Author Archives: Daveda

About Daveda

I write for http://DefiantAmerica.com, http://aleadernotapolitician.com/ https://magamedia.org/ and http://FreeAmericaNetwork.com & Graphic Artist & Video producer. I adore journalism. Politics seems to be my preferred genre although I do not hesitate to write anything that strikes me as interesting. Researching and finding 'Breaking News' makes my blood rush. I've written seventeen books. and over that including books in conglomeration with others. Doing graphic art design has always been fun for me. Sometimes I incorporate this talent into my articles or when a special 'feature picture' is required. You can find me tweeting on: https://twitter.com/DavedaGruber You can always find my articles on the sites I write for.

Who’s the Current Democratic Frontrunner?

 
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

Who do you think the Democratic frontrunner is at this stage of the race for the leadership of the party?

It appears that President Trump’s re-election campaign believes that the leader of the pack of Democratic contenders for the head of the party is now Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

Weeks before the caucuses kick off the nominating season the polls in Iowa are showing the self proclaimed Democratic Socialist, Sanders, as the frontrunner.

Over this past weekend the Des Moines Register published results of its poll that showed Sanders leading in Iowa.

The polls shows:

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders with 20%

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren with 17%

Former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg with 16%

Former Vice President Joe Biden with 15%

The Trump campaign has made it clear that it does not matter which candidate Trump eventually runs against in the general election.

Trump’s tweets pretty much sum up his opinion on his potential opponents. He even mentions billionaire Mike Bloomberg and Senator Cory Booker, D-NJ., who just pulled out of the race.

Here are a few tweets that are interesting:

Will Pelosi Give Up Articles of Impeachment to Senate?

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

On Friday Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said that she’ll send impeachment articles to the Senate next week.

Pelosi, even though the impeachment of President Trump was, as far as Democrats were concerned, urgent and keeping Trump in office was a security risk to the U.S. could not have been anywhere near as urgent as they made it sound.

House Democrats voted on the articles of impeachment on December 18th. Pelosi has been holding onto them since.

After trying to get the Majority Leader of the Senate Mitch McConnell to agree with the way she wants the trial held, Pelosi must have come to terms with the fact that she doesn’t control the Senate nor its rules.

Pelosi wrote a letter to her colleagues explaining what they should expect next.

Pelosi wrote,  “I have asked Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler to be prepared to bring to the Floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate. I will be consulting with you at our Tuesday House Democratic Caucus meeting on how we proceed further.”

This past week some Democrats were making their frustrations heard over the speaker’s approach to the matter.

In any case, Pelosi is still pressing on about important new information on the Ukraine controversy which is at the heart of impeachment.

The memo reads, “I am very proud of the courage and patriotism exhibited by our House Democratic Caucus as we support and defend the Constitution.”

She added, “In an impeachment trial, every Senator takes an oath to ‘do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws.’ Every Senator now faces a choice: to be loyal to the President or to the Constitution. No one is above the law, not even the President.”

Well, the Constitution hasn’t been brought up by Democrats with this much reference for as long as I can remember. When it becomes a focus of the Democrats to keep citing the Constitution, you can be sure they are using it as a talking point to stress that they are doing everything in a constitutional or legal manner.

Several Democrats lawmakers have voiced their opinions and are not pleased with this delay.

Some of those who were not happy with the delay are, Senator Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Senator Angus King, D-Maine; Senator Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; and Senator Chris Coons, D-Del.

Pelosi made an official announcement that supported her memo.

Senator Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, was early to jump on the delay tactic.

Grassley said in a statement of his own, “Speaker Pelosi threw the United States Congress into unnecessary chaos with this pointless delay. From the beginning, it’s been unclear what the goal of this hurry-up-and-wait tactic was or what the country stood to gain. We now know the answer was nothing.”

The Iowa senator went on to say, “We’ve had three weeks of uncertainty and confusion, causing even more division. Regardless, I will take my role as a juror seriously and review the evidence presented by both sides before making any determination.”

The next step for Pelosi will be to determine who will serve as House managers to prosecute the case against the president in the Senate trial.

The trial in the Senate may begin next week.

This whole facade will go on until Majority Leader of the United States Senate Mitch McConnell , R-Ky., either calls for a vote or the whole case gets dismissed.

Did the Obama Regime Pay for the Missiles Fired at US?

