Author Archives: Deplorable Patriot

George Floyd. 3 Minutes of resisting arrest. The video Fake News didn’t want you to see?

 

Video footage the MSM fake news conveniently kept out of their “breaking news story” has surfaced  of George Floyd resisting arrest for around three minutes .

Would this have stopped the riots? No. Fake news had made their minds up.  They were going do their part at destroying the country.  They were sticking to the plan.

*”One of the most obvious ways to tell I’f a event could be faked is paying attention to the news release. It’s  a dead giveaway when you see all the networks releasing the same exact story, at the same time.”

This video just adds to the long list  of events that fake news got caught at “faking news”.

There you have it.  Floyd did indeed resist arrest.  The entire fake news complex lied to you, again.  They specifically said Floyd didn’t resist arrest.

This is just another example why I quit believing everything the news media puts out..  Some might think that’s a little extreme.  No. It’s  the only logical, smart solution.  The days of me saying “they lie sometimes but usually they are pretty honest”  were gone long ago.  If you say you can tell the difference simply by using your best judgement, all you are really doing is selecting what you feel comfortable with. That does not make it true.

People saw the video.  They saw Floyd die.. Somebody mentioned in the comment section in a prior post of mine.  Something along the lines that “it’s  going to take more than different time stamps to change my mind”.

Five simple points, out of many.

  1. MSM lies all the time
  2. “Floyd is dead because the video shows it.”  Yes, the video looks like someone got killed or died of something. .. I get it, you’re convinced.  Now go turn on your TV or watch your favorite movie on the internet.   Why do you watch what you are watching?  It’s because the character’s seem real.  A block buster movie only becomes a hit if the movie is good.  This requires the actors  being skilled enough to convince you the roles the play are real..  Seeing is no longer believing.   If you believe Floyd is dead because it was captured on video, then you have to believe everything in all movies/videos  are true.
  3. If we wanted to use a video deposition in court, most states require the date/time to be burned into the video at the time of recording.  If the date is off/time is off, they cannot be used in court.  All the videos  times were different..  Floyd videos should not be legit evidence in court.  *Time/ date can be faked in any video.  Even when time of recording is hurned into video.
  4. To convict, there cannot be a reasonable doubt.   Time/date or  anything  else that’s  seemd wrong with this event causes reasonable doubt.  Innocent until proven guilty.
  5. Reliability of source of video.

I use the MSM as leads.  Then I investigate the story myself. But to each their own.

Fake ot not , some have come out ahead because of Floyd’s death.

  • Floyd family got millions in donations. Fame and fortune.
  • Black LIves Matter seemed to grow in numbers.  They assaulted and killed police officers which continues at this very moment.  They ignore   black on black deaths., or any other death in the black community..  They’ve actually got people giving in to their demands..  Some are actually kneeling for them, because BLM expects it.  .  Yes, they have been successful proving racism and bigotry exist in America.  BlM being perhaps the most openly racist group to ever exist in America..
  • Let’s not forget the 35 million and more BLM has received  in donations..  Unfortunate for them,  the people handling their money, the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF) has only spent  $200,000 of the money on bail money for protesters.  They haven’t  said where the rest of the money went.  MFF deleted the board members(which are almost all white) page on their site and they quit accepting donations.  They already admitted on Twitter that ” the donations are turned over to ACTBLUE.  ACTBLUE then give it to the democrats”.  That’s  because ACTBLUE is part of the Democrat party. Looks like the democrats hustled BLM.  Watch, BLM will still support democrats. Ok
  • Democrats have shown how much they love their voter base by allowing out of town rioters to destroy their cities, their  businesses, get assaulted, killed and have their whole lives destoyed.
  • Biden says Floyd is more important than MLK.
  • Science makes discovery that protesting will keep you safe from getting covid19 but attending church, working, etc, increases your chance to get the virus.
  • The first time in history that a transperson parent got to fight alongside their transchildren and transhgrandkids with their trans dog and trans bird. Take over American soil.  They did this through violence and   declared their own country.  Perhaps the #1 country of starving people because the homeless stole all the food the firds day.
  • The first time a unknown rapper declares himself the police after removing the police because they didn’t want police there.  He also declares himself to be leader of country by beating and who knows what.  Proving the people with guns win. Tupac  and biggie would be proud.
  • Floyd  so influential and important that he gets minute by minute coverage the day he is buried.  He gets second by second camera coverage from helicopter  of his car as it travels to his resting grounds. The man is treated like a Saint, even though he was a hardened thug who died while being arrested for committing a crime that is a violation of federal law , which can carry a sentence  of 20 years.
  • Police are getting replaced and now, just as I predicted, democrats are going after their weapons.
  • Muslims love the replacing the police with something like community police.  Perfect because to Muslims, community police is religion police or the morality police.  That gives them a chance to bring in Sharia  law.

Minneapolis is home to the largest population of Somali in the USA.  That means Muslim. You can be sure a Muslim controlled replacement for the police is ready to fill the spot.

I find it unusual that CUP FOODS is also the address of a Mosque.  Yes, they have a Mosque in the basement.  An “underground Mosque”. Now you know it’s  true.  They exist.

I mentioned earlier  about the video source being reliable. There is some evidence that the owner(from Palestine)of Cup Foods might have had some animosity toward the police.

That area of town is a hotspot for crime.  Cup Foods being a hotspot for drug trafficking.

The owners  son is a convicted felon who has been to prison. The business has been in trouble with the law in the past.  Both the owner and son have criminal records.

This document will explain the situation better than I.

 

CUP Foods, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, and its President Samir Hamaden Abumayyaleh, Relators, vs. City of Minneapolis, Respondent. C2-01-399, Court of Appeals Published, September 11, 2001.

STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN COURT OF APPEALS

C2-01-399

CUP Foods, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, and its President Samir Hamaden Abumayyaleh,

Relators,

vs.

City of Minneapolis,

Respondent.

Filed September 11, 2001

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

G. Barry Anderson, Judge

City of Minneapolis

Docket No. 9-2110-12612-3

Ronald I. Meshbesher, Jonathan M. Peck, Meshbesher & Spence, Ltd., 1616 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, MN  55404 (for relators)

Jay M. Heffern, Minneapolis City Attorney, Scott Reeves, Assistant Minneapolis City Attorney, 300 Metropolitan Centre, 333 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, MN  55402 (for respondent)

Considered and decided by G. Barry Anderson, Presiding Judge, R.A. Randall, Judge, and Robert H. Schumacher, Judge.

S Y L L A B U S

If an agency adopts the findings and conclusions of an administrative law judge, but rejects or significantly deviates from the recommendations of that judge and does not make findings explaining the deviation, the decision is arbitrary and capricious, and the case should be remanded for the agency to make findings explaining its decision to deviate.

