Even the CBC is abandoning Conyers
This is the first of a long line of lawsuits against Trump for his illegitimate scams…
The empire is crumbling over at Faux News. Multiple lawsuits from current and former announcers against the network, which while under the leadership of Roger Ailes openly practiced sexual harassment and abuse.
At least one of the victimized women claims the harassment and violations came from more than just Ailes, naming Faux Announcer Bill O’Reilly, and a toxic environment.
Fox News is willing to pay big bucks to protect their media “hosts”…
In a system where “good in bed” equated to airtime.
It looks as though Fox News really, really didn’t want to see former host Gretchen Carlson’s sexual harassment lawsuit make it to court.
Vanity Fair reports that Fox and Carlson have agreed to a massive $20 million settlement of her sexual harassment claims — and she’s even received an official apology from the network over the treatment she received from former Fox News CEO Roger Ailes.
“During her tenure at Fox News, Gretchen exhibited the highest standards of journalism and professionalism,” Fox News parent company 21st Century Fox said in an official statement announcing the settlement. “She developed a loyal audience and was a daily source of information for many Americans. We are proud that she was part of the Fox News team. We sincerely regret and apologize for the fact that Gretchen was not treated with the respect that she and all our colleagues deserve.”
Carlson filed a lawsuit back in early July alleging that she was fired from her job for refusing to have sex with Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Less than a month later, Ailes stepped down from his role as CEO after sexual harassment allegations from several other women against him came to light.
Despite crooked DA’s running fake Grand Juries, the Civil Courts have become another issue for cities insistent on protecting murderous Cops. While Cleveland hasn’t quite caught up with Chicago on the taxpayer burden for bad policing, there may be no shortage of cases entering the docket.
I am thinking that one of these cities needs to be hit for about $50 million before any serious effort at reform will come about.
The city of Cleveland has agreed to pay Tamir Rice’s family $6 million to settle a federal lawsuit filed over the boy’s November 2014 shooting death by city police.
The settlement, announced Monday, does not resolve all of the lingering legal issues surrounding the 12-year-old’s killing. However, it is a sign that both the city and the boy’s family did not want to endure what could be tension-filled and expensive litigation process that could last years.
The settlement was revealed via a court filing from U.S. District Judge Dan Polster, who presided over settlement talks.
Tamir Rice’s estate will receive $5.5 million, Samaria Rice, the boy’s mother, and his sister Tajai Rice will each receive $250,000. Neither the city, officers Timothy Loehmann and Frank Garmback nor dispatchers involved will admit to any wrongdoing. The city will pay $3 million this year and $3 million in 2017.
(You can read the court filing here or at the bottom of this story.)
The settlement must be approved by a Cuyahoga County Probate Court judge before it is final.
The amount the family will receive is in line with amounts paid in other high profile police use-of-force cases nationally in the past year. For example, the city of Chicago in 2015 paid $5 million to the family of Laquan McDonald before a lawsuit was even filed over his police shooting death.
And the city of Baltimore agreed to pay $6.4 million to the family of Freddie Gray, whose neck was broken in a police van in April 2015.
Attorneys representing the Rice family say that while the settlement is “historic in financial terms, no amount of money can adequately compensate for the loss of a life.”
The statement continues, “in a situation such as this, there is no such thing as closure or justice. Nothing will bring Tamir back. His unnecessary and premature death leaves a gaping hole for those who knew and loved him that can never be filled.” …More Here…
One of the reasons Republicans oppose Trial Lawyers is that the best way to reform a corrupt system is to make the results of that corruption (or racism) cost real money. Now I have no idea whether Baltimore officials will, can, or even know how to resolve the issues in Baltimore – but it has to be cheaper to the City and it’s taxpayers than continuing with the current system.
Racism literally shaves $2 Trillion a year off the US economy…Maybe it is time to stop feeding the racist trolls who are defending the status quo of unaccountability for some (usually white in their reference) folks.
The Washington Post reported Tuesday that Baltimore city officials have reached a $6.4 million wrongful death settlement in the death of Freddie Gray, citing two people with knowledge of the agreement.
Details of the proposed settlement could be released by city officials as early as Tuesday.
Gray, 25, sustained a severe spinal injury after being taken into custody by Baltimore police. He died on April 19. Autopsy reports showed Gray had a single “high-energy injury,” which was most likely caused by a “rough ride” in the back of a police van. He was handcuffed and not secured by a seatbelt, and the injury likely occurred when the van decelerated quickly. His death was ruled a homicide, based on police failure to follow safety procedures.
