TIP LINE

If you have any news tips, gossip or rumors you would like to share or any ideas for future post. Please send an email to: 6vwts@notsharingmy.info or contact us on Twitter: @IndyRepublicanX

You do not have to leave your name. We appreciate greatly your support.


Showing posts with label Fatima Hussein. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fatima Hussein. Show all posts

Sunday, October 29, 2017

Lawsuit alleges Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson is violating Federal Election Laws

Connie "Freeloader" Lawson


Back in May IR wrote about Vice President Mike Pence and Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson's appointment's to a Commission on Voter Fraud by President Trump. On Friday October 27th, 2017 Fatima Hussein at INDYSTAR.COM reported that Secretary Lawson was being sued by Common Cause Indiana and other parties for violating federal election laws.

Ms. Hussein writes:

Common Cause Indiana in a federal lawsuit filed Friday calls for an injunction to be issued against Lawson, whom the political watchdog group accuses of unlawfully purging voters from state rolls.

Specifically, Common Cause challenges the new "Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck" system that allows election officials to immediately remove voters identified as having registered to vote in another state. The process finds a match based on first name, last name and date of birth.

Common Cause alleges that the crosscheck system contradicts the protections in the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, resulting in "nonuniform, discriminatory and illegal cancellations of Indiana voter registrations."

For example, one requirement of federal law says a state “shall not remove” a voter from its list of eligible voters due to change in residence unless the voter confirms a change in residence in writing or fails to respond to a notice sent by the state.

The ACLU of Indiana, national ACLU and voting rights group Demos are representing Common Cause in the suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

Common Cause's latest action is similar to a lawsuit filed by the Indiana NAACP and League of Women Voters in August.

The Indiana NAACP and League of Women Voters also allege that the state's crosscheck system on voter rolls violates federal law and is discriminatory.

In noting the similarity of the separate lawsuits, Common Cause Indiana's policy director says the issue warrants increased attention.

"There seems to be a move to restrict the right to vote rather than expand it," Julia Vaughn told IndyStar.

"We are disturbed by attempts to restrict access to vote, and we feel an obligation to the voters and state to say, 'No, you have to follow federal law.'"

Named defendants in the lawsuit are Lawson, J. Bradley King and Angela M. Nussmeyer, who are co-directors of the Indiana Election Division.

The secretary of state's office declined to speak with IndyStar regarding the lawsuit, citing a policy not to comment on pending litigation. A spokesman for the Indiana Election Division did not respond to IndyStar requests for comment.

IR has the utmost respect for Julia Vaughan of Common Cause Indiana. We here disagree with her on many issues. But fairly often side with her on issues of government transparency. INDY REPUBLICAN is not sure of what to make of this lawsuit yet. We do not have enough information to form an opinion. But due to our reservations about Connie Lawson, and our respect for Julia Vaughan we will do our best to keep an eye on this case.

Monday, August 7, 2017

Will someone finally blame Mitch Daniels for his foul ups with FSSA's Welfare Privatization?


Mitch Daniels after his lobotomy 

You would think after the better part of a decade we the taxpayers would finally be able to put former Governor Mitch Daniels now infamous welfare privatization scheme behind us! But if today's story in the Indianapolis Star is to be believed we maybe nowhere near the finish line on this.

Earlier today Fatima Hussein and Tim Evans wrote "IBM owes $128M in welfare privatization". Mr. Evans and Miss Hussein give some background on the ongoing pissing match between IBM and the State of Indiana:

The state of Indiana has won a judgment for $128 million in damages in a lawsuit against alleging IBM breached its 2006 contract to modernize delivery of welfare services by the Family and Social Services Administration.

Marion Superior Court Judge Heather Welch awarded the damages in an order today, according to a statement issued by Barnes & Thornburg, which represented the state in the lawsuit. The suit has been going on since the state terminated IBM's contract in 2009 claiming the company's performance was poor.

IBM intends to appeal the latest ruling "which is contradicted by the facts and the law," says Clint Roswell, an IBM representative in an emailed statement to IndyStar.

"IBM worked diligently and invested significant resources in its partnership with FSSA to help turn around a welfare system described at the time by Indiana’s governor as one of the worst in the nation," Roswell said.

