Monday, August 3, 2020

White House Sued Over Lack of Sign Language Interpreters at Coronavirus Briefings


A Major Organization Representing Deaf Americans, The National Association of the Deaf and Five Deaf Americans, are Suing the White House over the Lack of a Sign Language Interpreter at the Administration's COVID-19 Briefings.

CNN first reported the Lawsuit, which was filed in District Court in Washington, D.C., and accuses the Trump Administration of a First Amendment Violation.

Plaintiffs argue that the Captions carried on Video of the Events lack Details that would be Conveyed by a Sign Language Interpreter.

"Tone is also often lost in written captions. By contrast, an interpreter is able to convey tone and context of a message through facial expressions, sign choice, and demeanor. The provision of live closed captioning frequently contains errors and omissions that make it difficult or impossible for [deaf and hard of hearing] individuals to understand the information being provided in the briefings, particularly if they are not fluent in English." the Lawsuit reads.

President Trump, the Lawsuit continues, "stands alone in holding televised briefings regarding the Covid-19 pandemic without ever having provided any ASL interpretation. This means that Not only are [deaf and hard of hearing] Americans being denied the opportunity to understand any communication from the President of the United States during this critical time, they are also being denied the opportunity to access information, analysis, and updates from Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx, two renowned public health experts."

My Daughter, Lisa Drucker Dramin and Son-in-Law Bob Dramin, were born Deaf and Graduated from the Deaf College, Gallaudet University in Washington, DC. MY grandchildren, Ariella and Joel, both born Deaf, are currently attending Gallaudet.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


2020 Presidential Debates Conflicts with Early Voting


Like the rest of this Election Cycle, the Debate Schedule has been Adjusted due to the Coronavirus Pandemic.

The First Presidential Debate: Case Western Reserve University and Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland will Co-Host, which is Scheduled for September 29th, 35 Days before Election.

The Second Presidential Debate: Arsht Center for the Performing Arts in Miami. That Debate will take place on October 15th, 19 Days before Election.

The Third Presidential Debate: October 22th at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee, 12 Days before Election.

The only Vice Presidential Debate will still take place on October 7th, at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, 27 Days before the Election.

It's best to double check with your State for any recent Changes to Early Voting in your State.

But, the Earliest you can Vote in the 2020 Election is: Minnesota and South Dakota, on Sept. 26th, 2020, Three Days before the First Debate.

On Sept 27th, you can vote in: Michigan; New Jersey; Vermont; Virginia; and Wyoming, Two Days before the First Debate.

These States are Voting Earlier then the Last Debate:

Alaska - 15 days before the Election and Ends the day before the Election.

Arizona - 27 days before the Election and Ends the Friday before the Election.

Arkansas - 15 days before the Election and Ends the Monday before the Election.

California - 29 days before the Election, varies by County, and Ends the day before the Election, varies by County.

Georgia - The Fourth Monday before the Election and Ends The Friday before the Election.

Idaho - On or Before the Third Monday before the Election. Not All Counties conduct Early Voting. Ends the Friday before the Election.

Illinois - 40 days before the Election and Ends the day before the Election.

Indiana - 28 days before the Election and Ends the day before the Election.

Iowa - 29 days before the Election, with In-Person Absentee Voting, and Ends the day before the Election, with In-Person Absentee Voting.

Kansas - Up to 20 days before the Election, Varies by County, and Ends Up to the day before the Election, Varies by County.

Louisiana - 14 days before the Election and Ends 7 days before the Election.

Maine - 30 days before the Election, with In-Person Absentee Voting, and Ends the Thursday before the Election, with In-Person Absentee.

Maryland - The Second Thursday before the Election and Ends the Thursday before the Election.

Massachusetts - 11 days before the Election and Ends the Second Business day before the Election.

Montana - 30 days before the election, with In-Person Absentee Voting, and Ends Noon on the day before the Election with In-Person Absentee Voting.

Nebraska - 30 days before the Election and Ends 1 day before the Election.

Nevada - 17 days before the Election and Ends 4 days before the Election.

New Mexico - 28 days before the Election and Ends 3 days before the Election.

North Carolina - 19 days before the Election and Ends 3 days before the Election.

North Dakota - At least 15 days before the Election, Varies by County, and Ends the day before the Election.

Ohio - 28 days before the Election with In-Person Absentee Voting, and Ends 2pm on the day before the Election, with In-Person Absentee Voting.
Contact your Local Election Office to learn more about early voting in your area.

Tennessee - 20 days before the Election and Ends 5 days Before the Election.

Texas - 22 days before the Election and Ends 4 days before the Election.

Utah - 14 days before the Election and Ends 4 days before the Election.

Washington - 18 days before the Election and through Election Day.

West Virginia - 13 days before the Election and Ends 3 days before the Election.