 
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

On Wednesday former President Barack Obama took some heat as President Trump blamed the last administration for money given by the Obama regime to Iran.

Trump has claimed that the money given to Iran by the Obama administration was used to pay for missiles that were aimed at U.S. troops in Iraq.

The nation listened and watched as Trump spoke the morning following the Iranian regime’s launching of more than a dozen missiles at Iraqi bases which house American troops.

The missiles were fired by Iran in a retaliatory attack for the U.S. strike last week that killed top Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

While referring to settlement money the U.S. paid to Iran in 2016, Trump said from the White House, “The missiles fired last night at us and our allies were paid for with the funds made available by the last administration.”

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA) is the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal. The U.S. withdrew from it in 2018.

Supporters of the deal claimed it kept Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

Trump on the other hand renewed his assertion that it bolstered Tehran.

Trump said, “Iran’s hostilities substantially increased after the foolish Iran nuclear deal was signed in 2013, and they were given $150 billion, not to mention $1.8 billion in cash. Instead of saying thank you to the United States, they chanted ‘Death to America.’”

He added that Iran went on a “terrorist spree” with that money “and created hell in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq.”

He went on to say that it was with that money that the missiles fired late Tuesday were funded.

Trump has never been a fan of the deal and zeroed in particularly on the money that was unfrozen or sent to Iran directly in the darkness of night.

It cannot be determined exactly how the missiles were paid for but some Republicans have connected the Iran settlement money to the attacks.

While on Fox News’ “Hannity” on Tuesday night, Texas Senator Ted Cruz said, “In a very real sense, the missiles that we saw fired at U.S. servicemen and women tonight were paid for by the billions that the Obama administration flooded the Ayatollah with.”

The money that was paid in cash, was transferred with a planeload of $400 million delivered to Tehran on Jan. 17 2016. On the same day Iran agreed to release four American prisoners.

The payment of $1.3 billion that remained was reported to have been paid within weeks of that first payment.

Then there is $150 billion which is an estimated value of Iranian assets that had been frozen abroad in financial institutions as part of international sanctions. That money was unfrozen as part of the deal.

That money could generate about $55 billion in liquid assets.

After leaving the Obama-Iran deal, the Trump administration has put back sanctions on Tehran. Violations by the Iranian regime by stockpiling uranium has brought back the restrictions.

Trump has called for other countries to break away from the deal and secure a new one.

Trump said, “The time has come for the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia and China to recognize this reality. They must now break away from the remnants of the Iran deal or JCPOA. And we must all work together toward making a deal with Iran that makes the world a safer and more peaceful place.”

Soleimani Funeral Causes Deaths in Stampede

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

According to reports in Iranian state media, as many as forty people have died and about two hundred have been insured during the Tuesday funeral procession for Iranian General Qassem Soleimani who was killed in a U.S. led airstrike.

The meshing of people that led to the deaths and injuries occurred in Kerman, in southeastern Iran, which is the hometown of the deceased Soleiman.

The numbers were not reported initially and are still uncertain but Pirhossein Koulivand, who is the head of Iran’s emergency medical services, gave the casualty toll in an interview with state TV. The death total can go up due to injuries that are being treated.

Koulivand said, “Unfortunately as a result of the stampede, some of our compatriots have been injured and some have been killed during the funeral processions.”

Videos posted online showed people lying lifeless on a road while others were shouting and trying to help them.

Here is a video from BBC News:

This isn’t the first time that chaos irrupted during a funeral possession in Iran. In 1989 the funeral procession in Tehran of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. In that incident the remains of the deceased half naked body tumbled out of an open coffin and the scene was captured on live state television. Mourners were seen blocking the path of a truck carrying the deceased leader of the Iranian revolution. His burial shroud was torn off and his body was knocked to the ground.

The body was airlifted by military helicopter and the TV broadcast cut short. The remains were then rewrapped in traditional Muslim burial attire and then placed in a metal casket for burial.
Soleiman was killed on Thursday at Baghdad International Airport. He was the leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force.

Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis who was the deputy commander of Iran-backed militias known as the Popular Mobilization Forces and five other people were also killed in the U.S. airstrike.

On Monday, the death of Soleimani led to a procession in Tehran which drew over one million people in the Iranian capital. The funeral procession continued into Iran’s holy city of Qom. Another huge crowd turned out for that.

