Two former National Football League cheerleaders who have filed discrimination complaints against the league have offered to settle their claims. They don't want a lot of money or even an admission of guilt. All they are asking for is the chance to sit down for a four-hour meeting with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. It's hard to see how the league could turn down the offer -- unless, of course, it's not really serious when it says its commitment to a fair and respectful work environment includes the women who cheer on the sidelines.
A settlement proposal crafted by the lawyer representing former New Orleans Saints cheerleader Bailey Davis and former Miami Dolphins cheerleader Kristan Ware offers to settle all their claims for just $1 each if Goodell agrees to meet them in "good faith." The purpose of the meeting, which would include two other yet-to-be selected cheerleaders, would be to negotiate leaguewide reforms of the outdated rules and regulations affecting cheerleaders. Implementation of change, though, would not be a condition. "I understand that they could meet with us, patronize us and do nothing in the end," the women's attorney, Sara Blackwell, told the New York Times. "But it's a risk we're willing to take to try to have real change."
Complaints filed by Davis with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Ware with the Florida Commission on Human Relations contend that the NFL maintains different standards for its male employees and its female ones. The cases -- notably that of Davis, who was fired after posting a photograph of herself in a lace bodysuit on her private Instagram account -- have brought new attention to the treatment of cheerleaders. A series of reports by the Times has detailed the indignities they face, including extremely low pay, long hours and sexual harassment -- sometimes physical -- from fans.
Most appalling was the account of some cheerleaders for the Washington football team of a 2013 trip to Costa Rica for a calendar photo shoot. They said they were posed topless or in body paint in front of an all-male audience of team sponsors and stadium suite holders. Some said they were later required to accompany sponsors to a nightclub. The director of the cheerleading squad disputed much of the account, and a statement from the team touted the program as "one of the NFL's premier teams in participation, professionalism and community service."
Whether sideline cheerleading featuring attractive women in provocative attire is integral to the enjoyment of football or a sexist relic of the past is a matter for debate. Six NFL teams do not have cheerleading squads, some for philosophical reasons and one to avoid the impact of a class-action lawsuit over pay. What shouldn't be an issue is that the women who choose to do this work shouldn't be treated like second-class citizens or -- as Washington cheerleaders alleged to the Times -- sexually exploited. That Davis and Ware are willing to forgo any claim to monetary awards to tell their stories in the hope of bringing about change should convince Goodell that, at the very least, he needs to listen.
While Memorial Day honors Americas's war dead, and Veteran's day honors those still alive who have served in times past, Armed Forces Day recognizes those presently serving.
Armed Forces Day is celebrated on the third Saturday in May. This year it will be celebrated on Saturday, May 19, 2018. Thanks to President Harry S. Truman, it’s a day to pay special tribute to the men and women of the Armed Forces. President Truman led the effort to establish a holiday in order for citizens to unite and to honor our military heroes for their current patriotic service in support of the United States of America.
Although, originally, there were single day celebrations for each branch of the military, the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force; this format changed on August 21, 1949, when Secretary of Defense Louis Johnson announced the creation of Armed Forces Day. Stemming from the unification of the Armed Forces under the Department of Defense, the annual celebration now commemorates all branches of the military during one solitary day.
The first official Armed Forces Day took place on May 20, 1950, and was themed “Teamed for Defense.” In honor of the special day, B-36 Bombers flew over state capitals, a march was led by more than 10,000 veterans and troops in Washington, D.C., and over 33,000 people participated in a New York City parade.
In addition, the first Armed Forces Day also played an essential part in educating society and expanding public knowledge of the military and the role they play in the community. Therefore, it wasn’t only a means to honor those who serve or who have served in the military, but also a way to showcase its top of the line equipment and abilities used to protect those in our country.
Interestingly, the marked celebration isn’t just limited to the United States. Other countries who honor this victorious day include Armenia, Australia and New Zealand, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Burma, Canada, Chile, China, Cuba, Egypt, Finland, France, Georgia, Guatemala, Hungary, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Lebanon, Mali, Malaysia, Mauritania, Mexico, North Korea, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Thailand, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, Venezuela, and Vietnam.
In 1961, John F. Kennedy declared Armed Forces Day a national holiday. It’s celebrated on the third Saturday of every May and is exhibited by exercises, parades, and receptions that highlight and honor our amazing military and all of its strength.