O P I N I O N

G. BARRY ANDERSON, Judge

Respondent city stayed revocation of relator’s business licenses subject to store closure for six months and compliance thereafter with several conditions.  Relator argues that respondent’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence and that the sanction was arbitrary and capricious.  Relator also argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) abused her discretion by denying his motion to strike testimony concerning controlled drug buys.  We conclude that there is substantial evidence to support respondent city’s finding of good cause for adverse license action against relator.  In addition, because relator did not make a timely motion to strike, we conclude that the ALJ acted within her discretion by denying the motion.  But because respondent deviated from the ALJ’s recommendations when imposing its sanction, without making findings explaining the reasons for doing so, we reverse and remand.

FACTS

In 1989, relator Samir Abumayyaleh opened a convenience store at the northeast corner of 38th Street and Chicago Avenue South in Minneapolis.  The store sold groceries and the usual convenience items.  Eventually, relator added numerous goods and services to the store, including a delicatessen, cellular phone and pager sales, tobacco products, and off-sale 3.2 beer.

Respondent City of Minneapolis issued CUP Foods (Chicago Unbeatable Prices) four licenses: (1) grocery store; (2) food manufacturer; (3) tobacco dealer; and (4) off-sale 3.2 beer vendor.  Respondent first issued the licenses in 1989 and each is subject to annual renewal.  Relator’s family, including his father and two younger brothers, work at the store, but relator also employs other workers.  Relator’s younger brother Nabil, known as “Billy,” one of the store employees, has a prior felony conviction for auto theft.

CUP Foods is located in a high-crime area of Minneapolis and, not surprisingly, experienced problems with loitering and drug activity in and around the store.  In 1991, relator complained to respondent about the loitering problem, and at a city crime specialist’s recommendation, relator placed two yellow “no trespassing” signs outside his store.  Respondent conditioned relator’s licenses on reduced hours of operation.  On several occasions, however, the store remained open after the designated closing time.

In 1993, after receiving additional complaints about loitering and drug activity near CUP Foods, respondent scheduled a committee meeting to consider adverse license action.  As a result of the meeting, relator agreed to remove public pay phones, hire off-duty police officers for security, reduce hours of operation, hire older employees for evening shifts, report drug activity to police, and remove signs blocking store windows.  Relator understood that failure to comply with the agreed-on conditions could result in revocation, suspension, or non-renewal of his licenses.  Relator complied with the conditions, including the employment of off-duty police officers as security guards.  But approximately one-year later, relator discontinued their employment because of the cost and because “things got a lot better at the intersection.”

As time went on, however, the crime problem at 38th and Chicago became worse.  In 1996, neighborhood residents formed a task force to improve safety and reduce drug-dealing activity in the neighborhood.  In 1998, the number of complaints concerning CUP Foods prompted police community crime specialists to open a file on the store.  Crime-prevention specialists visited CUP Foods and relator signed a Minneapolis “no trespassing” affidavit and received two new “no trespassing” signs.  The specialists advised relator to call 911 to report trouble, and he and his employees did so.

On July 13, 1998, a shooting took place near CUP Foods.  Shortly thereafter, relator attended a task-force meeting and asked for a greater police presence at the intersection.  A few months later, two more shootings took place near CUP Foods.

Beginning in October 1998, police conducted surveillance of CUP Foods.  Police observed loitering and hand-to-hand exchanges outside the store and in the store entryway.  Using confidential informants, police made several “controlled buys” of either crack cocaine or apparent crack cocaine inside CUP Foods.

Based on the results of the controlled buys, police obtained a search warrant for CUP Foods and executed that warrant on November 18, 1998.  Police recovered: stolen cell phones; a bullet-proof vest; live ammunition; a stolen bicycle; ephedrine, an ingredient in methamphetamine; glass tubing; baggies of what appeared to be crack cocaine (but later proved to lack cocaine base); postal scales; and three firearms.  Police also observed bullet holes in a door.  The state charged Nabil Abumayyaleh with unlawful possession of a firearm, but later dismissed that charge.  Police did not link any of the stolen items to relator, and did not charge him with any crime.

Police continued to make controlled buys in CUP Foods during 1999.  On one occasion, the participants completed a transaction in plain view of Nabil Abumayyaleh as he worked as a cashier.  On November 9, 1999, a Minneapolis police officer recovered crack cocaine from a CUP Foods shelf during the course of answering a call reporting an armed man in the area.

In November 1999, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office commenced a nuisance-abatement proceeding against CUP Foods.  That proceeding was stayed pending the city’s resolution of appellant’s licensing issues because, on November 19, 1999, respondent filed a notice of hearing concerning all CUP Foods licenses.  Respondent filed amended notices on February 25, 2000, and again on March 27, 2000.

An ALJ conducted evidentiary hearings on March 28, 30, and 31, and on May 5 and 15, 2000.  Respondent presented testimony from police and neighbors, and argued for revocation of relator’s licenses.  Relator presented favorable testimony from neighbors and customers, testified to his own compliance with recommendations, and explained that he, too, sought to end the criminal activity near the intersection.

The ALJ concluded that respondent had shown good cause for taking adverse action against CUP Foods, but recommended that the city council consider placing conditions on CUP Foods licenses, rather than revoking the licenses outright.  On December 29, 2000, the Minneapolis City Council adopted the ALJ’s report but, rather than placing conditions on relator’s business licenses, it revoked all the licenses, stayed on the conditions that CUP Foods (1) close for six months and (2) take additional specified crime-prevention measures upon re-opening.  The council, however, waived 90 days of the closure period, upon relator’s payment of a $10,000 administrative fine.  The mayor approved the decision on January 4, 2001.  Relator now proceeds by writ of certiorari.

ISSUES

I.                    Was respondent city’s decision to stay revocation of relator’s business licenses, subject to conditions, a denial of due process, arbitrary and capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence?

II.                 Did the ALJ violate relator’s right to due process of law by denying relator the opportunity to cross-examine confidential informants who made controlled buys at CUP Foods?

ANALYSIS

I.

            Appellant first argues that respondent city’s decision to revoke his business licenses is arbitrary and capricious, is unreasonable, is irrational, and not supported by substantial evidence, and that it violates his due-process rights because neither relator nor his employees had direct knowledge that drug activity took place inside CUP Foods.

Generally, decisions of administrative agencies, including cities, enjoy a presumption of correctness and will be reversed only when they reflect an error of law or where the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.  Cable Communications Bd. v. Nor-West Cable Communications P’ship,356 N.W.2d 658, 668 (Minn. 1984); see alsoMinn. Stat. § 14.69 (2000) (setting forth the scope of judicial review).

 Where the evidence is conflicting or more than one inference may be drawn from the evidence, findings must be upheld.  City of Minneapolis v. Richardson,307 Minn. 80, 88, 239 N.W.2d 197, 202 (1976).  If the agency engaged in reasoned decision-making, a reviewing court will affirm its decision even though the court may have reached another conclusion. State by Khalifa v. Hennepin County,420 N.W.2d 634, 639 (Minn. App. 1988), review denied (Minn. May 4, 1988). 