Soleimani’s remains and those of the others killed in the airstrike were brought to a central square in Kerman where the stamped occurred where he was set to be buried Tuesday. Those plans have now been delayed.

The leader of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Hossein Salami, spoke in Kerman and threatened to “set ablaze” places supported by the United States over the killing of Soleimani. The crowd of supporters chanted “Death to America” and “Death to Israel!”

Iran has promised retaliation to American interests for the death of Soleimani.

The chants of death, in themselves, would seem to be a promise of retaliation of sorts, but then again, Iranian extreme Muslims have been chanting threats of death for as long as I can remember.
Only time will tell what is yet to come. I can you, my readers, that Soleimani and his cohorts were very evil men and had the blood of Americans on their hands.

Sometimes the killing of those who are so evil is the only way to stop them from continuing their reign of terror that would continue to take innocent lives of Americans, our allies and even their own people.

Threats to Attack White House Made by Iranian MP

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

It has been reported that Iranian MP Abolfazl Abutorabi has threatened to attack the White House.

This statement comes after a message from President Trump that promised severe consequences if Iran escalates hostile actions with the U.S.

The message from Trump comes through tweets from the president.

A question from Abutorabi about how the Islamic nation should react to the death of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani sparked the response.

According to the Independent Abutorabi said “We can attack the White House itself, we can respond to them on the American soil. We have the power, and God willing we will respond in an appropriate time.”

Abutorabi called Soleimani’s death during an American airstrike  “a declaration of war,” and that a swift, strong response was necessary.

Abutorabi said, “When someone declares war, do you want to respond to the bullets with flowers? They will shoot you in the head.”

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said “harsh retaliation is waiting for the criminals whose filthy hands spilled his blood,” while speaking after the death of Soleimani.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani made a promise to “take revenge for this heinous crime.”

On Sunday Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said that Soleimani’s death puts the entire region at the beginning of a “completely new phase.”

At a rally in southern Beirut, Nasrallah reportedly called the killing of Soleimani a “clear, blatant crime” that will transform the Middle East.

The Independent’s international correspondent, Borzou Daragahi, doubted the likelihood of an attack on U.S. soil. He allegedly said that Abutorabi was known for inflammatory language and that Iran does not necessarily have the military capabilities of striking the U.S. with missiles.

I certainly don’t believe that Iran has the capabilities of striking American soil at this time.

Had former President Barack Obama been able to continue in the manner in which he was operating, for example, sending cargo planes filled with cash, then Iran would have accomplished their mission to destroy America and Israel.

Trump has just put a big damper on those plans.

President Trump: Soleimani Should have been Killed Years Ago

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

On Friday President Trump made it clear that Iranian General Qassem Soleimani was hated and feared in his own country and should have been taken out many years ago.

Trump was slinging back at people who have criticized him over the airstrike in Bagdad, Iraq that killed Soleimani, who was the top military general.

Here’s Trump tweet that told us about the death of Soleimani:

The tweets from the president came after the Pentagon confirmed that Soleimani, who was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members was dead.

Also, other military officials at Baghdad International Airport were killed during the airstrike.

The State Department went on to say that Soleimani, who was considered the most powerful men in Iran, was guilty of the wounding of thousands more Americans and coalition members.

A designated terror group since 2007, the elite intelligence wing called Quds Force, was led by Soleimani for many years.

Quds Force is estimated to have 20,000 members and it considered Soleimani was referred to as its shadow commander or spymaster.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has vowed to take revenge for what he called a heinous crime carried out by the U.S. Rouhani said, as well, that Iran would “raise the flag” of Soleimani “in defense of the country’s territorial integrity and the fight against terrorism and extremism in the region.”

Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif tweeted this:

Soleimani’s deputy commander since 1997, Brigadier General Esmail Ghaani, will take over for the now deceased Soleimani.

Iranian state media reported that Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also warned “harsh retaliation is waiting” for the U.S.

The State Department on Friday issued a security alert that urged all U.S. citizens to “depart Iraq immediately” due to heightened tensions in the region.

The alert said, “Due to Iranian-backed militia attacks at the U.S. Embassy compound, all consular operations are suspended. U.S. citizens should not approach the Embassy.”

In addition, the agency shared phone numbers people concerned about U.S. citizens and other loved ones in Iraq could call toll free for information.