The Indiana Supreme Court ruled in 2016, according to the statement, "that IBM was owed around $50 million for certain unpaid fees and equipment charges, but rejected over $53 million of IBM’s other claims, and held that IBM had breached its contract with the State as a matter of law." 

The Supreme Court then sent the case back to the trial court to determine the amount of the state’s damages.

The net result of today’s ruling, the statement said, is that IBM now owes the state more than $78 million, plus interest at 8 percent from the date of the judgment.

Evans and Hussein provide a condensed account of the events leading up to today's ruling:

The case stems from a $1.37 billion,10-year contract that IBM and Indiana entered in 2006. It was hailed at the time as the solution for fixing one of the nation’s most-troubled welfare systems.

The state, though, canceled the contract three years later after a flood of complaints about the system from clients, their advocates and federal officials. At the time, the state had paid $437 million to IBM.

The two sides sued each other for damages. In 2012, a Marion Superior Court judge awarded $52 million to IBM.

In 2014, though, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the ruling and ordered a determination of damages suffered by the state. Indiana was seeking $177 million in a breach-of-contract countersuit against IBM. The Indiana Supreme Court then took up the case.

John Maley and Peter Rusthoven of Barnes & Thornburg, issued a joint statement saying they were gratified by the latest decision. “We are very pleased the court awarded $128 million in damages for IBM’s failure to keep the important promises it made to the State of Indiana,” the statement said.

“This has been a long, tough battle with a big corporation that refused all along to take responsibility for its poor performance," the statement said. "This hurt Hoosier families most in need, who depend upon the help of the Family and Social Services Administration. Today’s ruling is another victory for those families, for our State, and for all our citizens and taxpayers. It also vindicates the consistent determination of former Governors Mitch Daniels and Mike Pence and now Governor Eric Holcomb that IBM must be held responsible for not doing what it promised.”

As frequent readers of the late Gary Welsh's Advance Indiana blog and Paul Ogden's Ogden on Politics blog will note. The state bears at least as much and probably more of the blame for screwing up Indiana's welfare programs! John Marley and Peter Rusthoven might want to avoid pointing fingers. According to rumor the biggest reason why Mitch Daniels did not run for President in 2012 is because the Obama administration would have had the US Attorneys Office in Indianapolis investigate and possibly prosecute many key players in the whole IBM-FSSA-ACS debacle. The fact that IBM is going to appeal the most recent decision in this case should give former Indiana Governor now Vice President Mike Pence pause about ever running for another office! This problem won't go away even if IBM loses. Also Marley and Rusthoven are probably hoping nobody will ever ask them about their law firms representing the state, while having a non waivable conflict of interest in doing so since they also represent ACS as well. Click here to read more about the conflict of interest. 

The late Carl Moldthan who worked for Mitch Daniels and argued against the privatization of welfare services warned of problems that would emerge back in 2005. But Mitch Roob was hell bent on privatization. And as Gary Welsh pointed out IBM was most likely a placeholder put on so that they could be later fired and Roob's former employer ACS could step in.

Here are some extracts from both Gary Welsh and Paul Ogden's work documenting the whole FSSA nightmare:

Carl Moldthan's time at FSSA:

"When Moldthan arrived at his his new job, Mitch Roob wasn't quite sure how to best utilize him. Because there had been so much talk about privatizing the services administered by the county welfare agencies, Moldthan suggested he be tasked to visit all of the offices, learn better what they were or were not doing right and make recommendations to Roob and his management team. Roob thought that sounded like a fantastic idea so off Moldthan went to visit every single county welfare agency--all 105 of them--over the next several months. During the course of his visits, Moldthan would make no fewer than 70 suggestions to Roob and his superiors on ways of improving the agency's operations, changes if implemented, he claims would have resulted in hundreds of millions in savings. Little did Moldthan know at the time that his common sense ideas would be met with scorn, laughter or otherwise summarily rejected by his superiors and would culminate in earning him a trip to Roob's office where he would be undressed for being the most disloyal person Roob had ever met."

"What Moldthan came to learn was that Roob was going to privatize the work done by those county welfare agencies come hell or high water. Anyone who didn't believe in privatization should leave, an offer Moldthan gladly accepted after less than a year on the job. Moldthan also learned that Roob had no intention of saving money from privatization. After all, the county welfare agencies comprised only $180 million of FSSA's multi-billion dollar budget, representing just 7% of the agency's entire budget. Surely there were other more effective ways of findings savings at the agency than getting rid of your front-line workers."

