knows this Bishop, my roommate murdered in the county jail by deputies lived to a different Mormon Bishop. 

    You are smart to follow this and start your own investigation.  I clearly suspect these attacks over 30 years lead into 9/11 and the Accenture Federal Services. 

    Your credit databases will reveal if Accenture has anything to do the missing Hellcat Missile as once they're all over DOS, DLA and BRAC.

    My analysis is heading for the FBI on top of everything else that's happened and to the DOJ in DC.   In 2014, I begged the FBI for witness protection for me, my family and sons.  

    The Strack Murders and Russ Darby (Mormon)
    http://cnetscandal.blogspot.com/2015/09/case-civmsc14-01974-dodge-vs-rrs.html

    Russ Darby has the missing trust, the CBRE Bishop knows this.  The trust leads to this allegation posted in 2014, sent to the FBI in 2011 after the Mormon Chief of Police refused to investigate, the same chief that knew murder victims Ernie Scherer and his wife. 

    If you took the time with vast portfolio of information you identify the real killers and numerous arsonists, including my theory about the FedEx truck accident that killed.

    Your data provides proximity information.  Smash every transaction from Sac to Redding or from LVNV to La Brea and Pleasaton you'll learn what I suspect which is Ernie Scherer III was framed, like Scott Dyleski who Horowitz is connected to 500 La Gonda Way Litigation who could easily see my truck explode. 

    Your data could free men from prison, reveal who has been trying to kill me and possibly solve 9/11. 

    It's not everyday that a person close to your BOD is close to a person who took 10M from the Bin Laden Family who are connected to Bechtel who once had a 100 year relationship with Bechtel. 

    You know and I know that Bechtel is Cheney, and Lynne Cheney is Mormon and one of their premier vendors was John Ramsey. 

    You work at Board Level and no sane BOD would pass on meeting a vendor doing nearly a billion per year. 

    It's all in the timeline and that connects to my stint at Wells Fargo when the programmer jumped. 

    http://cnetscandal.blogspot.com/2015/10/danville-stake-mormonmurders.html
    http://cnetscandal.blogspot.com/2016/01/accenture-ceo-pierre-nanterme-feinstein.html




    CC: Board Of Directors

    Saturday, June 25, 2016

    OBIT: Ex-inspector general @potus @KattenLaw @fbi @chp_hq @orlando @Orrick @nixonpeabody @OrlandoPolice @walnutcreekpd @JudicialWatch

    Ex-inspector general fired by Obama over 2009 Americorps probe dies at 84

    Gerald Walpin, a former inspector general for the federal AmeriCorps program who was fired by President Barack Obama over his handling of an investigation into a California mayor and Obama supporter, has died. He was 84.


    Walpin was killed Friday morning after being struck by a sport utility vehicle in New York, his son-in-law, Allan Tananbaum, said.


    The New York Police Department said Walpin was crossing a street on the Upper East Side when he was struck by the vehicle. He suffered serious head injuries and died at a local hospital. The investigation is ongoing and no arrests had been made by Friday evening, a police spokesman said.

    Walpin was fired in 2009 as the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other national service programs following an investigation into Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson and his nonprofit group, which received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grants from the corporation that runs AmeriCorps.


    Walpin's probe found Johnson used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities and run personal errands for Johnson. Johnson, a former all-star point guard who played for the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Phoenix Suns, had supported Obama during his first campaign.


    Walpin referred the matter to the local U.S. attorney's office, which said Walpin's conclusions seemed overstated and didn't accurately reflect all the information gathered in the investigation. The U.S. attorney's office later reached a settlement in the case.


    Obama said he removed Walpin from his position after he lost confidence in him.

    Walpin was sworn into office in 2007 after being nominated by then-President George W. Bush. Walpin graduated from College of the City of New York in 1952 and received a law degree in 1955 from Yale Law School. He was a partner with the New York City law firm Katten Muchin and Rosenman LLP for more than 40 years

    Saturday, June 18, 2016

    Amid Romney's rise, Bay Area Mormons hope for more acceptance


    One in 10 U.S. Mormons lives in California, giving the state the largest Mormon population outside Utah. The Bay Area is a Mormon hub, home to an estimated 100,000 members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and one of its oldest operating temples.
    The East Bay had a burgeoning Mormon congregation in 1924, when a prophet and former church president is said to have looked over the bay from a San Francisco hotel and envisioned a "great white temple of the Lord" in the Oakland hills.

     dd Dedicated in 1964, the five-spire Oakland Temple remains a regional center of Mormon life.
    "I love the Bay Area for its tolerance and respect of all types of people. In many respects, this is the ideal environment, not only for Mormons but people of any faith, or nonfaith," said Richard Kopf, a corporate attorney from Alamo who converted to Mormonism in the 1960s and is the church's regional spokesman.