A.         Due Process

            Relator argues that respondent’s decision denies him “due process of law.”  To determine what process is due, this court first determines whether a property interest is implicated.  Humenansky v. Minnesota Bd. of Med. Exam’rs,525 N.W.2d 559, 566 (Minn. App. 1994), review denied(Minn. Feb. 14, 1995).  Relator correctly points out that he has a property interest in his business licenses.  See Bird v. Dep’t of Pub. Safety,375 N.W.2d 36, 42 (Minn. App. 1985) (finding property interest in automobile dealer’s license).  Our second inquiry requires weighing the particular interests involved. Humenansky,525 N.W.2d at 566. 

Sufficient due process generally requires reasonable notice and a hearing.  In re License of W. Side Pawn,587 N.W.2d 521, 522 (Minn. App. 1998), review denied (Minn. Mar. 30, 1999).  Although relator argues that he was denied due process, he does not allege that he was denied either reasonable notice or an opportunity to be heard.  The record shows relator received initial notice of the hearings approximately four months before the license proceedings, a five-day trial-type hearing, representation by counsel, an impartial decision-maker, and a decision based solely on the record.  This is sufficient to satisfy the due-process requirement.  See Humenansky,525 N.W.2d at 565 (describing the process due when property interests are implicated).

B.         Substantial Evidence

Relator argues that respondent violated his due-process rights because revocation

extinguishes [relator’s] property interest and deprives [relator] from making a living without a factual finding that either [relator] or any of his employees permitted, encouraged, or had any direct knowledge of the alleged controlled buys.

In essence, relator alleges that respondent lacked substantial evidence of “good cause” to take adverse license action against relator’s business.

 Substantial evidence, for the purpose of appellate review of an administrative agency’s decision, is: (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; and (5) evidence considered in its entirety.  In re Friedenson,574 N.W.2d 463, 467 (Minn. App. 1998) (citation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr. 30, 1998).  We defer to the agency’s fact-finding process and it is the challenger’s burden to establish that the findings are not supported by the evidence.  In re Lakedale Tel. Co.,561 N.W.2d 550, 554 (Minn. App. 1997).  Unless manifestly unjust, inferences must be accepted even though it may appear that contrary inferences would be better supported by the record.  Id.  Thus, relator must show that the evidence, considered in its entirety, and drawing inferences in favor of the decision, is not substantial, and, therefore, does not adequately support respondent’s finding that good cause existed to take adverse action against his business licenses.

The Minneapolis Code of Ordinances provides that “[a]ny license granted under this chapter may be revoked by the mayor or the city council as in the city charter provided.”   Minneapolis, Minn., Code of Ordinances § 188.350 (1999).  The city charter provides:

Section 16.  Licenses May Be Revoked.  Any license issued by the authority of the City Council may be revoked by the City Council at any time upon proper notice and hearing for good cause * * * .

Minneapolis, Minn., City Charter ch. 4, § 16.

The ALJ’s memorandum explained that relator’s employment of his brother Nabil Abumayyaleh, a convicted felon, and the handguns found during the search of CUP Foods, did not warrant taking adverse license action against relator because relator legally employed his brother and legally possessed the handguns for protection.  Similarly, the ALJ found that, because respondent failed to link any of the stolen items recovered during execution of the 1998 search warrant to relator, that evidence alone did not support adverse license action.  Further, the ALJ found that the three shootings near CUP Foods had no connection to the store and were simply a “by-product of the gang violence that is prevalent in this south Minneapolis neighborhood.”

But respondent, through the testimony of police officers and neighbors, presented evidence of: (1) chronic loitering at CUP Foods; (2) numerous hand-to-hand exchanges, an indication of drug dealing, taking place in and outside the store; and (3) controlled drug buys inside the store.  Respondent also presented evidence that despite the earlier license conditions, the store’s windows remain obstructed by advertising, signs, and shelving, and that the lack of visibility inside the store hampers law-enforcement efforts.

For these reasons, the city council adopted the ALJ’s conclusion that

[respondent] has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that drug dealing and loitering have occurred on a frequent basis on and near CUP Foods’ premises.  * * * [Relator’s] failure or inability to prevent or meaningfully control the sale of drugs occurring inside his store constitutes good cause for taking adverse action against CUP Foods’ licenses. While [relator] testified that he routinely asks loiterers to leave, substantial credible testimony from neighborhood residents and police officers established that there is an ongoing pattern of loitering and drug dealing both inside the store and outside the store’s front entrance.  And, despite some measures taken by [relator] to increase visibility in his store, the record established that the majority of the store’s windows remain obstructed by shelving, advertisements, and other signage.  The inability to see into the store’s windows encourages loitering and criminal activity in general at CUP Foods.

Although there is no direct evidence that relator or his employees observed drug transactions, there is ample evidence, including the evidence of the controlled buys, that such transactions took place in and around CUP Foods and that relator knew that crime in and near the store was an ongoing problem.  Although relator made efforts to improve security and reduce crime, he failed to decrease the height of store shelves or remove window advertisements, and, until very recently, relator had abandoned the use of security guards.

Drawing inferences in favor of respondent city’s decision, as we must, and viewing the record as a whole, we conclude that the evidence, though hardly overwhelming, is reasonable, “more than a scintilla,” “more than some,” and “more than any” evidence.  The evidence, therefore, is substantial and supports the conclusion that respondent had “good cause” to take adverse license action against relator.[1] 

C.        Arbitrary and capricious

Relator also argues that the adverse license action is arbitrary and capricious.  Reviewing courts may reverse an agency’s decision if the decision is arbitrary or capricious.  Minn. Stat. § 14.69(f) (2000).  An agency decision is arbitrary and capricious if it is an exercise of the agency’s will, rather than its judgment, or if the decision is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons. Friedenson,574 N.W.2d at 467;Mammenga v. State Dept. of Human Servs.,442 N.W.2d 786, 789 (Minn. 1989).  “Where there is room for two opinions on the matter, [an agency’s choice of one course of] action is not arbitrary and capricious * * * .”  Friedenson,574 N.W.2d at 467 (citing Brown v. Wells,288 Minn. 468, 472, 181 N.W.2d 708, 711 (1970)).     

The problems at CUP Foods illustrate the collision between two important principles of United States jurisprudence: the reasonable public safety expectations of citizens and the preservation of private property rights, which, in this case, take the form of business licenses.

A city council may affirm, reject, or modify an ALJ’s findings or conclusions.  See Hymanson v. City of St. Paul,329 N.W.2d 324, 326-27 (Minn. 1983) (a city council may make new findings or decide contrary to the hearing examiner’s recommendations).   Despite this authority, when an agency significantly deviates from a reviewing authority’s conclusions, it must explain the deviation.  Beaty v. Minnesota Bd. of Teaching,354 N.W.2d 466, 472 (Minn. App. 1984).  Failure to do so “evidences the agency’s desire to exercise its will and not its judgment.”  Id.see also Burnett v. Stearns County Welfare Bd.,370 N.W.2d 452, 455 (Minn. App. 1985) (holding county welfare board acted arbitrarily and capriciously by rejecting without comment merit system council recommendation to grant relator a merit increase).  But see Friedenson,574 N.W.2d at 467-68 (holding revocation of relator’s medical license not arbitrary and capricious, even though board failed to explain its reasons for deviating from ALJ’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, because reviewing court was satisfied penalty was the product of “careful and prudent judgment”).  