Wisconsin - At least 14 days before the Election, with In-Person Absentee Voting, and varies by Municipality. Ends 2 days before the Election, with In-Person Absentee Voting, and varies by Municipality.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


NY Prosecutors Probe into Extensive and Protracted Criminal Conduct at Trump Organization


The New York City, Manhattan District Attorney's Office, on Monday August 2nd, hinted that its Subpoena for President Trump's Tax Returns and Business Documents is part of an Investigation into "possibly extensive and protracted criminal conduct at the Trump Organization," including potential Fraud Allegations Detailed in Media Reports in recent years.

In response to the latest Legal Challenge by Trump's Attorneys, New York County Prosecutors said that News Reports about the President's Financial History provide sufficient Justification for Requesting the Extensive Amount of Information from the Trump's Accounting Firm Mazars in their Grand Jury Investigation.

"In light of these public reports of possibly extensive and protracted criminal conduct at the Trump Organization, there was nothing facially improper (or even particularly unusual) about the Mazars Subpoena, which [was] issued in connection with a complex financial investigation, requesting eight years of records from an accounting firm," Prosecutors wrote in a Court filing submitted Monday.

A Footnote in the Court filing listed Three Media Stories published in 2018 and 2019 about the President's Financial History. Two of them, a reported that Trump had Inflated his Net Worth to Potential Lenders and Investors, while at the same time, Reduced those Amounts to Reduce his Tax Liability.

A Third story details former Trump Attorney, Michael Cohen's Allegations, that the President directed him to Pay Hush Money to Two women who claim to have had Affairs with the President. Those Payments, by Cohen, was shown on the Trump's Books as Legal Payments to Cohen, that Covered those Payments and another Amount as Cohen's Fees.

These Allegations had been previously cited by the Prosecutor's Office in issuing the Subpoena.

Last month, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Trump did Not have any Special Immunity to a Grand Jury Investigation like the one being Pursued by Manhattan District Attorney, Cyrus Vance.

In light of that Ruling, Trump's Personal Attorneys filed a New Complaint with the Federal District Court in Manhattan, last week, that Argued the Subpoena is Overly Broad and "amounts to harassment of the President."

The Prosecutors replied, "Plaintiff’s baseless [complaint] merely serves to delay the grand jury’s investigation. Every day that goes by is another day Plaintiff effectively achieves the 'temporary absolute immunity' that was rejected by this Court, the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court."

Vance's Office responded, on Monday, by arguing that the Latest Complaint Fails to put forth any Valid Legal Challenges to the Subpoena that haven't already been Considered and Rejected by the Higher Courts. The Prosecutors argued that under Federal Court Procedural Rules, Trump's Complaint should be Thrown Out.

The Judge could make a Decision next week.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


Sunday, August 2, 2020

Third-Party Candidates for 2020 U.S. Presidential Election with Possible 270 Electoral Votes


The following is a List of Third Party and Independent Candidates, for the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.

Ballot Access to at least 270 Electoral Votes:

Green Party

President: Howie Hawkins, Co-Founder of the Green Party from New York.

Vice President: Angela Walker, The Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 998 Legislative Director from 2011–2013 from South Carolina.

Libertarian Party

President: Jo Jorgensen, Clemson University Professor from South Carolina.

Vice President: Spike Cohen, Podcaster and Businessman from South Carolina.

Do you think they could take away Electoral Votes from the Major Party's Candidates?










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


Trump’s Intelligence Officials Contradict His Repeated Claims of Mail-In Voting Fraud


U.S. Intelligence officials Discounted the Possibility of Foreign Countries Mass Producing Fake Ballots to Interfere in the November Elections, Contradicting President Trump’s continued Insistence that Mail-in Voting poses a Significant Threat to Election Security.

The Closed-Door House Briefing was led by the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Top Election Official, Bill Evanina, and Senior Intelligence Officials who Specialize in Election Security.

Officials Dismissed the Possibility of Foreign Powers being able to Interfere on a Mass Scale to Produce and Send Fake Ballots to Voters and Election Authorities.

The Issue of Forged Ballots only came up when a Lawmaker asked about it. Evanina didn’t Raise any Alarms about that Possibility.

“Mail-in voting has already become an issue among partisan political voices, which makes it a target for threat actors to exploit. These threat actors may mislead and confuse the public about the mechanics of mail-in voting, and leverage limited understanding regarding mail-in voting processes, in order to cause chaos and provoke distrust in the election administration and electoral results.” the Assessment read.

I am Worried about the Ability of the U.S. Post Office to Collect and Deliver Mail-In Ballots to Board of Elections Sites. I hope States' offer Options like: Stand-Alone Secure Drop Boxes, and/or Drive-Thru Sites, and/or Mobile Units with a Board of Election Official to Verify the Hand-Offs.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


Saturday, August 1, 2020

Re-Nomination of Trump to be Held in Private


The Vote to Re-Nominate President Trump is Set to be Conducted in Private, without Members of the Press Present, a Spokeswoman for the Republican National Convention (RNC), citing the Coronavirus.