Since Armed Forces Day is not a federal holiday, many military installations are available for public viewing for those wishing to take part in the celebration or to learn more about our country’s military. Some other ways to celebrate the special occasion include wearing red, white and blue; flying the American Flag, talking with or writing to a military member, donating to military-based organizations, or sending care packages for those serving overseas.
The importance of this day should always be evident. It is a day that our military members rightly deserve and it’s essential that we celebrate it accordingly.
An excerpt taken from an article written in the New York Post on May 17, 1952, sums up Armed Forces Day’s utmost importance, “It is our most earnest hope that those who are in positions of peril, that those who have made exceptional sacrifices, yes, and those who are afflicted with plain drudgery and boredom, may somehow know that we hold them in exceptional esteem. Perhaps if we are a little more conscious of our debt of honored affection they may be a little more aware of how much we think of them.”
Another great quote: “Our Servicemen and women are serving throughout the world as guardians of peace–many of them away from their homes, their friends and their families. They are visible evidence of our determination to meet any threat to the peace with measured strength and high resolve. They are also evidence of a harsh but inescapable truth–that the survival of freedom requires great cost and commitment, and great personal sacrifice.” – President John F. Kennedy, 1963
I just read of another “Law Maker” making foolish, incorrect and ignorant statements. You would expect that a Congressman would actually know what he is talking about, since he makes the freaking laws. This misleads and misinforms his constituents, like the MSM does regularly!
“Asking F.B.I. to drop an investigation is obstruction of justice,” Representative Ted Deutch, Democrat of Florida, wrote on Twitter on Tuesday. “Obstruction of justice is an impeachable offense.”
You would think a Law Maker would at least understand the Law and the position the President of the United States holds. Allow me to explain to Congressman Deutch why both statements are truly dumb as can be. We need to assume the Congressman has some knowledge of his government so we’ll start with the Constitution. There are 3 branches of our government; Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Congressman.
Deutch is in the Legislative branch and the President is in the Executive branch. By Law the President is Chief Law Enforcement Officer, CEO, and under Article 2 of the Constitution, has the legal responsibility to supervise his employees and fire anyone, who he has reason (s) to fire… without submitting any explanation to anybody, especially when it comes to Presidential appointees. He hires and he fires, that’s the law.
Assuming Mr. Deutch is talking about the firing of James Comey, there is no doubt the president, who appointed Comey to continue as his FBI Director, absolutely had the right to fire him, when he lost confidence in him and for no other reason. He also, by law, can order the FBI Director to open or close ANY FBI case without explanation. He can order the AG to do the same, with…“Because I said so”, as his only explanation. The evidence shows very strongly that Comey should be indicted himself for Obstruction of Justice- Hobbs Act, Destruction of Government Property, Disclosure of Classified Information T18S798USC, and many more.
The President can walk into any FISA Court and listen to and read any evidence, the same with any NSA secret monitoring site and listen to ANY wiretap he wants. He can Classify AND Declassify any document he wants, without any explanation to anybody.
Next, and I have been writing about this forever, Mr. Deutch should start reading my columns…there is no crime in Title 18 called Obstruction of Justice! There must be a substantive criminal investigation of a violation of Federal Law by a duly authorized Federal Agency, like the FBI; that is being “obstructed”. The Director of the FBI himself told the President, before he was fired, that Trump was NOT the subject of an FBI investigation, which is a moot point because he can close a case even if the President’s name is in the Title! If a person’s name is in an FBI Title, then he is the subject of a criminal investigation…if it is not then he is NOT the subject. That’s the way it works!
He could have told Comey to close the investigation on Flynn because the President believed Flynn was not being afforded fair treatment and equal rights under the Constitution…or just say, “Close the case”, with no further explanation!
Why did he ask Comey, because he was Comey’s boss, he could, and it’s his responsibility to know if someone in his campaign “colluded” with a foreign government, duh. So, Mr. Deutch and anyone else…what’s the Title and Section of USC that the President “obstructed” ? By the way, Mr. Deutch, USC stands for United States Code.
Mr Deutch throws the word “Impeach” around like it is an easy thing to do, just because President Clinton caved when the House threatened subpoena. Had Clinton known there was really nothing that could have been done to force the president to testify and had Clinton stood up, he would have set a precedent that would have helped protect the Office of the President.
A sitting President cannot be charged with a crime, he MUST, be impeached first. He cannot be forced to testify by court order even with the grant of immunity. Contrary to what FOX’s Judge Napolitano has said repeatedly, the President cannot be forced to answer questions before a Grand Jury by subpoena because there must be a crime associated with the subpoena but if the president cannot be charged with a crime, how can he be held for contempt for refusing to testify about “nothing”? He can’t be arrested either.
