Where does Rep Kinzinger stand on impeachment?

Congressman Kinzinger uses impeachment talk to fundraise for campaign

Campaign Facebook page calls impeaching Trump 'radical agenda'

By Derek BarichelloEmailFollow

Sept. 25, 2019

Contributed

Caption

Congressman Adam Kinzinger's campaign Wednesday took a different tone than a press statement his office released a day earlier regarding an impeachment probe of President Donald Trump.

The congressman utilized the impeachment news to launch into fundraising efforts.

Tuesday, the Channahon Republican said he is reserving judgment until more information is released whether Trump used his presidential powers to seek help from a foreign government for his re-election.

A day later Kinzinger on his campaign page asked supporters "to make their voice heard and donate whatever you can right now, to send a message that we will not stand for this attack on the very foundation of our country."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi launched a formal impeachment inquiry against Trump on Tuesday. The probe centers on whether Trump abused his presidential powers and sought help from Ukraine for his re-election. Pelosi said such actions would mark a "betrayal of his oath of office" and declared, "No one is above the law," according to Associated Press reports.

The White House account shows Trump was willing to engage a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political foe and he volunteered his attorney general to help, according to the Associated Press. But Trump appears to stop short in the call of any explicit quid pro quo, such as linking Ukraine's help to American military aid or other assistance.

Days before the call, Trump froze nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine. It was not clear from the summary whether Zelenskiy was aware of that, and the White House did not respond to requests to clarify. The president has said he did nothing wrong and has denied any request for help was tied to the aid freeze.

It's illegal under federal law to seek foreign government assistance for U.S. elections.

Kinzinger said Tuesday he was looking forward to reviewing the White House transcript and that he'd reserve judgment. Kinzinger's office hasn't responded Wednesday to questions of what the congressman thought of the transcript.

His Facebook post Wednesday said of Democrats: "Now, more than ever, we have to stand up to these radical socialists."

"Their crusade to impeach the President has never been about the facts -- we know because they've pulled the impeachment trigger when Congress is still missing crucial information that could prove the President did nothing wrong. But that doesn't matter to them. This is nothing short of a blatant disregard for the will of the American people and our democracy. The Far Left didn’t like the result of the 2016 election, so they have chosen to tear apart our country to advance their radical agenda."

Kinzinger had said Monday on a Fox News program if Trump utilized his presidential power, he didn't believe it rises to the level of impeachment.

He also said Monday no foreign government should have an influence on the U.S. election, nor should an American president utilize his power to affect an election, calling the action wrong and one that should not be defended.

Above is from:  https://www.mywebtimes.com/2019/09/25/congressman-kinzinger-uses-impeachment-talk-to-fundraise-for-campaign/a9jbt8a/

House Republican Mark Amodei backs inquiry but not impeachment

By MELANIE ZANONA

09/27/2019 09:14 PM EDT

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Rep. Mark Amodei on Friday became the first Republican to explicitly back the House’s investigation into President Donald Trump over his interactions with Ukraine, though the Nevada lawmaker made clear that he does not support impeachment.

In a conference call with local media, the five-term congressman told reporters, “I’m a big fan of oversight, so let’s let the committees get to work and see where it goes,” according to an audio of the call released by The Nevada Independent.

Amodei said he is withholding judgment on whether Trump’s actions amounted to an impeachable offense — “Let’s put it through the process and see what happens,” he said — but he did express concern over the possibility that Trump asked a foreign government to dig up dirt on a political opponent.

“Using government agencies to, if it’s proven, to put your finger on the scale of an election, I don’t think that’s right,” Amodei said. “If it turns out that it’s something along those lines, then there’s a problem.”

After the Nevada Independent ran an article saying Amodei backs an impeachment inquiry, he put out a statement through his office to clarify that “in no way, shape, or form, did I indicate support for impeachment."

But he added that “we have to follow the facts and figure out what happened here.”

Amodei joins a small but growing list of Republicans who are alarmed by Trump’s efforts to press Ukraine into investigating the Biden family, at the same time that the Trump administration was withholding $250 million in foreign aid from Ukraine.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) has said he found Trump’s Ukraine call “troubling,” and Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) has called it “inappropriate.”

Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said on Thursday, “I want to say to the president, 'This is not okay. That conversation is not okay.'” Rep. Adam Kinzinger said the whistleblower complaint raises “important questions.” And Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) said “there is a lot in the whistleblower complaint that is concerning.”

