BACK TO THE BASICS |
No one is to be trusted is an arching theme throughout Washington. Across both aisle on the right or left, even in between with the highest court in the land, US Supreme Court leaks, and the way things are going in the country not just Michael Sussman case it holds some truth. On Thursday, Sussman's defense team talked with their client and made a decision that Michael didn't need to testify and wouldn't be beneficial to the case, so jury instructions were brought forth instead. Although all evidence is in the jury was instructed not to discuss the case with anyone.
The interpretation of the law as one comprehends its articulation has an affect on any decision making process. A defense to knowing and willful statement is sort of curious because its hard to know what someone was thinking despite the action carried out. Unless the jury calls on Elon Musk for his brainwave reading program its sort of vague. The evidence presented in the Michael Sussman case helps better determine the corruption or not. There are 2 types of evidence, direct evidence and circumstantial evidence from which a reasonable inference can be drawn. The jury was instructed by presiding judge Cooper not to allow the nature of the charge to be the weight of evidence. "You all are sole judges of credibility of witness," Judge Cooper expressed to the jury. Politics has played a role in evidence, but not making decision based on political views with leaning more towards affiliation was a function of the jury deliberating moment. One of the jury's daughters had a connection with the defense but that will not affect their decision-making process in this case. Instruction number 9, burden of proof was the issue at hand and if the jury finds the government beyond reasonable doubt. Instruction number 19, the testimony of the witness should focus on the meeting September 19, 2016. Instruction number 12 reiterates the nature of the charges and some political nature does play a vital role in this case. Both sides debated on striking the word bad with purpose to disobey the law, considering the word bad isn't appropriate in Sussman's case. The theory of the defense has reserve the right to change instruction number 31. Considering the jury instruction were preliminary some repetition could be present. If the jury finds that the government has proven the case beyond reasonable doubt and found guilty, it's verdict is the responsibility of the jury. It is the memory of the jury they must rely on and some were granted permission to take notes, but that shouldn't replace the evidence presented in the case. Proven Michael Sussman's is guilty beyond reasonable doubt to find him guilty, and the government proof must be beyond reasonable doubt. The closing arguments in the Sussman's case occurred on Friday, May 27, 2022.
0 Comments
Tuesday took a different turn in the pace of the US verse Sussman case "I'll try to be more exciting," suggested one of the Sussman's legal defense attorneys. The buck doesn't stop at the Federal Bureau of Investigations, it gets bypass for the white papers instead. It's a 50/50 chance that every investigation must follow some metrics of a procedure which has been stipulated on the basis of the policy. Streamlining procedures so they are more efficient for the agency operations is always suitable and standard for maintaining good faith protocols. Some would consider rules are meant to be bended or even broken, but that is the accountability of the thought-provoking risk taker. What appears to have taken many alternative routes with limited data to justify the rhetoric of allege Trump Organization and Russia link when many news outlets have yet to discuss where those Russian collusion advertising dollars have dive off the deep end too which caused a discourse in the 2016 Presidential Election resulting in Hillary Clinton clinching on to a gusty feeling. Moreover, the FBI headquarters in Chicago opened the investigation of the white papers. It appears that Allison Sands wanted to secure longevity with the bureau and moving up the rank by proving herself by any means necessary. Perhaps it was her desires and motivation were put to the test. According to Curtis Heide "she conducted most of the investigation and did most of significant activities," he said from the witness stand. They both drafted government exhibit 200, which had a typo. However, Allison is the primary author while Curtis just reviewed it for accuracy. On September 16, 2016, a referral of information from the US Department of Justice detailing an unusual, configured email server in Pennsylviana belonging to the Trump Organization, which was false. Furthermore, it wasn't until October 29, 2018, that Heide would learn the materials brought to FBI General Counsel Baker and the first time he identified the typo in paperwork. There is no "I" in team at the FBI despite it being a word that accounts for agency name. When a person is tasked with an assignment to work with colleagues the person who authors the documents are usually the spokesperson for explaining that agencies actions. If it's a pair not sure how one should divide the responsibility to deduct who will be held accountable for their actions but perhaps it depends on some premeditated factors not much understanding that is at the bottom of the checklist. Electronic communication in email format sent from agent Gaynor who was liaison to the FBI Headquarters managing the investigation. "Got it being discussed at Headquarters," were the details. However, agent Heide never learned the origin of the white papers as of October 3. The email sent from Gaynor to Heide just meant to keep reviewing the DNS logs and "we were not able to interview the source at time," said Heide during cross examination. Even though this was a pressing concern for FBI General Counsel Baker, it took months for the investigation to be inconclusive, and additional conversations were planned with Spectrum Health. "Don't remember what sparked file 302," it was an internal investigation to identify Domain Name Service or Domain Name System traffic which allege was the result of misconfigured server. The case of the white papers was closed January 2017. "I believe Allison closed the case," Curtis Heide