    At a 6 a.m. class Wednesday in central Hayward, Carol Welch stood in front of a map of the Holy Land, a King James Bible in her hand and eight tired teenagers in front of her.

    The class, known as seminary, meets every weekday, and this year the focus is on the Old Testament. In another year, if they haven't already, the teenagers will get to the New Testament and the Book of Mormon, the document that adherents believe was written by ancient prophets and translated by Joseph Smith in the early 19th century.

    Growing up Episcopalian in Alameda, Welch converted to Mormonism in the late 1980s. She wanted to raise her children in a religious tradition but wasn't sure which one until two suited missionaries appeared on her Fremont doorstep.

    "I was the world's biggest skeptic," Welch said. "When friends found out I was joining the Mormon church, they were shocked."

    The 63-year-old said she is regularly countering misconceptions. Mormons are nearly unanimous in describing themselves as Christian and believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, according to the Pew study, but Welch said many people still think Mormons aren't Christian.

    "There are so many religions that have been ridiculed over time," she said.

    Far more socially and politically conservative than the public, according to the Pew survey, some Mormons clashed with Bay Area gays and lesbians during the battle over Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage passed by voters in 2008.

    Hawker, who teaches critical thinking and argumentation at San Jose State, stayed out of the fray.
    "I don't think Mormons are being singled out any more than any other group, but Prop. 8 did not help many people's perceptions of Mormons," she said.

    A political moderate, Hawker prefers former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, a Mormon, over front-runner Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts and also a Mormon.
    About 86 percent of all Mormon voters view Romney favorably, and even Mormon Democrats approve of Romney as much as the average Republican voter, says the Pew study.

  • 94 percent of Mormons believe that God and Jesus Christ are separate, physical beings
  • 94 percent believe that the president of the church is a prophet of God
  • 95 percent believe families can be bound together eternally in temple ceremonies
  • Tuesday, June 14, 2016

    #CNETScandal Embedded Tweets

    Monday, June 13, 2016

    Walnut Creek / Investigators suspect boiler was at fault

    Explosion Rips Through Wells Fargo in Walnut Creek / Investigators suspect boiler was at fault

    Charlie Goodyear, Chronicle Staff Writer

    Published 4:00 am, Wednesday, December 1, 1999

    Note:  Darion Sable –Former Marine Suicide leaves Wells Fargo and jumps from Bay Bridge
    A thunderous blast ripped through a Wells Fargo Bank branch in downtown Walnut Creek yesterday, injuring an employee and a pedestrian struck by flying debris. Authorities termed it an accident.

    Fire investigators were focusing on a second-floor boiler as the likely cause of the blast. Authorities and bank employees said the boiler had been repaired about an hour before the explosion.

    "It was a big boom," said bank manager Nancy Methlie as she stood with a group of Wells Fargo employees not far from the intersection of Bonanza and North Main streets where the bank is located. "It was like you could feel it everywhere in the building."

    The explosion occurred at 3:51 p.m., blowing out windows around the building and throwing a large metal duct grille across Bonanza Street where it struck a man. He was taken to Kaiser Permanente Hospital in Walnut Creek with injuries to his shoulder and knee.

    A bank employee who was in a room adjacent to the boiler at the time of the blast was also taken to the hospital for symptoms of shock. But officials described both victims' injuries as minor.

    Bank patron Alex Utal said the explosion knocked panels off the walls inside the bank. "I thought someone had thrown something against the building," he said.

    Shannon Rogers, an employee at Athletic Outpost across from the bank, felt the explosion shake the building while she was working.

    "It reeked of gas," she said. "A big metal piece flew off and hit the piano store across the street."

    Other bank employees said the building quickly filled with heavy steam or smoke but officials said there was no fire inside following the blast.

    Damage was heaviest on the second floor where the suspect boiler was located.

    ''Earlier in the day, repairs were being made to the boiler," said Contra Costa Fire Capt. Larry Thude. "The repair crew left around 2 or 2:30 p.m."

    Authorities said only about 10 people, including employees and patrons, were in the bank when the explosion occurred. A gas line to the bank was immediately shut off but several neighboring businesses were evacuated as a precaution.

    Police cordoned off a four-block area around the bank, snarling traffic in the already heavily congested downtown area.

    Wells Fargo was planning to send its own security people to the scene to secure the bank, said bank market president Andrew Mastorakis.

    Mastorakis said there had been no threats made against the bank and that all evidence pointed to an explosion in the boiler. Fire officials and police were expected to remain at the scene to establish an official cause of the blast. Engineers from the bank and the city were assessing structural damage to the building last night.

    Lance Berg, a Wells Fargo spokesman in San Francisco, said customers in Walnut Creek should use Wells Fargo's branch on South Broadway until the branch on North Main reopens.