While Trump called Off the Public Components of the Convention in Florida last month, citing Spiking Cases of the Virus across the Country, 336 Delegates are Scheduled to gather in Charlotte, North Carolina, on Aug. 24th, to formally Vote to make Trump the GOP Standard-Bearer once more.

Nominating Conventions are traditionally meant to be Media Bonanzas, as Political Parties seek to Leverage the Attention the Events draw to Spread their Message to as many Voters as possible. If the GOP Decision stands, it will mark the First Party Nominating Convention in Modern History to be Closed to Reporters.

“Given the health restrictions and limitations in place within the state of North Carolina, we are planning for the Charlotte activities to be closed press Friday, August 21th – Monday, August 24th,” a Convention Spokeswoman said. “We are happy to let you know if this changes, but we are working within the parameters set before us by state and local guidelines regarding the number of people who can attend events."

Privately some GOP Delegations have Raised Logistical Issues with Traveling to either City, citing the Increasing Number of Jurisdictions imposing Mandatory Quarantine Orders on Travelers Returning from States Experiencing Surges in the Virus.

The Subset of Delegates in Charlotte will be Casting Proxy Votes on behalf of the more than 2,500 Official Delegates to the Convention. Alternate Delegates and Guests have already been Prohibited.

UPDATE

A Spokesman for the RNC said: "no final decision has been made" on whether Reporters will be Allowed to Cover the Republican National Convention In-Person, a day after a Convention Spokesperson said the Convention would be "Closed Press".

The Republican National Committee says No Final Decision has been made about whether President Trump’s Re-Nomination will be held in Private at the GOP Convention.

A Livestream is part of the Press Coverage Options. A RNC Official says the President is Not likely to Accept the Nomination in Charlotte in a Big Public Speech. If Trump goes to Charlotte, the expectation is that it will just be to Thank the Delegates in a Private, Closed Press Event.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker


Supreme Court Allows Border-Wall construction to Continue While Lawsuit Continues


The Supreme Court, on Friday July 31st, turned down a Plea from Opponents of President Trump’s Border Wall to Order a Temporary Stop to Construction. By a Vote of 5-4, the justices Declined to Lift a Stay, entered just over a year ago, that Allowed the Federal Government to Continue to Spend Federal Funds on Construction while a Legal Challenge to the Wall Continues. The Challengers had Urged the Supreme Court to Intervene last week, telling the Justices that if the Stay were not Lifted, the Trump Administration could Finish the Wall Sections Before the Court even decides whether to Take-Up the Case on the Merits.

The Brief One-Sentence Order was the latest in the Dispute over the Wall on the U.S.-Mexico Border. The Clash came to the Court for the First time last year, after a Federal District Judge in California Agreed with the Challengers, the Sierra Club, and the Southern Borders Communities Coalition, that Government Officials did Not have the Power to Spend more than Congress had already Allocated for Border Security. U.S. District Judge, Haywood Gilliam, Barred the Government from using $2.5 Billion in Funds originally earmarked for Military-Personnel Funds to Build the Border Wall, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit Declined to Stay that Ruling while the Government Appealed. The Trump Administration then went to the Supreme Court, which put Gilliam’s Order On-Hold and Allowed the Government to use the Pentagon Funds on the Wall.

The Trump Administration urged the Court to Leave the Stay in place. U.S. Solicitor General. Jeffrey Wall, said the Government Plans to file its Cert Petition seeking Review of the 9th Circuit’s Decision on Aug. 7th, which would Allow the Justices to consider it at their First Conference after the Summer Recess.

Justice Stephen Breyer filed a Short Dissent from the Court’s Denial of the Challengers’ Motion to Lift the Stay, which was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Breyer Reiterated that when the Court Granted the Stay last year, he had suggested a Middle Ground that, he said, would Avoid Irreparable Harm on both sides of the Dispute: Put Gilliam’s Order On-Hold as far as it Prevented the Government from Finalizing the Contracts for the Construction of the Wall, but continue to Bar the Government from Actually Spending the Pentagon Funds or Beginning Construction. “Now,” Breyer observed, the Government “has apparently finalized its contracts, avoiding the irreparable harm” that it said Justified the Stay last year. Because Friday’s Order allowing Construction to continue may effectively serve as a Final Judgment in the Case, Breyer explained, he would have Lifted the Stay of Gilliam’s Order.

In a Statement issued shortly after Friday’s Order, an Attorney representing the Challengers emphasized that the Justices’ “temporary order does not decide the case.” Dror Ladin, a Staff Attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, stressed that the Trump Administration “has admitted that the wall can be taken down if we ultimately prevail, and we will hold them to their word and seek the removal of every mile of unlawful wall built.”










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker