“If you serve the public, you are accountable to the public.” That was the line I heard an instructor boast at the law enforcement academy when I was a police cadet in-training. He didn’t say it often. In the context of why candidates vie for public service roles, that academy instructor didn’t have to harp on that credo. Everyone knows (or should have a sense) that societal occupations in the public sector means you are accountable to…the public. “Public safety” does not need definition. Its meaning is inherently in the status/title.
Same as with “government official” expectedly officiating government business as a representative of the people. Also with the term “elected official” which, undoubtedly, elects politicians to office via votes rendered by the public. You get the drift.
As with many others lately, I have written about the festering slew of sexual misconduct charges levied against politicos in both the House and Senate. Synonymously, the tax dollars we –you and I– unwittingly expended to silence and/or otherwise exit-stage-left the accusers through two decades by a growing number of elected officials is nothing shy of appalling. The evident arrogance and reckless disregard for oath of office renders each culprit untrustworthy and unfit for office. We wake up to media reports of sexual harassment by politicos, Hollywood moguls, and even members of the judiciary.
Splintered Gavel?
With morning coffee, a report flowed which explained several sexual harassment allegations made against federal Judge Alex Kozinski. As a link in the chains which balance the scales of justice, the judiciary is also accountable to the public. Not only for its decisions which impact the public in myriad ways but also for the revered icon of openness, fairness, objectivity, impartiality, reason, discernment and moral turpitude.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (California) chief Judge Alex Kozinski during a 60 Minutes interview with Lesley Stahl (Credit: Facebook/Allan Cruse)
Judge Kozinski is the chief judge presiding over the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in California. This is the same Circuit which has come under chronic fire lately whereby the vast majority of its rulings are heavily criticized. In an on-air interview with Judge Kozinski, CBS News journalist Lesley Stahl pointed out, “The president himself has come after the Circuit saying that 80 percent of your decisions are overturned by the Supreme Court.”
AboveTheLaw.com wrote, “Indeed, for a judge who once nominated himself as a judicial superhottie and appeared on The Dating Game (albeit before he became a judge), going on 60 Minutes is positively staid.” The 60 Minutes expose ATL is referencing pertains to an interview during which Judge Kozinski mildly sparred with some salient features involving President Trump’s condemnation of the Circuit Court over which Kozinski presides.
So, why is Judge Kozinski named among the latest string of high-powered officials whose office is marred by sexual allegations? What are the allegations? A Washington Post investigation uncovered six women, all of whom were once either judicial clerks or externs working for Judge Kozinski, all of whom made declaratory statements naming Judge Kozinski as an individual who is highly suggestive of pornography, sexual connotations, nudity, and control over his female staff members’ personal time/activities.
“Heidi Bond, who clerked for Kozinski from 2006 to 2007, said the porn was not related to any case. One set of images she remembered was of college-age students at a party where ‘some people were inexplicably naked while everyone else was clothed.’ Another was a sort of digital flip book that allowed users to mix and match heads, torsos and legs to create an image of a naked woman.”
AboveTheLaw.com reported that Ms. Bond “alleges that on multiple occasions the judge summoned her to his chambers, alone, and showed her pornography — unrelated to any case before the judge. He then asked if the images turned her on.”
“I was in a state of emotional shock, and what I really wanted to do was be as small as possible and make as few movements as possible and to say as little as possible to get out!” –Former judicial clerk Heidi Bond
“I was in a state of emotional shock, and what I really wanted to do was be as small as possible and make as few movements as possible and to say as little as possible to get out,” Ms. Bond shared with WaPo.
In a statement published by The Washington Post, Judge Kozinski defended himself, saying, “I have been a judge for 35 years and during that time have had over 500 employees in my chambers. I treat all of my employees as family and work very closely with most of them. I would never intentionally do anything to offend anyone and it is regrettable that a handful have been offended by something I may have said or done.”
Referring to Judge Kozinski’s qualification above, Kathryn Rubino wrote, “NOPE. Reality check — you don’t share porn with your family members and ask them if it arouses them. You don’t have to be smart enough to be the chief judge of the 9th Circuit to know that is extra inappropriate at work. And that non-apology has to take the cake.”