But even as some Republicans try to put some daylight between them and Trump, they’re still unwilling to wholly break with him, suggesting the president's firewall of GOP support on Capitol Hill is still standing firm — for now.

Above is from: 

With Trump under threat, his allies are seizing on various defenses. Most aren’t great.

• U.S. from…

With Trump under threat, his allies are seizing on various defenses. Most aren’t great.

Philip Bump

11 hrs ago

If the goal posts you use to evaluate the significance of a presidential scandal are his inevitable removal from office then, no, the still-ballooning allegations surrounding President Trump are not yet a significant scandal. If your goal posts are pretty much anywhere else, however, what Trump currently faces may be the most significant scandal of his presidency.

© Calla Kessler/The Washington Post (Calla Kessler/The Washington Post)

For Trump’s experienced defenders, the president’s solicitation of electoral aid from a foreign country, the possibility that he leveraged government resources to solicit that aid and his administration’s alleged effort to hide that solicitation poses a new and evolving challenge. Over the past week, they’ve had to follow Trump’s shifting explanations as information came out. (Remember when Trump claimed that he was just looking to combat corruption?) With the past two days’ document releases — the rough transcript of a call with Ukraine’s president and a complaint from an intelligence community whistleblower — his defenders have been operating on quickly shifting terrain.

Load Error

With that in mind, we decided to evaluate those arguments. How effective have Trump’s team and his defenders been at repelling the looming allegations?

Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post

The answer, in short, is: not terribly.

Joe Biden did it, too.

While the rest of this article focuses on recently emerging defenses, it’s worth lifting up one of the central ongoing claims made by Trump and his team: Former vice president Joe Biden was the one who acted inappropriately.

The assertion here is that Biden pushed for the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor in December 2015 because the prosecutor was investigating a company who had hired Biden’s son Hunter as a board member. Biden even bragged about withholding aid to Ukraine in early 2018 at an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations.

By now, though, this has been shown to be an inaccurate depiction of what happened. The prosecutor at the time, Viktor Shokin, was broadly and publicly criticized for not acting on corruption cases — including criticism from other members of the U.S. government. It’s not clear there was an investigation at that point into the company for which Hunter Biden worked, much less one targeting Hunter Biden. There’s been no evidence to emerge tying Joe Biden’s request to a defense of Hunter.

Trump first made this argument in an interview with Fox News on May 19. Interestingly, that was apparently before his administration decided to withhold aid intended for Ukraine that was still on track to be delivered as of May 23. By July, the aid was on hold, and it was still on hold when Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky spoke on July 25.

What’s interesting here is that Trump is accusing Biden of doing what he himself stands accused of doing: withholding aid or perhaps an in-person meeting until Zelensky signed on to an investigation of Biden. What Biden did, by all accounts, is what Trump claims he himself did: took an action to push back on corruption.

Democratic senators did it, too.

A Washington Post opinion piece by columnist Marc Thiessen pointed to a letter sent by three Democratic senators last year which, Thiessen suggested, demonstrated the sort of attempted arm-twisting of which Trump stood accused.

“[I]n May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake,” he wrote. “… So, it’s okay for Democratic senators to encourage Ukraine to investigate Trump, but it’s not okay for the president to allegedly encourage Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden?”

Thiessen’s argument was quickly lifted up as an example of Democratic hypocrisy. There are a few large differences between the two situations, though.

The first is that the threat Thiessen’s column (and subsequent defensive tweets) identifies the Democrats making is at best indirect. What’s more, there’s a big difference between three senators in the minority party threatening to curtail aid and the president of the United States doing it. Zelensky and Ukrainian officials are almost certainly aware that Trump has a lot more leverage over their fates than do three senators.

What’s more, the intent of the purported threats is quite different. It’s not investigate Trump vs. investigate Hunter Biden, as Thiessen has it. The Democrats were responding to a report in the New York Times suggesting that Ukraine was curtailing its assistance in former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe to avoid offending the Trump administration. In other words, it’s senators pushing Ukraine not to stonewall an ongoing investigation being conducted by the Justice Department.

What Trump wanted was more basic. He wanted dirt on Biden. The beneficiary of tearing down Biden — Trump — is quite different than the beneficiaries of a robust Mueller probe. The senators weren’t asking for a probe of Trump; they were asking that a probe of Trump and his team not be hindered. Trump was asking for a probe of the Bidens.

The media isn’t quoting the rough transcript properly.