Respondent adopted the ALJ’s findings, as well as the conclusions supported by those findings.  But respondent did not adopt the ALJ’s recommendations to place conditions on relator’s business licenses, and instead stayed revocation on the conditions that CUP Foods close for six months and, upon re-opening, comply with numerous crime-prevention measures.  Respondent significantly deviated from the ALJ’s recommendations without explaining why the ALJ’s recommendations were rejected or making additional findings to support this disposition.  At a minimum, a business owner with property rights in the form of government licenses is entitled to know the reasons for adverse action by the city council.  We therefore hold that the absence of such findings renders the respondent city’s decision arbitrary and capricious, and we reverse and remand for additional proceedings and to permit respondent to make appropriate findings explaining its decision.

We caution respondent, however, that any additional findings or conclusions it may adopt on remand, to explain its reasons for significantly deviating from the ALJ’s recommendations, must be limited to the issues raised in the earlier proceedings.  See Interstate Power Co. v. Nobles County Bd. of Comm’rs, 617 N.W.2d 566, 580 (Minn. 2000); Earthburners, Inc. v. County of Carlton, 513 N.W.2d 460, 463 (Minn. 1994) (reviewing board “must confine its inquiry to those issues raised in [the] earlier proceedings”); White Bear Rod & Gun Club v. City of Hugo, 388 N.W.2d 739, 742 (Minn. 1986) (city council not required to make formal findings but, at a minimum, must “‘have the reasons for its decision recorded or reduced to writing and in more than just a conclusory fashion’” (quotation omitted)). 

II.

            Relator also argues that the ALJ abused her discretion by denying relator’s motion to strike testimony concerning the confidential informants who completed “controlled buys” inside CUP Foods, contending that by failing to strike that testimony the ALJ denied him his right to confront the informants.  Evidentiary rulings in administrative proceedings are subject to an abuse-of-discretion standard.  See Lee v. Lee,459 N.W.2d 365, 369 (Minn. App. 1990) (applying abuse-of-discretion standard to appeal of evidentiary ruling on hearsay evidence made during an administrative child-support hearing conducted under Minnesota Administrative Procedure Act rules), review denied(Minn. Oct. 18, 1990).

During the license hearings, respondent’s counsel questioned Sherry Appledorn, the police officer who arranged the controlled buys, about her conversations with the confidential informants.  Relator’s counsel objected on hearsay grounds.  The ALJ sustained the objection, but permitted the officer to testify concerning matters within her own knowledge.  At the close of the hearings, relator moved to strike all testimony concerning the controlled buys on the basis that he was denied the right to confront the informants.  The ALJ ruled that the request was untimely.  Respondent argues that this court need not reach the issue of confrontation because relator’s motion to strike was untimely.  We agree.

The rule that an objection to the admission of evidence must be made at the time the evidence is offered is well established.  Eilola v. Oliver Iron Mining Co.,201 Minn. 77, 79, 275 N.W. 408, 409 (1937); see also Minn. R. Evid. 103(a)(1) (providing that there is no error unless an evidentiary ruling affects a substantial right of a party and a timely objection or motion to strike is made).  Although relator objected to out-of-court statements made by the informants as hearsay, relator did not (1) bring any motion to compel respondent to disclose the informants’ identities, even though the initial notice of hearing indicated that the controlled buys would be part of respondent’s evidence, or (2) object to the admission of Appledorn’s testimony concerning her knowledge of the controlled buys until the close of the hearing in May 2000, more than one month after she testified.  We therefore conclude that the ALJ acted within her discretion by denying relator’s motion to strike, and we decline to further address relator’s confrontation claims.

D E C I S I O N

Respondent’s conclusion that there is good cause to take adverse license action against relator is supported by substantial evidence.  Respondent’s decision to deviate from the sanctions recommended by the ALJ, however, is arbitrary and capricious because the deviations are significant and respondent did not make findings explaining its decision to deviate.  Finally, the ALJ did not abuse her discretion by denying relator’s motion to strike testimony concerning controlled drug buys because the motion was untimely.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

[1]Relator devotes more than three pages of his brief to a discussion of Saxon Coffee Shop, Inc. v. Boston Lic. Bd.,407 N.E.2d 311 (Mass. 1980).  In Saxon,a license-revocation action, criminal activity inside a store and the non-cooperation of the store’s management did not meet the substantial-evidence test.  Id at 319.  We reject Saxon’sreasoning because City of Mankato v. Mahony,542 N.W.2d 689 (Minn. App. 1996), suggests that a city may take adverse-license action in response to criminal activity if the licensee does not cooperate to prevent future violations.  Id. at 692 (reversing revocation of landlord’s license where landlord acted responsibly to prevent further violations of city noise codes). 

Source

Perhaps Floyd and the business was doing a drug deal.  When Floyd was on the ground, leaning against Dragon Wok, an officer leaned over and picked something up off the ground and put it in his pocket.  Maybe it was just a dime or something.

False Flag or not, the whole situation has the Democrats name written all over it.  It’s  only going to get worse until election  day.

Respectfully

Deplorable Patriot.

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Van Jones throws Hillary under the bus

 

You gotta love that.

Respectfully,

Deplorable Patriot

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Evidence points to CNN and Shaun King guilty of fabricating George Floyd video.

 

More  and more information related to this event becomes available daily.  In an effort to not be fake news. I will be updating this post often..  For example, The original version of this post was based on a video that lead  me to believe the event happened on one street.  Later on after posting, a new, more complete video became available.  Irregardless,  my opinion on this event will not change.  I believe this event was staged. The embedded recording times in the  videos iis the proof. That is the focus of this post/research.  If  the information was not related to the video time, chances are I didn’t  include it. Sometimes too much information can be confusing and unnecessary once you have proven your point.  I believe this is one of those situations.  Any information I include that does not support my point, I do so in the spirit of information  sharing.

 

Update- Body cam footage  worn by officer driving “Park Police” vehicle has different  embedded time  and  date in video.  That’s  3 different recording times  for 3 different  video’s  of the same event.

Given the obvious importance of accurate time and date in body cam videos. Real police officers would be sure time was correct.  

 

 

 

Continue reading

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Unmask for freedom event..

Just a quick reminder.  If you live in California and feel motivated.  Try the state capital in Sacramento Saturday, May 23, 2020.  That’s tomorrow.  High Noon

Hundreds + are going to protest to open up the state.  Hundreds does not sound like a lot, but it’s a start.

For additional information contact one of the many patriots that keep the ball rolling,  Connie a ChildofGod (@conidave): on  Twitter #UnMaskForFreedom.

Finally, conservatives  are taking it to the streets.