Congressional Accountability Overhaul
A DC Clothesline report analyzed the shameful revelations born of the recent litany of sexual allegations made against elected officials who occupy seats in the House and Senate. Some of those accused have resigned this week or announced intentions to vacate their congressional or senatorial seats, as was reported by OpsLens on December 8, 2017.
In November 2017, Rep. Ron DeSantis (R — FL) formed a bipartisan effort and co-sponsored H.R. 4494 Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act (CAHFEA). The Act intends to expose sexual harassment claims and the taxpayer-financed settlements covertly coordinated under the tutelage of the Treasury Department (Office of Compliance), effectively putting an end to the congressional hush fund we learned about via the recent spate of sexual misconduct suits.
The newly-authored Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act, a bipartisan bill, seeks to clamp down on sexual misconduct suits brought against members of Congress as well as cease tax dollars paid to silence or settle with accusers. (Credit: Facebook/Militant Christian Media)
None of this alleged perversion is pretty. But paring it down, the Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act’s purpose is to ensure transparency of public official wrongdoing, whether it be of a sexual misconduct nature or any compensatory awards in the realms of Employment Discrimination, Intimidation, Family and Medical Leave, Fair Labor Standards, Employment and Reemployment of Veterans. Ultimately, improved behavior patterns logically offset this sordid history and backhanded tax-dollar spending. Intolerance and publicity of wrongdoing can be an effective teacher and provider of wisdom…assuming the student-base is paying acute attention.
The Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act is a bipartisan bill seeking to eliminate tax-dollars paid-out to accusers in the form of settlements for otherwise avoidable behavior of elected officials. (Credit: Facebook/Nancy Ecker PeBenito)
In its attempts to clean-up the House, the House Administration Committee convened on Thursday and held a two-hour quorum discussing how best to remediate the rampant episodes of sexual misconduct by politicos. The House Admin Committee also analyzed the sums of tax funds clandestinely paid to abate finger-pointing from accusers.
House Admin Committee Chairman Gregg Harper (R – MS) “intends to move legislation through the panel by late January that would reform the 1995 Congressional Accountability Act, which governs the way the Legislative Branch handles workplace claims, including sexual harassment.”
In his opening statement on the HAC site, Chairman Harper elucidated, “Real reforms have not been made to [the Congressional Accountability Act] since it was established in 1995, and our Committee believes reforms are long overdue. I am focused on reviewing the entire process – from training, to House policy, to the reporting and settlement process. I am committed to improving the overall process to ensure there is a better system in place of our congressional community going forward.”
Surely, a “better system” is one that is valued by those to whom it applies, is free of abuses by those who are governing, and is wholly pertinent to “community” alternately categorized as taxpayers.
Incredulously, it turns out the legislation from long ago encapsulated a provision whereby the Office of Compliance disbursing settlement monies under the Treasury Department umbrella is not legally obligated to share details (read how many dollars went to whom and why). The DC Clothesline indicated “the Office of Compliance, which oversees the claims, denied the Committee access to the information.” Quite convenient, wouldn’t you say?
“The OOC believes they are barred by law to give it, but if you change the law they’d be happy to give it to Ethics,” Congressman Harper told the Washington Examiner. “So that is one of the things we should look at changing.” That’s a big bingo. Clean up the festering mess created years ago and learn how sometimes insulation is not always a protective barrier, at least not a judicious or constituent-serving one.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D – CA) articulated on Meet the Press recently: “Right now it takes about 90 days for you to file a complaint, and before actually going through the mediation, you have to sign a non-disclosure agreement and then you are not represented by counsel, but the harasser is represented by the House of Representatives general counsel.” That sounds more like public disservice than it does “representation,” don’t you think?
Sort of a sister to the Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act, Rep. Speier co-sponsored separate legislation in bipartisan fashion with members of both the House and Senate. The Member and Employee Training and Oversight On (ME TOO) Congress Act also seeks to “require more transparency, overhaul the flawed complaint process, and provide better support for victims and whistleblowers.”
“If we’re going to confront the challenge of sexual assault and harassment, we need to start with lawmakers and people in power,” added Rep. Ann McLane Kuster (D – NH).