The rough transcript of that July 25 call includes a number of tantalizing and suggestive passages. One that attracted a great deal of attention was Trump’s responding to Zelensky’s mention of possibly seeking military aid by saying, “I would like you to do us a favor though.” Another was his subsequent mention of Biden:

“The other thing, there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.”

Trump allies disparaged outlets that linked the two. After all, the specific favor Trump was mentioning wasn’t that probe of Biden. The favor was an investigation into Ukraine’s role in the hacking of Democratic National Committee’s server in 2016 (a role that doesn’t exist). Between the two were Zelensky’s reply (solicitous), Trump objecting to the firing of a prosecutor (presumably Shokin) and Trump praising his personal attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani.

It’s inaccurate to say that Trump directly asked Zelensky for the favor of investigating Biden. But it’s accurate to say that Trump asked for a favor and also asked for an investigation of Biden.

It’s a subtle distinction.

The whistleblower didn’t observe things firsthand.

Even before the release of the whistleblower’s complaint on Thursday, Trump allies were pointing to reports that the whistleblower hadn’t observed the July 25 call firsthand. After it was released, that argument became a primary point of objection.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, for example, was asked about the complaint on Thursday. He hadn’t had a chance to read the whole thing, he said, but “if I understand it right, it’s from someone who had secondhand knowledge.”

That’s largely true. The whistleblower notes that the information about the call is secondhand and in other places points to information shared with him or her or to public reporting to build out his case.

As a general rule, it’s worth considering secondhand sources with more skepticism. In this case, though, a primary focus of the whistleblower’s information — that call — has been made public. What the transcript of the call shows is that the whistleblower’s presentation in the complaint is largely accurate. It’s unfair, then, to dismiss the entire document out of hand for being indirectly sourced.

One effort to diminish the complaint tried to cast doubt on it by noting, among other things, that the whistleblower’s complaint referred to a mention of “servers,” plural, instead of the one server mentioned in the rough transcript. Such discrepancies are hardly disqualifying, of course — and may in fact reflect that the whistleblower was hearing from people listening to the call live, not reading the rough transcript.

The whistleblower and their lawyers are biased.

Allies of the president have alleged an apparent political bias on the part of the whistleblower (whose identity remains unknown). It was, in fact, one of the considerations taken into account by the inspector general for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in evaluating the complaint’s credibility.

That, after all, is the key question. If the complaint is credible, then bias doesn’t matter. If your sworn enemy robs a bank and you have proof, should the police dismiss your evidence simply because it’s your sworn enemy?

In the case of the whistleblower complaint, the inspector general specifically decided that the credibility of the complaint outweighed concerns of bias.

“Although the ICIG’s preliminary review found ‘some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the Complainant in favor of a rival political candidate,’ ” an Office of Legal Counsel evaluation states, “the ICIG concluded that the complaint’s allegations nonetheless appeared credible.”

Trump and his allies also targeted the whistleblower’s attorney.

As others have pointed out, Trump himself donated to Biden in 2001.

The whistleblower and their sources are equivalent to spies.

At an event on Thursday morning, Trump used remarkably aggressive language to disparage the whistleblower and the people who spoke with them.

“Basically, that person never saw the report, never saw the call, he never saw the call — heard something and decided that he or she or whoever the hell they saw — they’re almost a spy,” Trump said according to audio obtained by the Los Angeles Times’s Eli Stokols.

“I want to know who’s the person, who’s the person who gave the whistleblower the information?” Trump said. “Because that’s close to a spy. You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? The spies and treason, we used to handle it a little differently than we do now.”

The whistleblower used the defined legal process to raise concerns about the president’s behavior. It was Trump himself who decided to release the rough transcript and the complaint after keeping them out of Congress’s hands for weeks. The whistleblower didn’t leak information, as far as is known; nor did that person share information with any foreign power. Those who spoke with the whistleblower were expressing concerns to a peer.

If those are the actions of spies, then in the opinion of the president anyone who legally shares any derogatory information about Trump is a spy deserving of the punishment once meted out to spies — death.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) is wary about Trump’s interactions with Ukraine because one of the 24 foreign policy advisers he had on his 2012 campaign joined the board of the company for which Hunter Biden was working six months after Biden left.

Donald Trump Jr. thinks this makes sense (per a tweet), and the Trump campaign’s rapid-response shop soon retweeted it.

This one we will allow you to evaluate yourself.