What happened before and after Gray’s arrest is still unclear. But the Baltimore Police Department admitted on April 24 that Gray had not received timely medical care. In May, all six officers involved in the death of Gray were charged and indicted.
The settlement would need approval from Baltimore’s Board of Estimates, which handles the city’s spending, according to The Washington Post. The Board is expected to meet on Wednesday. In addition to the payout, Baltimore police officers would be required to wear body cameras.
The city has paid out around $5.7 million in police brutality settlements since 2011, according to a 2014 Baltimore Sun analysis.
Target, one of the ubiquitous big box retailers has settled a Discrimination lawsuit based on their hiring and promotion practices.It is not clear whether the process implemented by Target’s HR department was intended to be discriminatory, or the department personnel weren’t sufficiently cognizant of the rules and methodology to test a process to know.
Target Corp. will pay $2.8 million total to more than 3,000 job applicants who vied for upper-level management positions but were “disproportionately screened out” by an application test, the Minneapolis Area Office of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced Monday.
The screened-out groups included Black, Asian, and women job applicants. The EEOC complaint against Target was filed in 2006.
Target’s $2.8 million settlement, which will be disbursed among the applicants, is one of the highest for discriminatory practices in history according to the EEOC, as many large corporations and companies have settled for less than $1 million. Molly Snyder, a spokesperson for Target, told the Star Tribune that the application tests in question are no longer used by the multi-billion dollar corporation.
The application tests given to those applying for management positions at Target didn’t include egregiously discriminatory questions, but proved concerning to EEOC officials because of their overall effect on the application pool.
“The tests were not sufficiently job-related,” Julie Schmid, acting director of the EEOC in Minneapolis, said in an interview with the Star Tribune. “It’s not something in particular about the contents of the tests. The tests on their face were neutral. Our statistical analysis showed an adverse impact” for Black, Asian, and women job candidates.
Schmid added that Target cooperated throughout the lengthy agency investigation.
The EEOC investigation into Target’s hiring practices also found that one of the corporation’s job assessments, performed by a psychologist, violated the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The assessment, subsequently stopped by Target, included a medical exam of job applicants that is expressively forbidden by ADA guidelines….
In case you were in Siberia…The murder of Eric Garner by NYC Police…
New York City reached a $5.9 million settlement in the Eric Garner case Monday, nearly a year after he died in police custody.
“While we cannot discuss the details of this settlement, and the City has not admitted liability,” Comptroller Scott Stringer said in a release, “I believe that we have reached an agreement that acknowledges the tragic nature of Mr. Garner’s death while balancing my office’s fiscal responsibility to the City.”
Garner’s family, along with Reverend Al Sharpton will hold a press conference Tuesday morning to emphasize that “money does not establish justice.”
A video captured on July 17 showed Garner being stopped because he was selling loose cigarettes. He was held in what appeared to be an illegal chokehold. Eric Garner said “I can’t breathe” 11 times during the ordeal, before he lost consciousness. He was later pronounced dead at the hospital.
Garner’s family filed the claim against the city in October asking for $75 million. In January 2015, the grand jury decided not to indict the officer.
First – black people were better off under slavery. Now – black farmers are frauds, and ill deserving of “Reparations” for generations of discriminatory practices by the US Agriculture Department which all too often cost them their livelihoods and farms while subsidizing white farmers to the tune of hundreds of billions, if not several trillion…
We already knew Steve King is a bigot – turns out Bachman is “one” too.
Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann pointed to one program in particular Monday when talking about wasteful government spending: a multibillion dollar settlement paid to black farmers, who claim the federal government discriminated against them for decades in awarding loans and other aid.
The issue came up after Bachmann and Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa toured flooded areas along the Missouri River. During a news conference, they fielded a question about whether farmers affected by the flooding also should be worried by proposed U.S. Department of Agriculture cuts.
The two responded by criticizing a 1999 settlement in what is known as the Pigford case, after the original plaintiff, North Carolina farmer Timothy Pigford. Late last year, President Barack Obama signed legislation authorizing a new, nearly $1.2 billion settlement for people who were denied payments in the earlier one because they missed deadlines for filing.
King has likened the Pigford settlement to “modern-day reparations” for African-Americans. He said Monday a large percentage of the settlement “was just paid out in fraudulent claims” and criticized the Obama administration’s plan to resolve separate lawsuits filed by Hispanic and female farmers.