said while in court in reference to closing the Electronic Communication from Chicago. The "open captioned preliminary investigation is a typo in the allege covert communication." On or about September 16, the FBI received a white paper that was produced by an anonymous third-party from the US Department of Justice. But this was later discovered to be inaccurate and unable to substantiate anything in white papers to the understanding of agent Heide. "It came through anonymous source through General Counsel Jim Baker." In this case it was "unimportant to know the source because it involved presidential candidate a month before election," stated agent Curtis Heide. Some confusion about the client was raised to determine if source worked with client for business interest or financial benefits or FBI. Defense attorney Sean Berkowitz crossed examined agent Curtis Heide suggesting "give everyone a roadmap of where we're going." "The connection for application FISA Court can issue warrants or wiretaps?" defense Attorney Berkowitz asked witness Heide. "I didn't author any materials in the investigation in question," agent Heide replied. When agent Curtis Heide first met with the government his memory was "pretty hazy." He was focusing most of his attention on other cases. Heide can't recall if he approached Allison to give her an opportunity to open an investigation. They wrote the white paper had come from the US Department of Justice in their open communication. An assessment was emailed to agent Heide which suggest "from assessment there is no cyber equity in this report and that the research conducted in report reveals some questionable investigative steps taken." "We think it was a bunk report still as of September 26," said agent Heide from witness stand. Agent Curtis Heide sent an email to Edward Priestap wanting to interview "the source of the white papers." Thomas Grasso Supervisor in Chicago sent Allison Sands an email October 2, "the person of interest is tied to a home (DSL/Broadband) IP address." With all the electronic communication circulating not many were determined to request additional background on the anonymous person because the person was one of the sources who provided information on September 19, 2016. The SUBJECT of the white papers email gave the directive "please read as if you had no prior knowledge or involvements, you were handed this document as security expert (not DNS expert) and were asked?" Witness Jared Novick founded bitvoyant in 2015 and has since established other business partnerships. Bitvoyant is a cyber company filled with hardware and software and gives clients technical direction selling services to private sector doing cyber risk data. In August 2016, Novick was asked to look at research relating to Russia and Donald Trump. "This task was unique because private company and tasking about group of individuals and felt like opposition research," testified Novick. "Rodney task me and received PDF document with handful 5-7 names of people was very personal," expressed Novick during cross examination. It would be this task from Rodney Joffe where Novick would recognize Carter Page as the first name. Jared Novick had limited trust in certain people at the company and only worked with 3 people. "Crimson Rino" was the code name of the file internal for project, but Novick didn't have access to the data only able to analyze it. Defense Attorney Berkowitz learned from Novick's testimony that some government agencies "were suspect of Rodney." He later suggested that Novick didn't like Rodney Joffe much. "We had disagreements," expressed Jared. In August 2021, Jared Novick submitted evidence to the government after seeing a man serve him a subpoena with a gun drawn. "I didn't talk to him, just received a piece of paper," Novick shared of that subpoena experience. "2016 had challenging time and if I don't do certain thing I can find another job," Novick was told by Rodney Joffe. "If you don't remember, say I don't know," Judge Cooper expressed to witness Jared Novick to eliminate any tough of war of words with the defense attorney. Jared Novick is not a cyber expert he is a technical expert in other areas of security risk data with focus on value of data not internet research and said he was "extremely uncomfortable with the task," from Mr. Joffe. Novick said he had no knowledge that Georgia Tech was working on Crimson Rino. He also learned more about DNS when he took the job and based on the work it was to go to an attorney. Some of the exhibits presented during cross examination revealed "this doesn't look like anything I said. Still in shock from reading this," Novick expressed to the court. Jared Novick was responsible for formatting the document and gave it to Mr. Joffe, but the initial email was sent from Rodney Joffe. He also expressed that Mr. Joffe sent the document back, a different document than he'd sent him. Selective Memory will stale the United States verse Sussman trial starting at the witness stand5/23/2022 Baltimore, M.D. - In the matter of United States verse Sussman returned to the DC District court today for more witness testimony before the jury. Former Assistant Director of FBI Counterintelligence Division Edward William Priestap took the witness stand today. And to the best of his memory was able or impartial towards answering questions. Most people are able to recount where they were on that horrific September 11, 2001, day, and cannot forget such devastation and the patriotism that swiftly became the pillar to unite under after that day. Many people can also remember former President George Bush reading a book to elementary school children when one of the World Trade Center buildings were destroyed. What has been a pattern and trend line throughout the US v Sussman case is the inability for the witnesses to recount what occurred 5 to 6 years ago. This is quite dynamic especially if the investigation was centered around a Democratic National Committee lawyer wanting to help the FBI bureau by providing them with information of an allege secret communication channel along with links to Alfa-Bank that had the potential to pose a counterintelligence threat ahead of the 2016 Presidential Election of Donald J. Trump and Hillary Clinton.