This was all engineered by our forefathers…the authors of our Constitution because they anticipated sore losers like Schumer, Pelosi, Waters, Mr. Deutch and the rest of the losers would try to interfere with the duly elected president, just like that idiot John Kerry just tried to do with our Foreign policy…oh that’s right…we do have the Logan Act for That! If Kerry isn’t charged with violating the Logan Act we might as well erase it from our laws. Mr Sessions…how about it?
J. Gary Dilaura
A 28 year veteran of the FBI, spent his career in Charleston, SC, New York City, and Buffalo, NY. He was active in the FBIs Violent Crimes Program, finishing his career as Bank Robbery Supervisor. He also worked White Collar Crime and some well known cases including the Oklahoma City Bombing & the Dustin Hoffman, Dog Day Afternoon Bank Robbery, and established and ran the FBIs Environmental Crimes Program for the Western District
of NY. He received numerous Commendations from every FBI Director he worked for.
There are a number of situations where a party may need to contest the validity of a Florida will. One legal tool that a party may use to protect its interests is the filing of a “caveat.” This is essentially a notice filed with the probate court reserving the right to be notified if an estate has been opened.
Caveats are necessary because a person who files a will for probate–typically the personal representative named in the document–does not have to provide advance notice to any interested parties beforehand.
But if there is reason to challenge or contest the validity of the will, and therefore the personal representative's appointment, it is critical that any objecting parties are heard first. For this reason, Section 731.110 of the Florida Statutes expressly provides that once a caveat has been filed by an interested person–other than a creditor of the deceased–the will cannot be admitted to probate until the objector has a chance to be heard by the court.
Florida: A Caveat By Any Other Name Is Still a Caveat
Florida Probate Rules establish the necessary form for filing a caveat. Specifically, Rule 5.260 states the caveat should contain:
● the name of the deceased individual whose estate is the subject of the probate petition;
● the last four digits of the decedent's Social Security number or year of birth, assuming the objector knows this information;
● the objector's interest in the decedent's estate; and
● the name and mailing address of the objector.
Any filing that substantially contains this information should be treated by the probate court as a caveat even if it is not explicitly labeled as such. The Florida Second District Court of Appeals recently addressed this point in a pending will contest from Hillsborough County. The appeals court held a probate judge erred when he admitted a will to probate without first hearing an objecting party's contest.
The decedent in this case passed away nearly seven years ago. But nobody attempted to open a probate estate until five years later, when the personal representative nominated by a will purportedly signed by the decedent was filed with the court. The petitioner said an estate was necessary to probate a piece of real property in Hillsborough County, which under the terms of the will should pass to the decedent's sister and niece.
An objector filed a document labeled as an “Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Petition for Administration” with the probate court. The objector said he owned 50 percent of the real property in question, and he further claimed the will was invalid as the product of undue influence and fraud. The probate court admitted the will to probate without hearing or considering these objections.
The Second District said that was a mistake. Although the objector did not label his filing as a “caveat,” that is what it was, the appeals court said, and it substantially complied with the requirements of Rule 5.260. As a result, the objector was at least entitled to a formal hearing on his will contest.
Get Help With a Florida Will Contest/Challenge.
If you are involved in a will contest, either as a challenger or as the personal representative, it is important to work with an experienced Fort Myers probate administration lawyer who can guide you through the process. Contact the Kuhn Law Firm, P.A., today at 239-333-4529 to schedule a free estate planning consultation with a member of our team.
Back in '92, the late Paul Weyrich and I held a press conference during the Republican National Convention to make two announcements.
First, we were endorsing George Bush 41's re-election. Second, we'd just made the most meaningless endorsement in history. He had so thoroughly bungled his first term that there was nothing to be done to save him. And we were right.
The Republicans are now facing the same future in November. At this point, they may lose the House and quite possibly the Senate. Worse, they've so botched their opportunity that only they can save themselves now. Their $1.3 trillion omnibus bill was not just the most reckless spending bill in history, it was an abject surrender on every single political and policy pledge made to those who put them in office, save helping the military.
It's been this way from the start. First, they asked for control of the House and its appropriations authority to right the fiscal ship, and as importantly, to end Obamacare. In 2010, they got it -- and immediately stated they could do nothing without the Senate. In 2014, they were awarded that, too -- and just as quickly declared they could do nothing without the White House. So, in 2016 they were handed that, and with it complete control of the legislative process, but now with no more excuses available.