    Sunday, June 12, 2016

    "Exporting America" May 22, 2003 LOU DOBBS, CNNfn ANCHOR, LOU DOBBS


    Lou Dobbs CNN Moneyline
    "Exporting America" May 22, 2003
    LOU DOBBS, CNNfn ANCHOR, LOU DOBBS
    MONEYLINE: Good evening, everyone. Tonight, we continue our series of special reports, "Exporting America." This country's unemployment rate rose to six percent last month matching an eight-year high. Nearly nine million Americans are out of work. Many are bitter because their jobs are going to foreign workers who came to this country on special visas called H1-B. Kitty Pilgrim reports.

    KITTY PILGRIM, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Mike Roberts was laid off from his technology consultant job in California. He sold his house and is living in a hotel room with his family and plans to leave California for good when his daughter finishes the school year. He says the company he worked for brought in a wave of foreign workers on H1-B visas. He eventually was replaced.

    MICHAEL ROBERTS, TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANT: They were bringing in consultants like one, two, three every week, all H1-Bs, so you start asking and then you start discovering they're all coming through just one or two agencies and you realize they're not even considering American citizens at all.

    PILGRIM: Thirty-year-old Daniel Soong was making $160,000 a year but no longer. He lost his job to an H1-B visa worker. The former consultant now can't find a job and lives with his parents. He talks about a recent job interview that went nowhere. [Daniel Soong contacted ZaZona.com with a clarification: CNN made a mistake, he was making $60,000 a year, not $160,000.]
    DANIEL SOONG, TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANT: They were just interviewing me in order to satisfy the equal opportunity requirements of the state so they wouldn't be discriminating against American citizens, but in reality they had no intentions of hiring me and they wanted to hire an H1-B visa candidate.
    PILGRIM: The H1-B visa was born in the tech room of the early 1990s. There were not enough American workers, so employers asked for a special visa to bring in college educated workers from overseas to fill specialized jobs.
    In 1992, the H1-B visa let in a maximum number of 65,000 workers, but by the end of the decade that number jumped to 195,000 every year and that doesn't count visa renewals. For example, in 2001, 342,000 people renewed their H1-B visa.
    RON HIRA, IEEE-USA CHAIR: Usually in the technology area that you would bring an H1-B worker in temporarily. Unfortunately, the program has changed into instead of being a last resort the H1-Bs have become in some cases, you know, a first choice.
    PILGRIM: Peter Bennett started a Web site complaining about the H1-B visas. Then it gets 1,500 hits a week on his Web site.
    PETE BENNETT, NOMOREH1B.COM: Across the country, workers are being displaced wholesale. Entire teams are brought in to replace American workers and where they're being forced to train their replacements.
    PILGRIM: Charles Corry did consultant work in Colorado Springs with many high tech firms that use the H1-B visa. He says to him it's clear that companies give preference to the H1-B applicants because the workers are willing to put in longer hours for less money, anything to keep their job in the states.
    CHARLES CORRY, TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANT: They're a modern version of indentured servitude, the hours, the salaries typically much lower. I was probably getting twice what the H1-B visa people were.
    (END VIDEOTAPE)
    PILGRIM: And the General Accounting Office is looking into whether the H1-B visa workers are moving American workers out of their jobs. They expect to come up with a report by mid-September, and that timing is critical because Congress decides on the limits on the number of visas the following month - - Lou.
    DOBBS: They're studying whether H1-B visa employees are taking away jobs from Americans?
    PILGRIM: They want to make a study, everything.
    DOBBS: It seems like as they say a no-brainer.
    PILGRIM: Yes. It pretty much is industry knowledge that they are but they have to make a study of it -- Lou.
    DOBBS: How many are there now, H1-B visa holders in this country?
    PILGRIM: There's no real clear number because some people go back. Some people stay. Some people stay without the status.
    DOBBS: What's the best estimate?
    PILGRIM: But they think about a million.
    DOBBS: A million?
    PILGRIM: About a million and the problem is that you can reapply. You can stay in the country for three years and then renew it and stay for six, so you can stay for a long time on this visa.
    DOBBS: Kitty, thank you very much, fascinating, Kitty Pilgrim. Still ahead here tonight our "Quote of the Day" on a much needed boost for the economy. Then, we'll be talking with Congressman Peter DeFazio on why free trade is to blame for some of the problems our economy is experiencing and why free trade may be a misnomer.
    Also tonight, Saudi Arabia the target of terror, Saudi Foreign Policy Advisor Adel al-Jubeir will join us to talk about his country's new approach. Stay with us.
    (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
    DOBBS: This week we're focusing in our special series of reports on "Exporting America" on the reasons for the loss of jobs abroad. Democratic Congressman Peter DeFazio blames the loss of American jobs on poorly written trade agreements. The Congressman says one way to turn around that situation is to create a non-partisan congressional trade office. He says it would write smarter agreements that could uphold labor and environmental standards.
    Congressman Peter DeFazio joins us now from Washington, D.C., Congressman, good to have you here.
    REP. PETER DEFAZIO (D), OREGON: Thanks, Lou, appreciate being on the show.