Back Down Memory Lane Before Baker stepped down from the witness stand, he stated that Sussman was doing this in a different capacity and not at the FBI on behalf of any Hillary Clinton campaign and Michael said to Baker "he was not," at the FBI on behalf of the DNC nor Clinton. FBI General Counsel James Baker oriented Mr. Priestap of who Michael was. Baker then described to E.W. Priestap in his office the communication channel, and Spectrum health using a poor analog TOR. Priestap isn't sure how the use of the word important is. However, Genral Counsel Baker insisted he wanted to get those files and two portable electronic storage devices off his desk. Motivation is more of a factor in initiating an investigation Mr. Priestap suggested from the stand. "If bringing on behalf of a political campaign it is important," he said to the defense team. A confidential human source can be a variety of people who are providing FBI all day, every day with information. And since the FBI can't look into everything, they bring to the FBI's attention to determine should the agency spend taxpayers' money to investigate the issue. In this matter it has been over $30 million taxpayer dollars have been allotted to this investigation. Defense Attorney Michael Bosworth asked Priestap if he meet with the government and previously testified in June 2021 with grand jury to which Priestap didn't recall ever meeting Michael Sussman or speaking to him. "US is sole superpower on the face of this earth and a lot of nations don't like that," E.W. Priestap said from the witness stand. "Is Russia one of those countries?" Bosworth asked Priestap to which he replied "yes." Although he had selective memory in the procedures of handling the investigation of the allege secret communication channel and Alfa-Bank, Priestap said "let me put it this way whether the Russians were or trying to interfere in 2016 election." He also testified that it is his job to protect the country. As so long as he can remember what he is defending perhaps it will be justified. But as it is standing and has been a pattern no algorithms needed is the inability for such pressing and time sensitive counterintelligence issue to fade in the memory bank on September 19, 2016, but the investigation was data driven to delegate task for investigation. "Why do you remember one of Alfa-bank over Russia," defense attorney Bosworth asked Priestap while on stand. "If I recall correctly it didn't amount to much," but Priestap was briefed on Crossfire Hurrican. "It's hard to remember details from 6 years ago?" Bosworth asked E.W. Priestap. "Correct," he replied. Although it had looked like his handwriting it didn't jog his memory of the events which took place surrounding the investigation procedures. "Apparently it's hard to remember events in 5 minutes," Bosworth emphasized. According to the memo the information posed a national security threat is how Priestap interpreted even though it is his job to determine if information is true or false. The September 26 meeting with the NY Times was a tough time for Priestap to recount. Furthermore, on March 6, 2017, E.W. Priestap was included in an email for "Briefing for the (A) DAG," arranged by the meeting organizer. An investigation allows the agency to determine if allegations are true or false. According to the electronic communication it was Priestap understanding as a result of the investigation it had "fizzled out." Special agent FBI assistant Ryan Gaynor had an opportunity to give witness testimony in the matter of US v Sussman. His background is in national security with regards to terrorism and counterintelligence and he got his start in St. Louis. In 2016, Gaynor was assigned to unit for chief infrastructure protection. While attending a briefing on September 23, 2016, and Chicago was giving the briefing. Upon hearing the briefing Gaynor would continue to track for front office who initiated an investigation. Ryan was on a temporary duty and decided to volunteer to work on the case. The windy city of Chicago was working on the details of the case and Allison Sands described the allegations and sent documents related to the case to Gaynor. He didn't remember much about those events because "it's been 4 to 5 years," Gaynor said while at the stand. He also didn't remember anyone else in the meeting. "What I recall the allegations came from Michael Sussman provided information to James Baker counterintelligence agent, a DNC attorney," he may have said more during the meeting but don't remember. Due to a close hold on the case, Gaynor was unable to provide any field office information about the source as the close hold was helping or hindering Chicago's investigation of the matter. Gaynor didn't have significant cyber experience he was working on matters related to the threat. His view was that "hindering the investigation with close hold and couldn't argue a compelling reason to pull the close hold at that time." There were several efforts underway during the investigation waiting for logs from Central Dynamic. The defense team asked Gaynor if the close hold was on Mr. Sussman as one to if given reason to hold, but "I don't recall there was a close hold," he replied to the defense. FBI Senior Manager and special agent Allison Sands also gave witness testimony in court today. She worked at the bureau from January 2016 until August 2019. In her role she is the person responsible for paperwork process and procedure. Sands, who currently