On Friday Trump tweeted this:

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday said that the strike was carried out to prevent an “imminent attack” by forces directed by Soleimani.

He added that the strike was carried out to prevent an “imminent attack” by forces directed by Soleimani.

On Friday Pompeo was on “Fox & Friends” and said, “I think the Iranian leadership understands President Trump will take action. . . . We made very clear that these responses would be swift and decisive. We have now demonstrated that. I hope the Iranian leadership will see that and see American resolve and that their decision will be to de-escalate and take actions consistent with what normal nations do.”

Who would want to go to Iran? Not me. Would any of you book a flight to Iran? I didn’t think so!

Iran Blamed for US Embassy Attack in Iraq

 
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

On Tuesday, Iran has been accused of coordinating the attack at the U.S. embassy compound in Baghdad, Iraq and the accusation came directly from President Trump.

Trump has promised to hold the regime “fully responsible.”

In retaliation to U.S. airstrikes, Iraqi Shiite militia supporters allegedly smashed down a gate and gained entrance to the compound.

Trump made it clear that the strikes were in response to the killing of an American contractor.

On Tuesday morning Trump tweeted this:

Although this break into the compound was allegedly made by dozens of Iraqis, there were hundreds of them who tried to break through in an earlier attempt.

Twenty-five fighters from Iran backed Shiite militia Kataeb Hezbollah were killed in U.S. led airstrikes earlier this week and funerals were being held and this may have led to unrest from other militia.

The airstrikes by U.S. military were prompted by a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base that killed an American contractor and his death had been blamed on the militia.

A chaotic scene with flames coming from the inside of the embassy and at least three U.S. soldiers on the roof of the embassy on Tuesday was reported. Chants were described as a crowd on the ground shouting “Down, down USA!”

Fortunately, there were no reports of casualties but the attack was seen to be one of the worst on the embassy.

With Iran and the U.S. both allies of the Iraqi government, the pressure is on to maintain a balance.

The Iraqi government did not react well to the U.S. airstrikes and didn’t prevent the protesters from reaching the U.S. Baghdad embassy. Iraqi security forces had made an effort to stop the protesters who marched to the heavily fortified Green Zone.

It was reported that a man on a loudspeaker who was with Iraqi security, urged the mob not to enter the compound, saying, “The message was delivered.”

There is now a major deterioration in Iraqi-U.S. relations but Iraqi security forces

Ambassador Matthew H. Tueller was not evacuated from the embassy but reports revealed that he has been out of the country on a previously planned vacation.
Senator Marco Rubio, R-Fla., joined Trump in blaming Iran for the attack.

Rubio tweeted:

The embassy attack brings to mind the Benghazi embassy attack where four men lost their lives. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA operatives, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, both former Navy SEALs all died on September 11, 2012.

Does the First Amendment Protect Peter Strzok?

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

On Monday, in Washington D.C. federal district court former FBI agent Peter Strzok argued in a court filing that his anti-Trump messages were protected under the First Amendment.

Strzok is suing the U.S. government and wants to be reinstated in his position with the FBI even though his messages were sent on FBI issued phones. Strzok was involved in high ranking positions in both probes into Hillary Clinton and then citizen Donald Trump.

In his response brief, Strzok claimed, “Firing an employee for the content of his or her non-public communications is unconstitutional, irrespective of any balancing of interests.”

Strzok’s brief also referred to President Trump’s “unpresidential tweets.” In addition, Strzok also argued that his texts should be considered private speech. He disputed that he should not be held to the tougher legal standard under the famous 1968 Supreme Court case Pickering v. Board of Education that applies to public statements by government employees.

At one time, Strzok was the FBI’s head of counterintelligence.

The brief went on to say that he was entitled to “develop a full factual record through discovery. It also pointed out that it would be premature to dismiss the case at this early stage.

It was also pointed out that the DOJ’s position would “leave thousands of career federal government employees without protections from discipline over the content of their political speech.”

The filing by Strzok was in response to the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss his complaint for reinstatement in November.

The court had been told that Strzok had admitted to conducting FBI business on his personal iMessage account.

The material was said to be secure even though Strozk’s wife had gained access to his phone. The wife also found evidence on the phone that Strzok was having an extra marital affair with Lisa Page.