Respectfully

Deplorable Patriot

* I should point out that opening up the state should not be a red or blue specific event.  We all have something to lose.  Democrats and liberals should join us in our task.  We can pick up the politics later when regain our Freedom.

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

HCQ-AZ

Seen this?

Any Questions?

Respectfully,

Deplorable Patriot

Source: Hat tip to Sinking California (@SinkingCalifor1): https://twitter.com/SinkingCalifor1?s=09

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Gavin Newsom sets in motion his plan to steal Disaster Relief Funds from Pandemic victims. Primarily victims that voted for Trump

The arragent lawlessness of the democrat party no longer surprises me. We see this behavior more and more because they are allowed to get away with it, unchallenged.

In states like California, where democrats have complete control of all aspects of the government,  the corruption runs rampant.

The democrats misappropriation of state funds and desire to put their personal interests before the citizens have caused a financial hardship on the state.

To counter this hardship the democrats appear to have redefined the position of state Governor. State “Grifter” is more appropriate  title than state Governor.

Governor Newsom appears to spend most of his time trying to figure out new ways to scam the Federal government out of money.

Currently, Newsom is trying to use the covid-19 pandemic to scam the Federal government. For Newsom it’s all about that getting that disaster relief money.

By now we all should be familiar with Elon Musk battle with Alameda County. (A battle he won). Prior to winning the battle Musk went to Newsome to discuss this problem. Newsom made it clear that it was the county officials call. They are to decide when it’s ok to lift any restrictions. Basically he said he can’t do anything about it.

Newsom made the decision to leave it up to the counties. Alameda also agrees with this decision. A commenrt made by Alameda’s health official was ” The governor’s order does not override the county’s stay-at-home order, which is in place through May 31.

It should bew perfectly clear that Newsom passed on the responsibility of “reopening” the counties. With that being the case, we must ask ourselves “Why is Newsome harassing and making threats to Sutter, Modoc and Yuba counties?

‘Gov. Gavin Newsom is warning three counties that they could lose disaster funding if t”ey continue to defy his stay-at-home order.

Officials in Yuba, Sutter and Modoc counties all allowed businesses to reopen because they have fewer coronavirus cases than other parts of the state”.

It’s more than likely he is doing it because of the people that live there.

Sutter County. ” Strongly Republican in presidential and congressional elections. The last democrat to win a majority in the county was Franklin Roosevelt in 1940.”

Modoc County. Strongly Republican in Presidential and cogressional elections. It is the most Republican county in California. The last Democrat to win a majority in the county was Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Yuba County. Republican in the last five Presidential elections.
In the last Presidential election, Yuba county remained strongly Republican, 57.3% to 34.4%. * This makes me wonder how a democrat won the congressional seat.

*Stanislaus County should be next on Newsom’s hit list, Stanislaus has decided to ignore Newsom’s orders. The county is a “battleground” politically. If,or should I say when actual combat with firearms “kicked off” this would be a hot spot, if not the front line. There would be hundreds, if not thousands of casualties the first few days. The citizens are heavly armed. This is my county.

Alameda is a democrat county. Newsom lets the county do it’s own thing while attacking 3 Republican counties. This is obvious political descrimination.

*If you are one of the few democrats that live in these counties, consider yourself abandoned by your party leader. Newsom considers you a acceptable loss, killed by friendly fire.

Like everything else Newsom does, this is abuse of his power if not criminal. The quickest, more realistic solution to end this is by taking all disaster relief funding provided by the Federal government and relieve the state of the responsibility to issue it out. Give it directly to the counties.

Some might be asking, “Do you have any more proof about him stealing the disaster funds?”

Personally, I think how he handled these counties is enough proof to start a investigation. A person might say, “it’s the same as Trump witholding funds from California.” It’s not. These counties are not breaking any laws.. They’re not trying to cover their debt that had accumilated prior to the pandemic. That’s exactly what Newsome is doing. Trying to cover the debt of the state that accumilated prior to the pandemic. A debt the democrats created. Make no mistake, Newsom wants that money.

What we should keep in mind.

It seemsa like yesterday when Newsome was going to rehab for his cocaine addiction. That was around the same time when he was cheating on his wife and having an affair with his campaign managers wife, doing lines is the nearest bathroom.

Just imagine. The manager is out telling everyone how great Newsom is while at the same time, his wife is in the back seat of the family car having a good time with Newsom.

Newsom, a guy that screws over his wife and his most trusting friend. He is a person that knows zero about loyalty and lkacks integrity and morality. This is a person that has proven to be untrustworthy. Yet, he wins the election.

  • I don’t believe he got the legal amount of votes required to win. When the polls closed on election day, Newsome was behind. Just like most of the democrats in the election. He along with the other democrats won after the mail in votes were counted. Ballots that come in after the polls that arrive by mail don’t get inspected the same way they do when the polls are open. Democrats changed that rule. All fake ballots make it through, unchallanged.. It doesn’t help matters when many of the election officials are corrupt.

Newsom and his crew of pirates need to be audited. The first place I would start would be the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) and their branch, Cal Fire.

I would investigate every piece of equipment owned by Cal Fire. If you have been paying attention in the past you will have noticed that many of the aircraft used to fight fires in California are owned by private contractors or other sources. Cal Fire has not been using their own equipment.

A good question would be, “If they are paying private contractors or other sources to fight fires then why have they spent so much money buying their own equipment?”

Here is some of the aircraft owned by Cal Fire. This information comes from Wikipedia

“In support of its ground forces, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) emergency response air program includes 23 Grumman S-2T 1,200 gallon airtankers, eleven UH-1H Super Huey helicopters, and 14 OV-10A airtactical aircraft. These aircraft are stationed at 13 air attack and 10 helitack bases located statewide.”

Then there is the expense to maintain the equipment.

The average annual budget of the CAL FIRE Aviation Management Program is nearly $20 million.”

I shoul also ad the following.  This comes from a prior post of mine titled,

Kincade fire revisited. 

“In addition I found the following. They have 61 dozers, 50 fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft which include , 2 Air King A200 and 1 or more of the following, Dornier Do-228, C-23A Sherpa (SD3-30), Air Tractor AT-802A “FireBoss”mman S-2T, Lockheed P-2 Neptune, CL-215/ Bombardier 415 “Superscooper”, Douglas DC-7,McDonnell Douglas MD-87, British Aerospace Bae 146/ Avro RJ85, L188 Electra, Lockheed C-130 Hercules, Boeing 747, DC-10, AH-1 Firewatch “Cobra” ,Sikorsky S-61, Sikorsky S-64, Sikorsky S -70 “Firehawk”,Eurocopter AS-332L, Boeing-Vertol BV 107, Boeing 234 “Chinook”, Kaman “K-Max”, Bell 212, Bell 205 A++, Bell 412, Bell 407, Bell 206B “JetRanger”, Bell 206L-III “LongRanger”, Eurocopter AS350 AStar, MD 500D, Aérospatiale SA 315B “Lama”, Alouette 316B, Lockheed C-130, UH -60 “Blackhawk”, Boeing CH-46 “Sea Knight”, CH -47 “Chinook”, Sikorsky CH-53E “Super Stallion” (Sikorsky S-80E). For details click here.”