“That’s another at least $1.3 billion,” King said “I’d like to apply that money to the people that are under water right now.”
Bachmann seconded King’s criticism, saying, “When money is diverted to inefficient projects, like the Pigford project, where there seems to be proof-positive of fraud, we can’t afford $2 billion in potentially fraudulent claims when that money can be used to benefit the people along the Mississippi River and the Missouri River.”
John Boyd, president of the National Black Farmers Association, which represented black farmers in the Pigford settlement, called the criticism unfair.
“Why continue to take from those people who haven’t taken part in federal programs equally and give to another group of farmers who have taken part in federal programs?” Boyd asked. “I think taking resources from a group of people who have been historically denied any relief at the Department of Agriculture is a bad idea. For the flood victims that deserve redress … they should provide those people with relief, too.”
Boyd said he and others worked to put anti-fraud provisions in the legislation signed last year. They require each claim of discrimination to be judged individually to determine its merit _ a process that Boyd said has not yet even begun.
“We worked with Republicans … to get those issues addressed,” he said. “Even after we got them addressed, Ms. Bachmann and Mr. King have continued to look at black farmers in a very negative way.
This article doesn’t talk about but the whole racist attack on former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy by Republicans was based on race which was thrown out of court in 1997 after Rethugs s[pent $20 million prosecuting him on bogus charges.
It’s an astonishing development given the history of race relations at the USDA, an agency whose own Commission on Small Farms admitted in 1998 that “the history of discrimination at the U.S. Department of Agriculture … is well-documented” — not against white farmers, but African-American, Native American and other minorities who were pushed off their land by decades of racially-biased laws and practices.
It’s also a black eye for President Obama and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, who signaled a desire to atone for the USDA’s checkered past, including pushing for funding of a historic $1.15 billion settlement that would help thousands of African American farmers but now faces bitter resistance from Senate Republicans.
Forced Off the Land
Any discussion about race and the USDA has to start with the crisis of black land loss. Although the U.S. government never followed through on its promise to freed slaves of “40 acres and a mule,” African-Americans were able to establish a foothold in Southern agriculture. Black land ownership peaked in 1910, when 218,000 African-American farmers had an ownership stake in 15 million acres of land.
By 1992, those numbers had dwindled to 2.3 million acres held by 18,000 black farmers. And that wasn’t just because farming was declining as a way of life: Blacks were being pushed off the land in vastly disproportionate numbers. In 1920, one of out seven U.S. farms were black-run; by 1992, African-Americans operated one out of 100 farms.
The USDA isn’t to blame for all of that decline, but the agency created by President Lincoln in 1862 as the “people’s department” did little to stem the tide — and in many cases, made the situation worse.
After decades of criticism and an upsurge in activism by African-American farmers, the USDA hosted a series of “listening sessions” in the 1990s, which added to a growing body of evidence of systematic discrimination:
Black farmers tell stories of USDA officials — especially local loan authorities in all-white county committees in the South — spitting on them, throwing their loan applications in the trash and illegally denying them loans. This happened for decades, through at least the 1990s. When the USDA’s local offices did approve loans to Black farmers, they were often supervised (farmers couldn’t spend the borrowed money without receiving item-by-item authorization from the USDA) or late (and in farming, timing is everything). Meanwhile, white farmers were receiving unsupervised, on-time loans. Many say egregious discrimination by local loan officials persists today. Read the rest of this entry »
Hmmmm… Turns out Shirley Sherrod and her husband were part of the Pigford settlement, which was the ulti-billion dollar lawsuit by black farmers against the USDA, which had denied them loans based on race.
It also appears that the reason for the quick action in firing Mrs. Sherrod may well have been in at least some part, blowback from that settlement.
The Agriculture Department has a lengthy history with the official forced to resign Monday over a controversial YouTube clip — it turns out she and a group she helped found with her husband won millions last year in a discrimination suit settlement with the federal government.
The information about the suit only thickens the plot that has evolved seemingly by the hour since Shirley Sherrod resigned late Monday as the department’s Georgia director of rural development.
She claims the video clip, which showed her telling a story about how she withheld her full assistance to a white farmer, omitted key details, and she argues she was pushed out by the Obama administration without getting a chance to tell her side. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack is standing by his decision.