Page had been an FBI lawyer and was also involved in the Clinton and Russia probes.

It is alleged that Strzok had engaged in a “dereliction of supervisory responsibility” by failing to investigate the potentially classified Clinton emails which had showed up on an unsecured laptop which belonged to Anthony Weiner at the time that the 2016 elections were approaching.

Page is also suing the FBI and DOJ in claims that there was a breach of the Federal Privacy Act. Page said she suffered numerous damages because of the disclosure, including a “permanent loss of earning capacity due to reputational damage” and “the cost of therapy to cope with unwanted national media exposure and harassment” which happened by way of tweets and statements by Trump.

Besides this, Page’s complaint also sought reimbursement for “the cost of childcare during and transportation to multiple investigative reviews and appearances before Congress,” the “cost of paying a data-privacy service to protect her personal information,” and of course, attorney’s fees that were incurred.

I tend to disagree with some of the accusations made by Strzok and claims for financial reimbursement made by Page.

But, then again, these claims are up to the court to decide. I do not have a say in these matters.

I am, however, sick and tired of government expenditures that I don’t agree with. These people, in my opinion, broke a sacred vow to this country. That promise was to abide by the Constitution of the United States.

The very fact that people in high positions in government affiliated agencies were not held to a higher standard of unbiased procedures is appalling.

Will there be a Brokered Democratic Convention?

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

It appears that there is no clear frontrunner in the Democratic race for the leadership of the party.

The Iowa caucuses are less than six weeks away and there is no outright favorite. In more than a half of a century we have not seen a convention that goes beyond a first ballot but we may see it happen.

If this first ballot does not work out, and it certainly looks like that is a possibility,  we will see a brokered or contested convention.

The last time that either of the major party nominating conventions went past a first ballot was 1952. In that year Adlai Stevenson won the Democratic nomination on the third ballot.

Kathy Sullivan, the Democratic National Committee member from New Hampshire, recently said, “It could happen, it would be exciting to see it go past the first ballot because it would be so unusual.”

Sullivan added, “It’s been a long, long, long time since there’s been a second ballot at a Democratic convention.”

Even if the possibility of a brokered convention is not a strong possibility, conditions in this race could possibly lead to no candidate holding a clear majority of delegates when they head into the July Democratic convention in Milwaukee.

Here’s where the electoral college comes into play. We’ve all heard about superdelegates. These delegates are the party elders and insiders. But the superdelegates were stripped of their power in the 2016 primary battle. After all, Hillary Clinton was destined to win, if only in the minds of the Democrats.

This upcoming election does not have a presumed frontrunner so the superdelegates could become important and their powers would be activated.

They would be free to boost the candidates of their choosing. Their choice is not an easy task. Who could possibly beat the incumbent, President Trump? None, as far as I can see.

The top tier consists of four candidates. They are former Vice President Joe Biden, Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

The donors to the Democrats are a diverse group. Sanders, Warren and even a long shot candidate like tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang could see their campaigns funded by people-powered donations into the primary process.

Online contributions are interfering with the once powerful wealthy donors  who still back more establishment candidates and those candidates would be Biden or possibly Buttigieg.

Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg and environmental advocate Tom Steyer are pouring hundreds of millions of their own money into their own campaigns. That alone could keep them going if they can manage to hang in the race long enough.

If three or four contenders are still standing when heading into April, they would all fall short of the 1,919 delegates that are needed to clinch the nomination on the first ballot.

Sullivan explained, “You’d have to have a situation where multiple candidates come out of the first four states with wins. You’d go into Super Tuesday and have some candidates concentrating in certain states, others in other states, because it’s very expensive to run in all the states on Super Tuesday. Not all the candidates can afford to do that.”

She went on to say, “So if we come out of Super Tuesday with no clear leader and then it becomes a state-by-state contest and then we end up in New York towards the end of April. If after that point we still don’t have [a clear leader], then yes, it goes to the convention and conceivably a second ballot.”

Democratic governors, senators, representatives, former high-ranking lawmakers and leading party officials, who make up the superdelegates, all backed their favorite candidate, Clinton, in 2016.

But after the 2016 election, the DNC pulled back the influence of superdelegates because of the anger of Sanders and his army of progressive supporters.

Now, the superdelegates are only unbound if the convention reaches a second round.

Then there is another scenario.