And what have they done? They surrendered without a fight. Any real advance, be it Justice Gorsuch, regulatory relief, minimal border security, minimal tax cuts or minimal changes in Obamacare, has all been driven by the White House. Congress has done nothing.
Here's the difference between the two parties. For the past eight years, the GOP has been the party that begins each conversation with, "This is why we can't do it." The Democrats begin theirs with, "This is how we'll get it done." The crisis for Republicans is so grave that not even a rhetorical shift will save them. Only action, concrete action, might. They must come up with victories.
Here's what they need to do, in six easy steps.
1. Like it or not, they must wrap themselves around the president to save him from impeachment. This means publicly embracing him as their leader. More to the point, it means supporting everything he puts on the table from here through November, and doing it with brio.
2. Reverse that disastrous $1.3 trillion omnibus. This talk about a revision, or worse, a balanced budget amendment, is the height of hypocrisy and the public's not going to stand for it. It's like committing rape and then joining the #MeToo movement. Only tangible results, legislation that reduces the deficit and puts the government on the road to fiscal sanity, will work.
3. Kill Obamacare. Nothing less will do. The public that voted these Republicans in has had it with excuses and half-measures.
4. End the funding of Planned Parenthood. The pro-life movement is leaving the GOP, and for good reason. When Republicans award the operation that proudly massacres more than 300,000 babies annually with $450,000,000 dollars taken from American taxpayers, there's no difference between the parties.
5. Fund border security. The base will not stomach any more of the GOP's public displays of affection for Chuck Schumer while denying funds for Trump's border wall. Promises made, promises broken.
6. Deliver real personal tax cuts. What they came up with last year rewarded big business nicely while excusing nearly 50 percent of Americans from the responsibility of paying taxes altogether. Everyone else was given a small amount of relief. Those were your voters, GOP.
Here is the bottom line. On Sept. 30, five weeks before the election, there will be the need for a new spending bill to keep the government running. Everything listed above can be accomplished in that one piece of legislation. No more excuses. No more punts. No more stalling.
It's so obvious, really. At this point the GOP faithful are set to make a devastating declaration in seven months: "We gave you complete control, and you not only accomplished nothing, you broke your word on virtually everything. Good-bye."
And you know what, Republicans? They're right.
L. Brent Bozell III
and Tim Graham
I am still amazed on how many do not understand that Hillary Clinton actually purchased the Democrat National Committee (DNC), AUGUST 2015, 4 months after she announced her candidacy!
Remember when the Republican candidate, Donald Trump, kept stating over and over again, “The Democrats are crooked (true), the Democrat nomination is rigged ( true), Hillary is crooked (true), Bernie Sanders has no chance to win (true)”…did I forget any? It turns out, the then candidate Trump was right about everything he claimed and a “lot” more…wasn’t he?
When the “poles” that the MSM were all quoting, said that Hillary was ahead by double digits, Mr Trump was saying that the poles “are rigged”. I believe the only poles that were favoring Candidate Trump was Rasmussen. It also seemed only a few individuals like Hannity and yours truly, were predicting a triumphant Donald Trump!
Just in case you think I’m crazy, here’s a quote from Donna Brazile in Politico Magazine 11-2-17;
“The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.
I had been wondering why it was that I couldn’t write a press release without passing it by Brooklyn. Well, here was the answer.
When the party chooses the nominee, the custom is that the candidate’s team starts to exercise more control over the party...This victory fund agreement, however, had been signed in August 2015, just four months after Hillary announced her candidacy and nearly a year before she officially had the nomination.”
Think back for a moment…Hillary gained control, (ie, owned the DNC) a “year “ before she “won” the nomination !!! What was Hillary saying back then? Did she let on anything to anybody about how rigged her nomination was? She continued to work so hard…poor thing…to the point of near exhaustion! She should have won an Emmy!
So when she blew up after the CNN “debate” with Matt Laur, the fired pervert, you remember that this is the CNN hosted , audience participation get together where Brazile provided Clinton the Q & A before the “debate” and when Laur asked a “good one” she didn’t get beforehand…Clinton had another melt down ,screamed and cursed her staff, throwing a full glass of water at the head of her staffer and was quoted as saying, “Don’t you f----ers realize that if that f---er (Trump) wins ,he will hang us all”?
We all thought, why would she say that? She must have done something, really bad, improper…”ya think”?!