    DOBBS: The issue of free trade, membership in the W.T.O, (unintelligible), all of these agreements ostensibly a level playing field for lesser developed nations as well as industrialized. Why do you find it's not working?
    DEFAZIO: Well, actually if you look back to NAFTA, the whole intent of NAFTA was to make the export of capital safe because the appropriations earlier in the last century in Mexico. So, it was really set up to protect capital exports, capacity exports by U.S. manufacturers and the other agreements are modeled on that.
    They don't protect labor rights. They don't protect environmental standards, and they don't create a level playing field in any way. I mean U.S. workers can't compete with Mexican workers let alone China and others that they're being forced to compete with in this agreements.
    DOBBS: As you know, Congressman, one of the facts is that jobs that were lost in this country to Mexico have subsequently been, at least a portion of them, lost to China which are now being lost to Vietnam. At what point does this Congress and this White House deal with the issue of real imbalances that are creating job losses and the exportation not only of capital and jobs but intellectual capital?
    DEFAZIO: Well, we're hollowing out our economy, both our industrial strength and now our service sector, intellectual strength, and high technology which was supposed to be where the displaced industrial workers went. It is an extraordinary threat to the future of our productivity and I believe our national security. When does Congress wake up? I don't know. The American people have woken up. Even Alan Greenspan is speaking out strongly about the potential problems here.
    The International Monetary Fund, controlled by the United States has said our trade deficit isn't sustainable. But inside the Beltway here there's this head in the sand attitude.
    You know when we renewed the H1-B which your last segment talked about here in Congress, they lied to us. It was controversial when they renewed it even when the economy was booming. They did it after hours. They told us there would be no more recorded votes. People left and the Republican leadership brought it up and jammed it through and, of course, the Clinton administration was complicit in that.
    DOBBS: The Clinton administration, you mean Democrats and Republicans alike lied to you, Congressman?
    DEFAZIO: Well, I'm not sure what the Democratic leadership knew or didn't now but the Republicans did for sure because they told us no more votes. I left among others and no more bills coming up and they brought that through, passed it on a voice vote. So, it's not going to happen this time we would hope with the scrutiny that's now starting to come on this problem and this issue.
    DOBBS: Well, the fact of the matter is that in the ten years since the H1-B visa was created, it has brought in a huge number of visa holders that are taking jobs whether one -- and as Kitty Pilgrim reported a study is underway. It doesn't seem to me to require a lot of studying to figure out that jobs have been lost to H1-B visa holders. What are you going to do about it?
    DEFAZIO: Well, the conflict that Congress feels, and obviously this administration feels is that there are certain corporations that have done very well under this and they're putting counter pressure on against American workers and the American workforce.
    I'm hoping that this will be a time when we're going to do one for the future of our country and for our workers and we can create enough inertia. They can't ignore this problem anymore. I mean all those displaced industrial workers were supposed to get retrained for high tech. Well, guess what, we brought in people to do your work and now we're starting to export it.
    I mean the other thing, and I'm not sure she touched on it, is that a lot of times these people are brought in, trained in teams, and then sent back to India where they can pay them even less than here. Here they're paid less than American workers but over there they're paid less than half.
    DOBBS: And is it your sense that anything will be done about this or is it -- because you talk about the corporations doing very well. The fact is whether one looks at this in terms of men and women, working men and women in this country who are simply being screwed, or whether one looks at it in terms of corporations who are benefiting, the fact is it is certainly not helping the American economy. Shouldn't Congress be taking a serious look at the interests of this country?
    DEFAZIO: Well, absolutely, and I'm hoping to engage some of the Republicans, like Duncan Hunter on Armed Services. We're now -- the Chinese are within half a generation of us in high tech computer technology and chips. We're supposed to by national policy maintain a two generation lead. That happened because of U.S. exports of technology to China under their demands. I mean they demand. We export the technology there and then they'll provide the cheap labor.
    This is an extraordinary threat to the future of this country and, you know, there certainly should be a national security concern. If people aren't concerned about our workers they got to be concerned about our national security.
    DOBBS: Congressman DeFazio we thank you very much and we wish you luck as you move forward with your advocacy of a congressional trade office. Thank you, sir.
    DEFAZIO: Thanks, Lou. Thanks for shining a light on this.
    DOBBS: Tomorrow on this broadcast we continue our series, "Exporting America." We'll take a look at the tremendous pressure faced by U.S. companies that try to keep their operations in this country, and we'll show you what businesses and governments are doing to at least try to encourage them to stay. And we'll try to find out precisely what the trade policy is of this country on this important issue.