Cal Fires budget is up to 2.6 billion a year.

Why have the equipment if we are not using it? We need  inventory every piece of equipment.  We will be lucky if it’s  all there.

Before the Federal government gives any more money to the state of California, as well as any other state, they should require some sort of proof that shows prior spending matched request or purpose for the funding..  It’s  not too much to ask for.  If you or I are going to give someone money, we are going to want to know what it’s  spent on.  We are going to expect it to be spent on what we were told it was for.

Newsome is just like every other Democrat in a leadership position, corrupt.  It wouldn’t  surprise me if the democrats weren’t busy rigging the 2020 election, while all the focus is on the pandemic.

The whole concept of waiting for a covid-19 vaccine is stupidity at its best.  We have been looking for a vaccine  for HIV since the early 80’s.  In 2019 the US spent a minimum of 34 billion  on HIV. 

Still  no vaccine.

Democrats know this.  Newsome and the rest of the democrat leadership are nothing more than a band of grifters.  They are an embarrassment to every American, among many other things.

Law Enforcement and the Justice Department need step up and start making arrests  Treat the politicians the same way they treat everyone else.   It will only take a few before they start telling on each other.  Then they all fall.  It’s  that easy.

Respectfully,

Deplorable Patriot.

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Pandemic a planned “scamdemic”?

 

 

 

We have learned in the past that False Flag events can leave a trail.  What sort of trail?  False Flag events require people. A “people trail”.

We’ve  all seen “crises actors”.  Some we have seen at multiple events.  These people are sourced from a variety of places.  One method to recruit people is through advertising.  Want ads/ Craig’slist, etc. The simplest  would be advertising on your website.

But we are not talking about crises  actors today.  We are talking about real educated  professionals. Actual scientist..

Who they are does not matter.  What matters,  is the time, position, location, skills required, job details and how long the job is for.  We also need to keep in mind as to why these people were hired.

Conveniently, they were hired right before the covid-19 outbreak.

The following can be found on the CDC  website.   It can be found under jobs.

Be sure to take the time to read all of it.

This was posted on 11_15/2019

 

 

Job ID HHS-CDC-D3-20-10640010 Date posted 11/15/2019 Location Dallas, Texas, El Paso, Texas, Houston, Texas, Seattle, Washington, Anchorage, Alaska, Los Angeles, California, San Diego, California, San Francisco, California, Miami, Florida, Atlanta, Georgia, Honolulu, Hawaii, Chicago, Illinois, Boston, Massachusetts, Detroit, Michigan, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Newark, New Jersey, New York, New York, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, San Juan

Department: Department of Health And Human Services
Agency: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Job Announcement Number: HHS-CDC-D3-20-10640010
SALARY RANGE: $51440.0 to $93077.0/Per Year
OPEN PERIOD: 2019-11-15 to 2020-05-15
SERIES & GRADE: GS–9/11AGENCY MARKETING STATEMENT:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is the agency Americans trust with their lives. As a global leader in public health, CDC is the nation’s premier health promotion, prevention, and preparedness agency. Whether we are protecting the American people from public health threats, researching emerging diseases, or mobilizing public health programs with our domestic and international partners, we rely on our employees to make a real difference in the health and well-being of people here and around the world. This position is located in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Emerging & Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Division of Global Migration and Quarantine (DGMQ), Quarantine and Border Health Services Branch (QBHS) within various locations. Salary may be adjusted to include a Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) of 10.64% for Honolulu, Hawaii.
Salary may be adjusted to include a Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) of 3.27% for Anchorage, Alaska Salary may be adjusted to include a Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) of 3.29% for San Juan, Puerto Rico Term appointments may be shortened or extended up to a maximum of four years based on the needs of the agency without further competition. Subsequent employment for CDC positions must be through the appropriate competitive process or special employment program hiring authorities. CDC is an Equal Opportunity Employer.JOB SUMMARY:
Serves as a project representative for a program responsible for preventing the importation and spread of communicable diseases.DUTIES:
[
“Assist in planning and implementing a program for preventing the importation of communicable diseases from abroad and spread of these diseases domestically.”, “Monitor disease trends and consults with senior leaders to ensure that appropriate measures are taken to prevent the introduction/spread of communicable diseases by travelers, etiologic agents or vectors.”, “Provide technical assistance, consultation and guidance to national, state and/or local agencies; health organizations; federal, state and local law enforcement agencies; airport and seaport activities; hospital networks, and other private entities.”, “Ensure appropriate communication networks, planning documents and emergency response protocols are in place, tested and regularly updated.”, “Develop and present training to various governmental agencies and local partners on emergency response protocols, communicable diseases and quarantine activities.” ]REQUIREMENTS:
US Citizenship is required. Background Investigation is required. E-Verify: If you are selected for this position, the documentation that you present for purposes of completing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Form I-9 will be verified through the DHS “E-Verify” System. Federal law requires DHS to use the E-Verify System to verify employment eligibility of all new hires, and as a condition of continued employment obligates the new hire to take affirmative steps to resolve any discrepancies identified by the system. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is an E-Verify Participant. Direct Deposit: All Federal employees are required to have Federal salary payments made by direct deposit to a financial institution of their choosing. All qualification requirements must be met by the closing date of the announcement. One-year probationary period may be required. Travel, transportation, and moving expenses will be paid: Maybe Bargaining Unit Position: No Drug Screening Required: No Recruitment Incentive authorized: No Annual Leave for non-federal service authorized: No Research position: No Promotion potential: Yes, this position has promotion potential to GS-12. Promotion to the next grade level is at management’s discretion and is based on your meeting qualifications and time-in-grade requirements, demonstrated ability to perform the higher level duties, the continuing need for the higher level duties, and administrative approval. Promotion to the next grade level is not guaranteed and no promise of promotion is implied. Supervisory position: No Mobility Agreement Required: Yes Immunization required: YesQUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED:
Minimum Qualifications: GS-9
Applicants must have at least one year of specialized experience at or equivalent to the GS-7 in the Federal service as defined in the next paragraph. Specialized experience is experience which is directly related to the position which has equipped the applicant with the particular knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) to successfully perform the duties of the position to include experience assisting with providing advice and evaluating the effectiveness of public health programs, policies and activities. OR Have a master’s or equivalent graduate degree or 2 full years of progressively higher level graduate education leading to such a degree or LL.B. or J.D., if related. OR Have a combination of experience and education that meets 100% of the qualification requirements for this position. Minimum Qualifications: GS-11 Applicants must have one year of specialized experience at or equivalent to the GS-09 grade level of in the Federal service as defined in the next paragraph. Specialized experience is experience which is directly related to the position which has equipped the applicant with the particular knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) to successfully perform the duties of the position to include experience in planning, coordinating, developing and/or evaluating and implementing public health programs, policies, and activities. OR Have 3 years of progressively higher level graduate education leading to a Ph.D. or equivalent doctoral degree in public health or other field of study with course work directly related to the work of the position to be filled. OR Have a combination of specialized experience and graduate level education that meets 100% of the qualification requirements for this position.