But it’s not the first time Sherrod faced off against the federal government. Days before she was appointed to the USDA post last year, her group reportedly won a $13 million settlement in a longstanding discrimination suit against the USDA known commonly as the Pigford case. Read the rest of this entry »
I think there should be an investigation into the records keeping of some companies. It seems that, in particular cell phone companies use a legion of debt collectors to harass and intimidate subscribers. In particular, part of the scam is the “gotcha” game of a “surprise” bill. A subscriber, who has signed up for a service level of $50 a month – suddenly gets a $300, $400, 0r (in my case) even a $600 bill out of the blue.
If the subscriber can’t pay it (which could be the whole reason they only signed up for a $50 a month service) – the cell phone carriers are remarkably adept at “selling” that debt to a series of sometimes questionably ethical debt collection agencies. A consumer can wind up paying the same “debt” two or three times just to get the debt collectors off their back.
Your average consumer is ill prepared to fight back – either because of the hours it takes to get a live person, the fact that many of the “service” people at the carrier won’t solve the problem, are completely ignorant of the technology and it’s common faults – and not knowing how to file complaints through consumer agencies. (If you can back your case up with documentation, try the Public Utilities Commission, Federal Trade Commission, Better Business Bureau, and Chamber of Commerce – all of whom have complaint procedures.)
All too often, as in my case – the bill is in error. Or, in far too many other cases, the consumer already paid the bill. This, like other corporate scams (debit card fees, mortgage fraud, credit card late fees) which have emerged over the past 20 years cost American consumers billions of dollars, and suck the life out of the economy.
At least this guy -did the right thing!
Debt collectors from Advanced Call Center Technologies, Dallas, have to shell out a whopping 1.5 million dollars for explicit voicemails sent on a man’s phone.
The company sent eight harassing and threatening voicemail messages on Allen Jones’ mobile phone in August 2007 trying to collect what it said he owed on a credit card.
Most messages were laced with profanity and spewed racial slurs.
“This is your mother******* wake-up call you little lazy a** b****,” wfaa.com quoted a collector as saying in one message.
“Get your mother******* n****r ass up and go pick some mother******* cotton fields,” said another collector.
Jones is African-American.
“This shouldn’t be tolerated. Nobody should have to experience what I had to experience,” he said.
Mark Frenkel, one of Jones’ attorneys said: “If we did not have tapes, no one would ever believe that this happened.”
“This is absolutely, without a doubt, the most egregious collection case I’ve ever seen,” Dean Malone, Jones’ other attorney, added.
Jones sued Advanced Call Center Technologies over the harassing calls.
And on Friday afternoon, a Dallas County jury awarded him one of the biggest verdicts of its kind-he won 50,000 dollars in mental anguish and 1.5 million dollars in punitive damages.
“We made a statement and the statement is we will not tolerate abusive debt collectors,” continued Jones.
Frenkel and Malone said employees from Advanced Call Center Technologies confessed to the calls.
However, it remains unclear if they are still with the company and whether it will appeal.
Jones always disputed the debt and claims he paid it.
And the amount in question was a meagre sum of 200 dollars.
“They did this to Allen for under 200 dollars. Two hundred bucks put him through this,” noted Frenkel.
After the infamous Pigford case failed to pay black farmers for nearly 15 years – I wouldn’t hold my breath on this one until the check is in the bank.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Thousands of black farmers who were discriminated against by the U.S. Agriculture Department will be eligible to receive $1.25 billion in a settlement, the government said on Thursday.
The settlement of the case, known as Pigford II, is contingent on Congress approving $1.15 billion for the farmers, in addition to $100 million already provided in the Farm Bill.
For decades, black farmers said they were unjustly being denied farm loans or subjected to longer waits for loan approval because of racism, and accused the USDA of not responding to their complaints.
The original Pigford lawsuit, named after North Carolina farmer Timothy Pigford, was filed against the USDA in 1997, and settled two years later when the government compensated black farmers left out of USDA loan and assistance programs.
More than 13,000 farmers able to provide proof of their claims of discrimination were awarded $50,000 each and given debt relief in a package worth more than $1 billion.
But tens of thousands of claims were denied for missing the filing deadline. The settlement in Pigford II would allow these farmers to again make their claims.
“We have worked hard to address USDA’s checkered past so we can get to the business of helping farmers succeed,” USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement.
“The agreement reached today is an important milestone in putting these discriminatory claims behind us for good,” he added. Read the rest of this entry »