Hillary Clinton’s complete and total unethical, immoral, crooked, lying , cheating, stealing, deceiving of everything, may have just had an “itsy, bitsy” part in her loss to now President, Donald Trump…what do you think?
Now that all the “after election” attempts to unhinge our duly elected President, have failed, she does the only thing any crooked lawyer would do…”sue the bastard”! My attorney Dewey Screwum , would be proud…but remember what she said after the Matt Laur CNN deal…Hillary,it’s not smart to piss off the new Sherriff, he’s the hangman ‘s boss !
If all of the above is true, and it is…add to that all of the, charges against Clinton, “yet to come”, and they will…email server, classified document violations, money laundering, influence peddling, et al!
Now look at the charges that have been leveled by the Democrats against the President that have been proven…there are none !? I haven’t heard the MSM or Schumer /Pelosi mention that …have you?
The Russian peeing prostitute allegation is the best…an unnamed Russian informant told his Russian handler that he “thought” he saw Trump enter the room two prostitutes usually use and he passed this valuable info on to another un-named Russian official who assumed Trump participated in the peeing that they are known for, and passed it on to Chris Steele…! You be the judge of that!
Nothing that has been leveled against this president has had a foundation in fact, substance or law…nothing…yet he continues to do things Obama only dreamed about after his prayers to Allah, of course! And the MSM accepts any lame, unfounded, allegation they can dig up against this president as true even after the former Obama appointed FBI Director Comey said in Jan 2017, the info remains unverified and salacious after a year of investigating or attempts to verify. Even offers of rewards by idiots with money, to help prove “collusion” or anything else against the President has proved futile!
Let it go and let this guy do his job, your stocks are climbing and our enemies are losing, just like you!
Congressman Shiffty and Senator Schumer should watch and learn…some day they too could be believable and…successful…so they could finance their own election campaign without begging money from businessmen like the President !
J Gary DiLaura
It's an experiment on a vast scale, with Florida's hydrological future on the line.
Florida's economic future depends heavily on the continued availability of fresh, clean, affordable drinking water. Any measure that could endanger the state's already-stressed water supply should be viewed with extreme skepticism. Florida legislators dance nervously around that concept, paying lip service to conservation while knocking down restrictions that could help the protect the Floridan aquifer, the vast network of underground caverns the state relies on for fresh water.
The apparent goal: Keep Florida development from being hampered by concerns about available water in the short term, even though it could mean serious trouble for the state in decades to come.
The state needs solutions. But it shouldn't rush into reckless experimentation. Gov. Rick Scott's veto Friday of a bill that would have allowed large-scale injection of treated wastewater into Florida's aquifer gives the state a chance to explore this option cautiously, with limited test sites and scientific evaluation. Scott made the right call.
Opponents of the bill relied heavily on the gross-out factor, calling it the "toilet to tap" bill and asking if Scott wants to be known as "Gov. Poopy Water."
It's not that difficult to clean reclaimed water of what are euphemistically described as "bio-solids" before the water is injected into the aquifer; some cities, including ones in the U.S., already mix reclaimed water into their drinking-water supply. It's a far trickier task to ensure that other contaminants, including prescription medications, petroleum-based pollution, radioactive material and heavy metals, are removed from the water before it's forced into the state's water supply.
What will happen to those contaminants once the wastewater mixes with drinking-water supplies? Will it stay where it's put, or migrate to other parts of the aquifer, potentially spreading contamination? What will the impact be on Florida's freshwater springs and water bodies, which are already showing signs of trouble in higher bacteria counts and other pollutants? And what will happen to the soft limestone lacework of underground caves that comprise the aquifer? If the water is injected with too much force, will they be damaged?
The answers to these questions could indicate that Florida's found an affordable, sustainable way to secure its water supply. But the state doen't have those answers yet. The process the bill would have permitted, known as "aquifer storage and recovery," is only active in three states: Oregon, Colorado and Texas, where ASR wells are serving the water-starved cities of San Antonio, El Paso and Kerrville. None share Florida's unusual underground geology. When Florida was considering experimenting with aquifer storage in South Florida, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers raised multiple concerns.
In the long run, aquifer storage and recovery might be the right answer for Florida. But diving headfirst into the practice -- in a state with multiple other options on the table, including capturing some of the billions of gallons of fresh rainwater that fall on the state every year -- should be approached with extreme caution. By wielding his veto pen, Scott hit the reset button, not the kill switch.