works at Roku, a tech streaming company, stated the "general allegation there was covert communication channel transit through TOR node (hide source of internet traffic) to Spectrum health." As a training agent sent white paper email and Sands directly opened a cyber investigation. She opened the initial case "on or about September 16, 2016." According to Allison the FBI received a referral of information from the US Department of Justice detailing unusual, configured email server in Pennsylvania belonging to the TRUMP Organization in that referral. She also testified that not many files were stored on the portable electronic devices. The white paper was received when the Chicago office opened the case. The FBI first reached out to experienced agents in cyber security and technical data. From the investigation Sands suggested the data assessment was incomplete and activity wasn't occurring which was being investigated by Chicago division. The case was opened as a cyber investigation as a communication channel isn't illegal the threat to counterintelligence not cyber security. Open source researched the domain and IP address were leased from godaddy.com. Central Dynamic is an email marketing company providing hospitality services but also SPAMs emails. Baltimore, M.D. - Jury selection has been sorted out on Thursday in DC District court, in the case of the United States verse Sussman with Judge Cooper presiding. A jury is a body of individuals selected and sworn to inquire into a question of fact and to give their verdict according to the evidence. Former FBI General Counsel James "Jim" Baker took the stand in an attempt to recount the scope and context of the meeting he had on numerous occassions with lawyer Michael Sussman who was retained by the Democratic National Committee along with the Hillary Clinton Campaign or Foundation, that finding has to be made clear. "Our Michael Sussman is an honorable man," wrote his colleagues at Perkins and Coie in a WSJ opinion piece "Who Is Michael Sussman?" He is a man with many intriguing clients and who former FBI General Counsel Baker would vouch for as a decent lawyer coming to help the bureau.
Time to Circle back to 2016 1,825 days is a long time to recount an event. Furthermore, if the facts are present then not much should change over the years in presentation not perception. 13 days before Michael Sussman had a desire to do a good deed and help the FBI bureau by bringing 2 portable electronic devices and specific documents that could pose a potential national security threat by reporting some suspicious activity or what New York Times Washington Breau reporter Eric Lichtblau would suggest a secret channel associating the Trump campaign with using Spectrum Healthcare entity as a money holder for alleged Russian Alpha bank benefits. On September 6, many of the Obama Administration Senior Level Officials such as Sally Yates, Deputy Attorney General Department of Justice, and DJ Patil, US Chief Data Scientist would gather in the South Court auditorium for a White House 21st Century briefing to keep it short like 240 Twitter characters. This event was hosted by National Action Network Rev. Al Sharpton. The origin of this time sensitive information was introduced by NY Times reporter Eric Lichtblau. Maybe if he had some ethics in journalism training the story wouldn't have generated so many feelings of assumptions but be very concrete and concise. Furthermore, this time sensitive but critical data would later present a request to the publication asking them to hold off from publishing the story because it could potentially interfere with the ongoing FBI investigation. Nonetheless, proprietors hire people to go out into the world and write stories about various things. If what the writer publishes in an error and misinformation, that is solely the responsibility of the writer not the paper. Not sure if anyone needed to generate a buzz beyond the allege Russian collusion advertising dollars which caused a major discourse resulting in Hillary Clinton to have gusty feelings. Moreover, Michael Sussman's actions prompt the publication to hold the story, so they assumed. The honorable man according to Perkins and Coie, Sussman was not at the FBI on behalf of his intriguing healthcare, telecommunications, DNC, or Hillary Clinton clients but simply to help. Former FBI General Counsel Baker stated in court that he is "100% confident that Michael said that in the meeting and his colleagues believed that statement was truthful." James Baker and Michael Sussman had known each other very well prior to the helping the bureau. Their children played sports together. It was not clear what they discussed as friends, but Sussman suggested he went to the FBI as a citizen not a friend. According to the help sponsored by a good deed of Sussman, he had been in contact or approached by cyber security experts who have national and international recognition in that field. Baker claims in court that Michael was coming to see him as a good citizen from the text and had no idea of what he was telling him about. Despite this information being classified as time sensitive, the FBI still chose to sit on the information contingent on the circulation of a New York Times article but if what Eric told Sussman to be factual, why would the FBI be wary of the words in the article? Former FBI General Counsel James "Jim" Baker suggested he skimmed the WSJ opinion article not reading it in its entirety "Who