If one of the candidate gets strong in the early states, the nomination race could be over pretty fast.

In 2004 when then Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts wrapped his nomination early.

If the battle between the candidates goes to a second ballot in Milwaukee, Sullivan maintains that we shouldn’t expect to see a repeat of the contested conventions from the history books.

Sullivan said, “People refer to brokered conventions, which leads you to think of people in smoke-filled rooms making deals, cutting deals. I don’t think you’re going to see deal-making going on because all these people [delegates] are free agents. It would be a very democratic process.”

A Democratic process? Is she suggesting that the 2016 process wasn’t? No, Clinton was the clear choice for everyone in the party even if they cheated Sanders out of it.

Unfortunately for them, they were all wrong. They backed their candidate without any thought that Trump would or could defeat their choice for president.

Personally, I believe Trump will be the winner no matter who the Democrats put up against him.

If I were a Democrat, which I am not, I’d be panicking about now.

Union Leaders Spending Exposed

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

Federal prosecutors have unearthed a number of pretty lavish lifestyles of some former United Automobile Workers top officials.

It appears some details of high-end cigars, four-figure dining and even California villas are some of the luxuries that appeal to union bosses.

Gary Jones resigned last month as union president amid pressure when a complaint was filed in September in Michigan federal court against union leader Vance Pearson. The name “Vance Pearson” actually refers to several unnamed individuals. Union officials and have alleged UAW “Official A,” is Jones. It was Jones’ home that was raided by federal agents.

One example of expenses that were brought to light, in the documents in question, allegedly included expenditures made by Jones, Pearson and others of $13,000 spent at a cigar store.

“A December 2015 Gary’s Sales invoice issued to ‘UAW c/o [UAW Official A]’ for a $13,046.91 purchase.

The purchase allegedly included an order for  12 boxes of Ashton Double Magnum cigars at $268.00 per box which totaled $3,216.

Also on the list were 12 boxes of Ashton Monarch Tubos cigars at $274.50 a box which totaled $3,294.

A $13,000 purchase invoiced to Pearson from the same store the following year was part of an alleged $60,000 expenditure on cigar and tobacco related purchases between 2014 and 2018.

That’s a lot of money going up in smoke.

Prosecutors have said the spending was made via accounts set up with hotels such as the Royal Palm Springs Hotel (RPSH) and Loews Coronado Bay Resort.

These hotels were where the unions had training conferences. The hotels then paid outside vendors on the UAW officials’ behalf. This was done as a way to conceal the embezzling of union funds for their own personal use, according to the complaint.

Another official who was referenced anonymously in court documents is Jones’ predecessor as president, Dennis Williams.

Neither one of them has been officially charged. An attorney for Jones has made the allegations look less serious as part of filings.

Jones was not charged and Williams allegedly rejected accusations that he urged the misuse of funds.

Prosecutors are claiming that union officials, through the RPSH, during the years from 2015 to 2017, spent more than $400,000 at local businesses on expenses including off-site condominiums and villas for themselves.

In addition, an amount of nearly $400,000 was spent on “training” and “conference” expenditures at the Loews Coronado Bay Resort.

These alleged expenditures included meals and excursion expenses for senior union officials and their spouses. This allegedly includes the San Diego Zoo’s Safari Park and horseback riding on the beach.

Allegedly, a master account was billed for rather expensive dinners that included one at LG’s Prime Steakhouse which was priced at over $6,500.

The steaks must have been good.

The Detroit Free Press reported prosecutors allege top union officials misused more than $1.5 million.

Pearson is facing charges which include embezzlement of union funds, filing false reports and maintaining false union records, money laundering, conspiracy, and mail and wire fraud.

Jones’ decision to resign, allegedly according to his attorney, Bruce Maffeo, was reached before learning of the internal charges that had been filed in court.

Pearson’s case is part of a larger investigation of UAW and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles.

That case has gone on since 2015 and has already resulted in nine convictions.

UAW officials convicted were related too improperly receiving things of value from Fiat Chrysler. Another involved a UAW official taking kickbacks from vendors in exchange for union contracts.

It appears to me that if you have a high ranking job and you are inclined to use unlawful means to obtain money, the opportunities are all out there for the grabbing.

Personally, I couldn’t  steal from others, but if you are so inclined, don’t get caught because the penalties are harsh!