Congresswoman Speier stayed busy with this issue. She also wrote H.R. 604 – CEASE Resolution, the language of which amends “the Rules of the House of Representatives to require each Member, officer, and employee of the House to complete the program of sexual harassment prevention and response training in employment which is offered by the Office of Compliance, and for other purposes.” Co-sponsored by 33 bipartisan members of congress, the Congressional Education About Sexual harassment Eradication (CEASE) Resolution is pending. How do you feel about the Office of Compliance being the lead instructor in this context?
So, corrective measures incorporated in the Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination ACT will wash the window of transparency so as to allow access to unprecedented inquiry while the ME TOO Act and CEASE Resolution will mandate sexual harassment training, accountability, and enforcement. As a policeman, I trust enforcement includes criminal charges should any elected official go full-bore with his/her provocations toward unconsenting targets.
Although none of these Acts guarantees prevention of sexual predation of colleagues on the Hill, it does allow for redress by victims of unwanted advances while working on Capitol business on behalf of the people who voted for governance and not political Mardi Gras.
Although none of these Acts guarantees prevention of sexual predation of colleagues on the Hill, it does allow for redress by victims of unwanted advances while working on Capitol business on behalf of the people who voted for governance and not political Mardi Gras.
As to the judiciary and the likes of Judge Alex Kozinski’s allegations against him, is there a settlement fund for such matters among jurists who harass or literally disrobe around staff or others? Does recourse exist for would-be victims? Where do you think those settlement dollars would come from?
In 1980, then-President Jimmy Carter signed into law the Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act. This piece of “legislation creates a mechanism and uniform procedures by which members of the judiciary can respond to allegations of unfitness against Federal judges. It makes a sound accommodation between two essential values—preserving the independence of the Federal judiciary, and making judges, as public servants, accountable under the law for their conduct in office,” according to The American Presidency Project. “Public servants” and “their conduct in office” rings a bell, especially lately.
Constitutionally, federal judges such as chief Judge Alex Kozinski are impeachable. As with substantiations whereby judges ordinarily rule against the accused with bases of restitution ought to go both ways when a judge is deemed a defendant. One example encompasses a federal judge who was accused of and arrested for groping a woman in Detroit, Michigan in 2016. A Detroit Free Press report indicates Judge Henry Perez, 74, was charged with criminal sexual conduct, misdemeanors under Michigan law.
“King of Latex”
In 2013, Circuit Court Judge Wade McCree was the subject of judicial misconduct involving a sexual affair with a litigant on his docket. Besides being embroiled in a case whereby he was on the wrong side of the bench, the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission subpoena’d Judge McCree and held hearings regarding “charges of judicial misconduct.”
Known as “Freak from the Bench,” Circuit Court Judge Wade McCree faced several judicial misconduct charges after he had a 4-month-long sexual relationship with a litigant whose case he heard and with whom he had intercourse in chambers. (Credit: Facebook/NewsOne)
According to MLive.com, a “mistress” identified as Geniene La’Shay Mott became intimate with Judge McCree. “The relationship began when Mott appeared as a complaining witness against the father of her child in McCree’s courtroom in May of 2012.
“They swapped business cards, nearly a week later had dinner and it quickly became physical. Heavy pettin.” Under oath, Judge McCree testified that their relationship evolved in a full-out “volatile” and “intensely sexual relationship,” all while he was married and the father of two children. A Prosecutor’s office investigator claimed that when he interviewed Judge McCree, the judge labeled himself “the king of latex” after Ms. Mott claimed she was impregnated by Judge McCree.
A Prosecutor’s office investigator claimed that when he interviewed Judge McCree, the judge labeled himself “the king of latex” after Ms. Mott claimed she was impregnated by Judge McCree.
The bevy of charges leveled against him include “sending inappropriate and sometimes sexual text messages from the bench, having sex with Mott in his chambers, failing to [recuse] himself from Mott’s child support case, using his judicial power to reduce a bond for one of Mott’s relatives and lying to investigators. Judge McCree’s sordid saga includes sending provocative sexts to a court bailiff, and his colorful history as a jurist can be viewed here.
We are positioned to generate tougher rules to replace half-baked rules broken by lawmakers and jurists whose self-governance is less than stellar and whose power over the powerless is shameful. Recent bipartisanship between the House and Senate appear to have a concerted effort to ameliorate these spates of expensive and perverted “public service.”