Is Michael Sussman?" He handed his wife a bag of m & m's while his son handed a fresh mask for the proceedings. Michael signaled to his son to ensure it was worn properly. It is unclear if the cyber experts had already been in communication with the New York Times before going to Michael, or if they only had communication with Sussman and he then shared that information with the FBI. Baker first appeared before Congress on October 18, 2018 and suggested at that time he wishes he could give a better answer, but his goal was to get those time sensitive documents and portable electronic storage device into the hands of an agent. The Department of Justice Inspector General Office is independent part of the agency, and they conduct oversight to do investigations within the bureau and provide management oversight to determine any waste, fraud, abuse or criminal activity. It appears the communication was time sensitive but shorthand with meetings not exceeding 30 min intervals. "I wanted to get it out of my hands," Baker stated with regards to the time sensitive documents and 2 portable electronic storage devices despite requesting the news organization to hold off on publishing the article. How long did the FBI assume the New York Times should hold off on publishing the article? Citizens coming forward with evidence is proper and within range of FBI policies and isn't considered snitching. Baker stated he learned from the press not sure if it was the New York Times, Washington Post, WSJ or CNN that the honorable Michael Sussman represented the DNC and Hillary Clinton Campaign or Foundation at the time of their first meeting September 19, 2016. Would that have been the duty of the reporter or the lawyer to disclose that information to the FBI if they were providing time sensitive information which could pose a security risk? Neustar was another company which had telecommunication contracts providing cell phone portability and telecom services would be contemplating giving the contract to foreign company running part of US telecom system. Neustar was losing business and had the FBI intervene on their behalf since significant business and money was on the line. "Lawyers are slow sometimes," according to Baker but they made a swift request to the news publication to hold the story. The concern was that those using this secret communication channel would switch their method and that mode would make it difficult for the FBI to access the required information. Each client is different, and lawyers have to make different decisions based on the conditions in the case matter. By May 2018, Jim Baker departed ways with the FBI lending his expertise to a think tank in DC before his current post at Twitter. Baker stated that he was never told that he was the subject of a criminal investigation and refused to answer questions involuntary. In 2020 that case was closed by the FBI. Baker found himself receiving much backlash for his meeting with Michael Sussman and was seen as a traitor and coupe plotter and dragged Michael by discussing him in the news interviews. Sussman at some point wanted to project when the media would release the big secret and texted Jim suggesting the rumors of a big story was trickling out and that would force media outlets hand. There is limited understanding if Sussman gave these same materials to Mr. Lichtblau? The FBI would be worried if a reporter wrote about facts and unsure if they had enough but what they could report is the FBI is reporting and some element of story is published. It was also stated that Steve Myers a Russo expert who wrote a book would be meeting with former FBI General Counsel Jim Baker, but he didn't get an autograph. Perhaps he was waiting for his signed copy of the Muller Report by the Washington Post. Baker expressed that the FBI would be fairly frustrated with not getting the response they desired pertaining to the secret communication channel. The goal for Baker was to ask the New York Times to continue to hold off on publishing the article to review and investigate the case. Not certain when the article went live, but the New York Times wasn't present in the court room on today. Washington, D.C - Adobe sure brings the ambiance for a great atmosphere at the Experience Makers Government Forum held in Washington DC on May 10. "Digital experiences that put people first. Simple, seamless, and secure government solutions," was this year's theme. So long to the days of reviewing microfiche files when doing any research. The digital revolution has transformed how we access information and who has access to the information. The government forum was a hybrid event which allowed more than 1,000 to participate from all across the world. Various government and private sector agencies were in attendance to share the benefits of new technologies they have implemented at their organization for best practice use and developing effective standards for maximum solutions. DATA is king in the digital world and having access to data allows for much analyzing and categorizing for preservation and future use in various scenarios. One particular organization Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services suggest that data can be helpful but it's a lot to convert it into useful information. CMS has some leverage in that area since they already have in place an electronic health records system. CMS reaches a lot of entities in the health care sector, facilitates and serve as an agency