HOW YOU WILL BE EVALUATED:
Once the application process is complete, a review of the resume and supporting documentation will be made and compared against your responses to the assessment questionnaire to determine if you are qualified for this job. If, after reviewing your resume and/or supporting documentation, a determination is made that you have inflated your qualifications and/or experience, you may lose consideration for this position. Please follow all instructions carefully. Errors or omissions may affect your eligibility. Category rating procedures will be used to rate and rank candidates. The category assignment is a measure of the degree to which your background matches the competencies required for this position. Qualified candidates will be ranked into one of three categories: Best Qualified, Well Qualified or Qualified. The Category Rating Process does not add veterans’ preference points but protects the rights of veterans by placing them ahead of non-preference eligibles within each category. Preference eligibles who meet the minimum qualification requirements and who have a compensable service-connected disability of at least 10 percent must be listed in the highest quality category (except in the case of scientific or professional positions at the GS-9 level or higher). Your qualifications will be evaluated on the following competencies (knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics).
Collaboration / PartneringContinuous DevelopmentCustomer ServiceData SynthesisNetworking and Partnership Development (2)Oral CommunicationProblem SolvingProgram AssessmentProgram Planning and DevelopmentPublic Health Information DisseminationPublic Health KnowledgeWritten Communication

BENEFITS:

OTHER INFORMATION:
Additional selections may be made within the same geographical location CDC-wide. The utilization of shared certificates within multiple Centers of the Center of Disease Control and Prevention may be used from this vacancy announcement for specialties to include but not limited to: Applied Epidemiology, Behavioral Epidemiology, Chronic Diseases, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Emerging Infectious Diseases, Environmental Health, HIV/AIDS, Immunization, Infectious Diseases (e.g. Viral, Parasitic, etc.), Influenza, Malaria, Non-communicable Diseases, Outbreak Investigations, Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), Surveillance, Tropical Medicine, Tuberculosis (TB), Viral Hepatitis, and/or Zoonotic Diseases. If you are a veteran with preference eligibility and you are claiming 5-points veterans’ preference, you must submit a copy of your DD-214 or other proof of eligibility. If you are claiming 10-point veterans’ preference, you must also submit an SF-15, “Application for 10-Point Veterans’ Preference” plus the proof required by that form. For more information on veterans’ preference see http://www.fedshirevets.gov/job/vetpref/index.aspx. Males born after December 31, 1959 must be registered or exempt from Selective Service (see http://www.sss.gov). For information on “People with Disabilities” please see http://opm.gov/disability/PeopleWithDisabilities.asp
and https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/disability-employment/getting-a-job/sampleschedaletters.pdf. Interagency Career Transition Assistance Program (ICTAP)/ Career Transition Assistance Plan (CTAP): For information on how to apply as an ICTAP eligible see http://opm.gov/rif/employee_guides/career_transition.asp#ictap. To be well-qualified and exercise selection priority for this vacancy, displaced Federal employees must be rated at 85.0 or above on the rating criteria for this position. To view the questionnaire, click on the following link: https://apply.usastaffing.gov/ViewQuestionnaire/10640010 If you are unable to apply online or need to fax a document(s), view the following link for information regarding an Alternate Application.

HOW TO APPLY:

To apply for this position, you must complete the online application and submit the documentation specified in the Required Documents section. Special Notes – This announcement is being used to create an inventory of applicants for Public Health Advisor (Quarantine Program) positions and will be used to fill immediate and future needs. Applicants are encouraged to apply early in order to maximize their employment opportunities. Your application will remain in the inventory of tentatively qualified applicants. Applicants that are among the best qualified will be referred to the selecting official for consideration as requests to fill vacancies are processed by the Human Resources Office. The first cut-off date for you to be referred will be December 2, 2019. Thereafter, additional referral lists will be generated throughout the open period as vacancies occur. If further evaluation or interviews are required, you will be contacted. This is an open continuous announcement. Qualified applicants will be considered as job opportunities occur and may or may not receive further notification regarding the status of their application. A complete application package must be submitted by 11:59 PM (EST) on05/15/2020 of this announcement to receive consideration. To begin, click Apply to access the online application. You will need to be logged into your USAJOBS account to apply. If you do not have a USAJOBS account, you will need to create one before beginning the application. Follow the prompts to select your résumé and/or other supporting documents to be included with your application package. You will have the opportunity to upload additional documents to include in your application before it is submitted. Your uploaded documents may take several hours to clear the virus scan process. After acknowledging you have reviewed your application package, complete the Include Personal Information section as you deem appropriate and click to continue with the application process. You will be taken to the online application which you must complete in order to apply for the position. Complete the online application, verify the required documentation is included with your application package, and submit the application. To verify the status of your application, log into your USAJOBS account (https://my.usajobs.gov/Account/Login), all of your applications will appear on the Welcome screen. The Application Status will appear along with the date your application was last updated. For information on what each Application Status means, visit: https://www.usajobs.gov/Help/how-to/application/status/. If you cannot apply online: You are encouraged to apply online. If you are unable to apply online, please use the Alternate Application link listed in the Additional Information section of this vacancy announcement. Applicants are strongly encouraged to apply online if at all possible. Applying online, through your USAJOBS account, will expedite the application process and allow you to check your application. If you utilize the Alternate Application method, your USAJOBS account will not display this application and you will not receive status updates.

REQUIRED DOCUMENTS:
To apply for this position, you must submit a complete Application Package which includes: Your résumé showing work schedule, hours worked per week, dates of employment and duties performed. Other supporting documents: Cover Letter, optional Veterans Preference Documentation, if applicable Transcripts (if applicable)* Schedule A Eligibility Letter, if you are applying as a Schedule A candidate Interagency Career Transition Assistance Program / Career Transition Assistance Program documentation, if applicable (e.g., Certification of Expected Separation, Reduction-In-Force Separation Notice, or Notice of Proposed Removal; SF-50 that documents the RIF separation action; and most recent performance appraisal). *Note: You may submit an unofficial transcript or a list of college courses completed indicating course titles, credit hours, and grades received. An official transcript from an accredited educational institution is required if you are selected for the position. Failure to submit any of the above mentioned required documents will result in loss of consideration due to an incomplete application package. It is your responsibility to ensure all required documents have been submitted. OTHER JOB INFORMATION:
Subject to permanent reassignment to another CDC Quarantine Station or duty station as the needs of the service warrant. Subject to temporary assignment at any location in the United States and its territories or possessions, in foreign countries, or at sea. Selectee will be required to sign a Geographic Mobility Agreement. These positions are subject to shift work, weekend work, irregular work schedule and evening hours. On call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, independent of shift work assignments. The incumbents will be required to wear a uniform. The incumbent must be able to qualify for unrestricted access to secure areas at U.S ports. The incumbent must be able to qualify for a secret security clearance. The incumbent must be able to obtain an official U.S. passport. The incumbent must have a valid State government-issued driver’s license. The incumbent is required to be current in his/her immunizations per ACIP guidelines. Must undergo baseline and periodic health screening procedures such as respiratory fit testing and PPD tests for tuberculosis exposure. May be required to wear an N-95 respirator. The incumbent must be physically fit enough to work long hours and frequently travel on foot to remote gate areas in a short period of time. The incumbent must be required to provide basic quarantine station support, including purchasing, property inventory, document processing, timekeeping, and answering inquiries, etc. For Résumé and Application Tips visit: https://help.usajobs.gov/index.php/Tips.