Moldthan's warnings to Mitch Roob:

"Moldthan found a broken system. Moldthan pleaded the case for an alternative solution to privatization recommended by the consulting firm hired by Roob, but Roob and others rebuffed him."

Gary Welsh explains Mitch Daniels and Mitch Roob's real plans for FSSA:


I have always steadfastly maintained that it was never the intention of the Daniels administration to put IBM in charge of this major undertaking. I've contended that IBM's role was that merely as a placeholder to provide cover to Mitch Roob from criticism that he was steering the state's largest contract in Indiana history to his former employer (ACS). 

"Underscoring my view, Judge Dreyer noted evidence in the record that ACS's lobbyist, Joe Loftus, was lobbying state officials behind IBM's back to have it assume control of the contract and to oust IBM despite ample evidence that many problems with the implementation involved tasks performed by ACS. He cited testimony that Loftus "used his political contacts with the administration to help his clients, ACS and Arbor, with respect to Modernization" and "Anne Murphy relied on Joe Loftus as a source of information in her dealings with IBM." Judge Dreyer found that ACS was interfering with IBM's contract "by directly lobbying the Governor, and the State was unable or unwilling to redirect the revenue necessary to adequately fund Modernization with IBM." Judge Dreyer found that Loftus' lobbying actions were creating distrust among the contract partners. He cited an e-mail exchange Loftus had with Roob in which he said, "I expect to get a lecture today from IBM reminding me that they are the Prime." Loftus added, "They just don't get it." Dreyer found that Loftus' communication behind IBM's back "presumably violated its contract with IBM and the state was in violation of the terms of the MSA, which provided that IBM was the sole point of contact with regard to contractual matters." Loftus' communications included conversations directly with Gov. Daniels and one of his top staffers, Betsy Burdick, who is the sister of Brian Burdick, the Barnes & Thornburg attorney who signed the contract on behalf of the firm to represent the state in its lawsuit against IBM despite its obvious conflict of interests. Loftus' actions were that of a snake in the grass, completely stabbing IBM in the back to win the contract for his client. Dreyer noted that ACS officials testified that Loftus' communications behind IBM's back "were contractually prohibited." As Dreyer put it, "The Court is unable to find that IBM breached the contract by failing to adequately manage ACS at the same time ACS and the State were talking behind IBM's back."

For the life of me, I do not understand why a criminal investigation has not been launched by the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's office. This has got to be one of the most corrupt deals in the history of Indiana state government. Hundreds of millions of federal tax dollars were being misspent simply so big campaign contributors of Gov. Mitch Daniels could make a lot of money with no concern at all to the services being provided using those tax dollars. One of the administration's biggest critics in the state legislature is a Republican lawmaker, State Sen. Vaneeta Becker (R-Evansville). “The whole thing could have been avoided if the state from the beginning had just provided new computers and additional training to caseworkers,” she told the Star's Mary Beth Schneider. “A lot of this could have been avoided and a lot of costs.” Gov. Daniels, for his part, was totally unapologetic about the outcome and says he expects the decision will be overturned on appeal. Even if the state loses on appeal, he told Schneider that the more than $52 million the state will be required to pay IBM was irrelevant because they "are so tiny compared to the savings we’re achieving.” The state has spent more than a half billion dollars to date on the privatization effort. What do you expect from a guy who told Congress when he was OMB Director that the Iraq war would only cost taxpayers $50 billion? Oh, and did I mention that Gov. Daniels put a former paid consultant for ACS, Mike Gargano, in charge of FSSA after Roob's successor, Anne Murphy, left the agency after a short stint running the agency?