which implements data standards and data exchange in practice and regulation for programs, participants, and pair program participants. "It is critical and important in health care that we get the right data. And people can't make informed decisions unless you have what you need," expressed Alexandra Mugee, MPH, Director and Deputy Chief Health Informatics Officer. The 21st century technology methods have afforded CMS to send data to patients in digital format to customize their experience and allows customers to tailor and prioritize their health information. Having access to high quality and meaningful data can provide more streamlines and reduce cost burden for administrative processes. Some healthcare measures require a prior authorization process and most medical services should be covered but who will cover the cost? CMS has taken a look at prior authorization to help automate data exchanges and inherently reduce burdens. The culture change that is involved to help move into the digital future has been a very curious one. During COVID-19 many government agencies went remote. This allowed for some culture changes to be implemented and prove effective through practice and observing ways to strengthen those culture changes. The US Patent and Trademark Office is responsible for the protection of information critical for economy to grow with innovation and new ideas deliver modern lively products. Stephan Mitchev, Acting Chief Technology Officer, US Patent and Trademark Office suggest creating a culture based on goals can be beneficial to the agency. Once trust has been breached what is the method to engage the public to show and enhanced the processing of information. Creating resilience and modernizing infrastructure while moving to leverage cloud are focus areas for providing services currently at the US Patent Trademark Office.
John Landwehr, Vice President and Public Sector Chief Technology Officer shared that content authenticity 20 years ago meeting with pharmaceutical companies have changed drastically. Companies needed a way to submit clinical trials in a more secure fashion which can be trusted and get drugs to market quicker through submission. Another challenge raised a concern when it was time to authenticate college transcripts. Much falsifying of documents occurred until Penn State electronic system was implemented as a model standard for authentication replacing the water mark transcript. The Publishing Office is also a client Mr. Landwehr served to streamline access to locate the appropriations to ensure trust along with being a reliable source. Transparency is the key attribute in providing trust Mr. Mitchev shared during the forum. Transparency is observing the process of data. Block chain can answer any questions of information issues and why that issue exists. "Public trust shows how we make a decision," he expressed. Machine learning for normal operations takes a lot of investment also. What are all the inputs coming in to trusted information is vital for all agency functions. Having a trusted time stamp authorizes standards and policy are a part of a global standard as government shares information. How does an agency or organization know who is submitting a request for documents? Being able to see more video and pictures are elements to authenticate those processes. Strengthening government transparency process and how data is generated allows many to trust the experts. How does any agency determine which data to discard and which to input into the database? This is a critical and vital question, but it depends on how that agency or organization wants to maintain its records and what strategy they have in place for accessing those records also. Should the agency keep files for longer than 20 years? If they only store data electronically starting in 2006 but one is unable to access that data in 2022, then what changed in that processing method to acquire accurate and sufficient data? Reducing reliance on paper is great for the environment but not being able to reduce data points that would be most beneficial for the organization is imperative for their ecosystems. What will your organizations dataflow chart look like? Will it start in a virtual setting first or file submission process first? What are you trying to achieve is key in this digital ecosystem for sustainability? Using all tools at your disposal to achieve an effective outcome for customers and service providers. Adobe creates the atmosphere for amazing conversations and connections. Your agency can't go wrong when your goal is for a seamless connection and accessibility for data. If District residents seeking housing subsidies, vouchers or any assistance administered through DC Housing Authority and weren't on the waiting list before 2009, chances are they have to use some other program source, because that list is nonexistent in 2022. They'd now have to go through Virginia Williams resource for intake. Then they find a program such as MBI Homelessness Prevention Program and that program would have to refer the customer to the Community Partnership program. This method may have been adjusted due to COVID-19, but that was one of the procedures to receive any program support. These housing clusters organizations and networks have a very intricate way in which they render program services because the customer is outsourced too several agencies for housing support only to have to return to the Virginia Williams Resource Center.