WHAT TO EXPECT NEXT:
Once the online questionnaire is received you will receive an acknowledgement email that your submission was successful. The most highly qualified candidates will be referred to the hiring manager for further consideration and possible interview. We expect to make a selection within 45 days of the closing date of this announcement. You will receive notice via email once this process is completed (generally 4-6 weeks).

AGENCY CONTACT INFO:
CDC HELPDESK
1600 Clifton Road NE
Atlanta GA US 30333
Telephone: (770) 488-1725
Email: HRCS@CDC.GOV

I’m  not saying the pandemics was a False Flag event.  That’s  for you to decide.
The duration of employment fits the timeline of the Covid-19 outbreak.  It also fits the timeline I  pointed out in my post “Deception of the sleazoid swamp donkey. “
Taking all the factual information I have gathered. Add this to it. Add the rest of the relevant  post and comments from authors and subscribers here on FOTM. Then ask yourself two things. Why? And what are you going to do about it?
Respectfully
Deplorable Patroit
Democrat leadership are responsible for all jobs lost,all business  closures along with every hardship that is the result of ccovid-19 pandemic.

 

Source

 

 

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Declassification of House Intelligence Russia investigation documents

Declassification of documents.

Now we can see for ourselves how the Democrats lied to the public in matters related to the investigation into Trump/Russia collusion .  When reading the documents keep in mind the following:

“In 2017 and 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) undertook an investigation into Russia’s interference campaign targeting the 2016 U.S. election. The Committee’s investigation came on the heels of an Intelligence Community assessment, which found:”

“Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.”

Here are some quotes from Adam Schiff.  Truth or false accusations?

“Whil” Special Counsel Mueller found insufficient evidence to prove the crime of criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, he refused to draw any conclusion on the issue of collusion — contrary to false representations made by Attorney General Bill Barr and others. There is ample evidence of the corrupt interactions between the Trump campaign and Russia, both direct and circumstantial, in the record:”


 “Trump and his son drafted a false statement for the press together in order to cover up the true purpose of the meeting. .”“Multiple witnesses sought to hide and cover up illicit activity related to Russia during the presidential campaign.”“And the transcripts also show that during the transition period in late 2016, the incoming National Security Advisor.”


“Despite taking part in this investigation and hearing these facts first-hand, the transcripts reveal how House Republicans used witness interviews not to gain the facts, but to press President Trump’s false narrative of ‘no collusion, no obstruction.’


“the White House held up their release to the public by refusing to allow the Intelligence Community to make redactions on the basis of classified information, rather than White House political interests.”

Source and additional information  click https://intelligence.house.gov/russiainvestigation/

Respectfully

Deplorable Patriot

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Deceptions of the sleazoid Swamp Donkey


Swamp Donkey –  Individual who is part of the Democrat party or allied with the Democrat party that deceives the citizens of America for personal gain.   A Swamp Donkey works against the will of the people, the government, the President. They think they are above the law.  They lack honor, integrity, and loyalty.  Public opinion indicates that they are responsible for many False Flag events.     Synonymous with  rats on a sinking ship,  traitor, periplaneta americana, deep state, globalist, Cabol, Illuminate, sell out, stooge, puppet, bottom feeders.”  Wikipedia
*A Wikipedia editor removed this entry claiming ” Attack Page”.  Wikipedia is a poor source being that the controlling editors lean politically left.  As a editor at Wikipedia I have challenged  it’s removal.  Although it’s an uphill battle, I still spend time trying to “balance” the level of political bias on wikipedia.  I encourage others to get involved.


Continue reading

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Evidence proves Russian collusion undeniably true. This is a “must read” before you vote.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Russian collusion does exist.  The question is “Would you be part of a political party that supported a US President that colluded with Russia?”

We are not at war with Russia, so Russia is not our enemy.  The democrats and Fake News MSM have made it clear that it really doesn’t matter if we are at war. They have made it perfectly clear that no US President should have any involovement with Russia.   We are expected to believe  the president  is guilty simply because they said so.  No evidence. Just their opinion, hunches and opinions.

Some example stories that accused a US President of Russian collusion  include,

  1. Second Intel Dem Confirms Trump-Russia Evidence ‘”More Than Circumstantial.”
  2. Schiff recites long list of Trump’s Russia contacts after Republicans call for his resignation “I think it’s immoral, I think it’s unethical, I think it’s unpatriotic, and yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion.”

  3. –llary Clinton says ‘Americans’ guided Russia’s attack on her campaign, suggesting Trump’s campaign colluded’ with Russia.

I would like to add  my proof of  Russian collusion.  Unlike what the democrats and the Fake News MSM has provided for us, my addition is factual proof of Russian collusion.

The following comes from a US Presidential document.

Circled at the top, It mentions “technical cooporation with Russia“.  Underlined it is repeated with the addition of  “including lab to lab contacts and collaboration on verification technologies“. Next, we see “the United States provided the Russian Federation with diplomatic non-paper entitled U.S. Russian Scientific and Technical Cooperation.”

We see the words “utilization“, “techinques“, “technologies” and “classified discussions are  warranted.”

 

Using the standards that the democrats and Fake News MSM go by, this is being far too friendly with Russia.  This is more than simple collusion.  This is the president talking about  sharing information  and working with the Russians.  What  and how much is being shared with Russia?

The following screenshots come from the same document.

It is clear that a lot of planning was put into this. It is clear that there are more people involved than the president.  This is an organized effort to give Russia American secrets.

The democrats and Fake News MSM would love to have this information to bring charges up on the president.  With this information, the republicans would have no choice to go along with it.  There’s just too much deny. So much that I would have to agree with them. There was Russian collusion.  They even mention they would keep it from the public  at one point in time.  After they got it all together, they would then let the public in on it.

I don’t need to see anymore.  If that isn’t Russian collusion, I couldn’t tell you what is.  Now all we need to do is pin it on the president.  Lucky for us, that won’t be that difficult.  It’s signed at the bottom.

Wait a minute,  that say’s William J Clinton.  That’s President Clintons signature. That’s right.  Sorry to disappoint the Trump haters.  This is all Bill Clinton complete with signatures from his advisors.

The next time the democrats or the Fake News MSM cry Russian collusion, just bring this up.  I’ve even provided the full PDF file

 

The next time you vote just remember that the democrats are the party of Russian  collusion

Respectfully

Deplorable Patriot

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0