There were lots of hiccups along the way, some of them IBM's fault, some of them the fault of subcontractors like ACS, some of them the fault of FSSA and some due to circumstances beyond both parties' control attributed to the explosion in claims caused by the Great Recession. The undisputed facts show the state devised metrics for measuring IBM's performance and an overwhelming number of those metrics were on target. What few were under-performing were moving in the right direction when Gov. Daniels abruptly terminated IBM's contract and handed its work over to ACS entirely to fulfill, which I believe was the objective all along. Roob just needed IBM as a placeholder not to make it so obvious he had steered one of the most lucrative contracts in the state's history to his previous employer, although everyone knew that was his objective all along beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Gary Welsh predicted Indiana would try to screw over IBM:

Sometimes justice works, and sometimes justice works in mysterious ways. This is one of the most corrupt and sad chapters in recent Indiana government history. There should have been criminal prosecutions for what took place involving this contract in the Daniels administration and what continues to take place to this day. Unfortunately, I don't see much upside for IBM finding justice in this state, and its attorneys would probably be well-advised to pick up its marbles and go home without being stripped too bare of its clothing before leaving the state by the wheels of justice in Indiana, which can work in very mysterious ways. IBM should have realized it was lying down with dogs when it got involved in this taxpayer feeding frenzy years ago and the inevitable result of waking up with fleas.

Paul Ogden on FSSA debacle and Barnes and Thornburg's conflict of interest representing the state and ACS:

The State, i.e. FSSA, ended up suing IBM to recover under the contract.  IBM countersued, claiming that the State breached the contact through its termination.  But who does the Daniels' administration insist the State hire to represent the State?  None other than Barnes & Thornburg the very law firm that represented ACS in lobbying to get the contract and still represents ACS to this day. 

Let me summarize what appears to have happened. ACS lobbies state officials to oust IBM so ACS can have the lucrative Medicaid privatization contract to itself.  ACS eventually succeeds.  The State sues IBM, perhaps to counter the inevitable breach of suit IBM was about to file.  After, IBM sues, the State hires Barnes & Thornburg, ACS's attorney to represent the state.

The State appears to be nothing more than a proxy for ACS. This case is essentially ACS v. IBM, yet we taxpayers are on the hook to pay Barnes & Thornburg, ACS' attorneys, $9.6 million.  That is uttterly outrageous.

Given that federal money here is involved, I too wonder why there has not been a federal investigation opened up by the FBI into this matter.  There certainly should be now that the facts here expose troubling, if not illegal, conduct by government officials and private lobbyists.





Saturday, March 11, 2017

Oops! Mike Pence Did It As Well! The Day Mike Pence Became Hillary Clinton!

Image result for mike pence is hillary clinton meme
MIKE PENCE AS HILLARY CLINTON



Greetings Brother and Sister rabble rousers! As we have previously pointed out on this blog. The late great Gary Welsh compared Mike Pence with Rod Blagojevich. A belief we all share here at IR. But we never thought that we would ever be lumping Mike Pence in with Hillary Clinton but we believe that is a fair and accurate assessment of Pence given his ongoing email scandal and the fact that he used a private AOL email account to conduct state business on. We can all recall how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton email scandal during her time running the State Department. Mike Pence's email scandal is a long and sordid tale, but it is one that must be told.  Miss Hussein is one of the only great reporters  remaining at the Langley controlled "Pravda Indianapolis"  Indianapolis Star. As some of you are aware Mike Pence has been fighting since last year to keep many of his emails he sent while he was governor a secret from we the people. Starting with Fatima Hussein's February 27th, 2016 article Ms. Hussein writes:




Vice President Mike Pence continued to fight to keep secret a political white paper emailed to him while he was Indiana governor, petitioning the Indiana Supreme Court not to review a public records denial for the controversial papers.
If opened, the communications could reveal a slew of Republican political strategies that Pence and dozens of other U.S. governors devised to fight former President Barack Obama and an executive order of his concerning immigration.
If the justices take the case, the court also could redefine the bounds of open, public communication for Indiana's executive office.





The case stems from a public records request made in December 2014 by Indianapolis attorney William Groth, a Democrat, who was gathering information about the former Republican governor's use of outside counsel for the immigration litigation and its cost to Indiana taxpayers.
Pence produced the requested emails “but those documents included substantial redaction,” including a white paper the governor failed to produce, according to court records.


The white paper in question contains legal theories used by many governors in their decision to join State of Texas et al v. United States of America, which challenged the Obama administration's executive order regarding immigration.
After Groth filed suit in Marion County Superior Court, a judge ruled in favor of Pence, saying the redactions the administration made to the public record were "proper."