These housing organizations and niche market networks lack any need for effective communication. Especially during critical times when a customer is in need of housing. Barriers to housing can be analyzed through various program systems but if the customer didn't create any of the conditions to be displaced then how does their program assess that need? It can't. Why? Because the created conditions don't align with any of the socioeconomic factors that would attribute to one being homeless although there are many factors that occur for conditions of homelessness. The housing experts and advocates would use an alternative route as a means to provide housing for this particular customer. The DC agencies used the customers legal case caption as their means to petition then order for the customer to be hospitalized and observed. So therefore, the housing assessment system lacked sufficient data for any sustainable housing solutions, although the DC CFSA had substantiated claims based on a compelling caller. Furthermore, after the customer has gone through credit class, housing counseling, and IZ orientations, the MBI Homelessness Prevention program will instruct the customer to write a letter to appeal for a housing program the intake center Virginia Williams Resource Center could've offered. But what purpose is there in participating in all these programs if the initial intake was to deny the customer housing accommodations? These practices are either found in the Fair Housing Act or Department of Housing and Urban Development because that is what has been carried out over 24 months. Perhaps the 2018 Certificate of Completion could've provided housing accommodations before the first case of COVID-19 was discovered in the district March 2020. An economist would consider it was a great economic reset, but a scientist such as Bill Gates would call it a pandemic and we haven't seen the worst of it as of yet. By using a telescope, there was a progressive movement and bipartisan agreement effort to evict one particular American by any misuse of program funding found possible. And continue the restrictions to affordable housing formula. Not sure if it's as potentate as the pre-requisite bill formula for Facebook movie caption bills, but it sure has reached a COVID-19 climax housing crisis generating close to $20,000 for their created conditions. That is a substantial amount of money for anyone these days. Furthermore, when they mobilize their organizational charts to create a housing crisis with Google as their guidance and program support for abusing program operations then what good is any policy? It is as good and useful as their West Stat assessment program to evaluate the conditions of customers who are in need of housing accommodations on various levels. The assessment didn't return any data points outside of the one's they generated through the petition suitable for a customer during COVID-19. However, the case management wasn't deemed effective until the end of September. Suppose being silly April fools has found many with appeasing mad hats no #MAGA hats are required for this haunted affordable housing that has many dynamic dysfunctions to demonstrate it needs an audit. Very frankly not sure how they should verify or validate that it is against the law for residents to occupy any dwelling with rodent infestation. Those conditions create unprecedented health conditions. Could you imagine a rodent eating your fried chicken during inflation? Why would any housing program agency allow a customer to participate in a program contingent on a mental health crisis generated by the DC Attorney General and lease up and live with rodents needless to say the verbal agreement was a different dollar amount for the customer to pay than the amount they instructed the customer to sign for them. This appears to align on the mental health spectrum with preventive measures for providing housing in the district of corruption. Case management is critical, but if you're managing homelessness prevention and the customer expressed a rodent problem for 12 months and due to COVID-19 they were unable to do much then what? Should the customer re-engage in those hazardous living conditions the government created or find better safe and healthy living conditions? The housing crisis which many DC Government Google agents huddled to howl at, have circle back to haunt their unclean hand jobs. As if those bill formulas for Facebook movie captions weren't world wide web stage worthy of an Oscar, before CODA was washed underneath the currents of a slap in the face. It is evident that the housing crisis they created weren't able to maintain their 2019 April fool's composure and didn't find a cue card until September 2020. Moreover, which housing program did the customer participate in is the mystery clue? Their housing crisis which they generated based on a petition embed with Google has amassed an almost $20,000 price tag for all those curated acts. Ask Bloomberg how many horseshoes does it take to trot the land? |
MINDY JOFar from your traditional news, "Welcome to the Mindy Jo News Show," where she shares news that you can absolutely use! And slogan Let's Get Right To It!™ She's often copied, but none can compare. Mindy Jo has a different frequency, and delivery with a unique style of story telling. Delivering dynamic and distinguish ORIGINAL digital news content, along with vary of other original digital streaming content to the District of Columbia and around the World. Archives
April 2024
Categories |