This January, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that Groth does not have the right to view the political white paper, but disagreed with the governor's contention that it would violate the separation of powers doctrine for the judiciary to second guess the redactions.


That was an important finding to advocates of government transparency, who feared a Pence victory in the suit could set a broader precedent that would embolden future governors to refuse to disclose or heavily redact public documents with no court oversight.
Earlier this month, Groth petitioned the Indiana Supreme Court to take up the case.
Indianapolis attorney Greg Bowes filed the 19-page petition on behalf of Groth claiming the appeals court erred in determining that the white paper did not have to be released because it was "deliberative material" for the purpose of preparing for litigation.
Groth is arguing the Court of Appeals improperly applied the attorney-client relationship doctrine because the white paper was emailed to a wide range of people outside of the attorney-client relationship. He is also asking the court whether the court of appeals improperly created a "deliberative materials exception" to state public records.


Calling Groth's lawsuit "unfounded" in court documents, Joseph Chapelle, Pence's attorney from Indianapolis law firm Barnes & Thornburg, last week filed the 30-page response.


Chapelle told IndyStar that the appellate court majority’s decision should stand and that if the Supreme Court takes on the case, "it will be an opportunity for the court to clarify the separation of powers doctrine."
In the latest court documents, Chapelle maintains that Pence will use executive privilege as a defense in the future. "There are policy reasons for executive privilege," Chapelle said.
Groth told IndyStar Sunday that he wants to see transparency in government.
"Hoosiers are entitled to and should continue to demand more, rather than less, openness from all governmental officials, but especially from their governor," he said


The fact that Pence has an attorney from Barnes and Thornburg handling this situation is enough to make us think Pence is terrified of these emails being publicly released. Longtime readers of Advance Indiana and Ogden on Politics will recognize the name Barnes and Thornburg. They are the law firm that has represented the state in the FSSA Privatization debacle, also they fought like hell trying to save former US Senator Dick Lugar's butt! Word is that they went so far as to get WXIN the Fox affiliate in Indianapolis to spike a story about Lugar's residency issue that the station had planned to air in 2011 click here to read Paul Ogden's recounting of that incident. Other nefarious individuals associated with B&T over the years have included: Former Marion County Prosecutor Scott Newman and Democratic State Rep. Ed "Why Did I meet with some mysterious person in a Parking Lot" Delaney.  We are especially curious as to what Mr. Chapelle's reasoning is behind his claim that "There are policy reasons for executive privilege." That Pence is claiming as to why these emails shouldn't be released. For what policy is Chapelle referring to? And what policy could possible trump our right to know what Mike Pence was doing with the taxpayers money? This sounds a little to much like Nixon's bullshit claim of executive privilege during the Watergate Scandal!


Ms. Hussein wrote in her November 21, 2016 "Pence's legal team argues to keep emails secret":


"The statute (Indiana Access to Public Records Act) itself cannot get into the governor's personal papers," said Joseph Chappelle, Pence's attorney, from the Indiana law firm Barnes & Thornburg, referring to the legal bounds of the Indiana Access to Public Records Act.
Legally, the burden is on the governor to prove the documents are protected from public purview.


What we are curious about is if these were Mike Pence's "personal papers" as his lawyer says they are then why did he email them to 30 or so different people in several different states? Since it is Pence's job to show why these documents in question should be shielded from public purview it is reasonable to assume that he would not have sent such sensitive information to over two dozens parties! So either he believed they were sensitive at the time and chose to brazenly send them out to 30 people. Or more likely in as we believe he only adopted the stance that these emails should be kept secret when Mr. Groth asked for them. It is true that Pence's office had large amounts of his AOL emails that he sent out turned over to now Governor Eric Holcomb's office recently after he was called out on the carpet. But Pence's continued pursuit of keeping some of his official emails secret inspires no confidence in him. Pence might as well put on a blonde wig and a blue woman's business suit. Based off of his lack of transparency with his official emails the verdict is in. Mike Pence is now Hillary Clinton.



Update: WISH-TV has a story about Mike Pence defending his use of a private email account for state business. As usual his Propaganda Minister Spokesman Marc Lotter talks about how great his boss Mike Pence is. Click here and here for our past posts about Lying Marc Lotter.