Above is from:  http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/with-trump-under-threat-his-allies-are-seizing-on-various-defenses-most-arent-great/ar-AAHTn9T?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=UE13DHP

Rep Kinzinger speaks on whistleblower complaint against President

White House

Trump: ‘It doesn’t matter what I discussed’ on call that drew whistleblower’s complaint

President announces sanctions at the ‘highest level’ against Iran after strike against Saudi oil facility

Posted Sep 20, 2019 9:41 AM

John T. Bennett

@BennettJohnT

Amid ‘Whistleblowergate,’ Trump again suggests his office has unlimited powers Trump denies ‘inappropriate’ remark to foreign leader that prompted whistleblower complaint Bashful base: Pollsters say Trump closer to Dems than early 2020 surveys suggest

President Donald Trump is mired in another crisis, this time over an allegation he made a troubling “promise” to another world leader. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images file photo)

President Donald Trump on Friday did not deny discussing former Vice President Joe Biden with his Ukranian counterpart during a telephone conversation that reportedly prompted an intelligence community whistleblower to file a formal complaint.

“It doesn’t matter what I discussed,” Trump told reporters Friday, according to a pool report. The ever defiant president then ran toward the controversy, saying, “Someone ought to look into Joe Biden.”

Earlier Friday Trump tried to discredit the unidentified whistleblower as “highly partisan.” At the same time, Trump said he does not know the identity of the whistleblower, which raises questions about how he could know that the individual is "highly partisan."

Trump dismissed the whistleblower matter as “another political hack job.”

The Washington Post and other media outlets have reported the intelligence community whistleblower’s complaint stems from a telephone conversation Trump had over the summer with a senior Ukrainian official, most likely new President Volodymyr Zelensky. The Post first reported that the complaint had been filed because the intelligence official was concerned about a “promise” Trump made to that leader.

Trump, during a meeting with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison in the Oval Office, was asked directly if the complaint stemmed from a July 25 call with Zelensky. He replied, “I really don’t know.”

The intelligence community’s inspector general, Michael Atkinson, dubbed the matter one of great concern. The Trump-Zelensky call was made about two and a half weeks before the Aug. 12 complaint was filed; the conversation already was under investigation by House Democrats. That’s because they want to know whether Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani was trying to press Zelensky’s government to investigate one of Trump’s political opponents to help the president’s 2020 reelection campaign.

Giuliani has not denied having such conversations, which are related to his contention that while Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden was vice president, he convinced the Ukrainian government to drop an investigation into a company linked to one of Biden’s sons. Giuliani said on CNN Thursday night that there was nothing inappropriate about his conversations with Ukrainian officials.

[Bashful base: Pollsters say Trump closer to Dems than early 2020 surveys suggest]

Want insight more often? Get Roll Call in your inbox

He also said that if Trump, as president, had asked Zelensky to look into the company in question and Biden’s son, such an ask is within the powers of the Office of the President. The next morning, the president defended himself on Twitter.

Trump suggested — as he does almost daily — that “Radical Left Democrats” and “Fake News Media” are somehow “partners” in a conspiracy targeting him and his presidency.

“They think I may have had a ‘dicey’ conversation with a certain foreign leader based on a ‘highly partisan’ whistleblowers statement,” he tweeted.

The White House and acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire are blocking release of the complaint to Congress. That is allowing Giuliani and Trump to try shaping a narrative about the individual and circumstances surrounding the call, which Trump said others were listening to.

“Strange that with so many other people hearing or knowing of the perfectly fine and respectful conversation, that they would not have also come forward,” the president tweeted.

He claimed of the call that “there was nothing said wrong,” describing his conversation with the comedian-turned-Ukrainian leader as “pitch perfect!”

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

· 9h

The Radical Left Democrats and their Fake News Media partners, headed up again by Little Adam Schiff, and batting Zero for 21 against me, are at it again! They think I may have had a “dicey” conversation with a certain foreign leader based on a “highly partisan” whistleblowers..

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

....statement. Strange that with so many other people hearing or knowing of the perfectly fine and respectful conversation, that they would not have also come forward. Do you know the reason why they did not? Because there was nothing said wrong, it was pitch perfect!

47.2K

7:27 AM - Sep 20, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

25K people are talking about this

But further muddying the waters was a Trump administration hold placed on U.S. military aid to Ukraine. The aid had been planned to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia after Russia used military force to annex the Crimea region in 2014.

Democratic response

Democratic lawmakers, so far, are walking a tightrope on the matter. They say it is too early to talk specifics of the classified matter while also warning that it would be nefarious — and possibly illegal — for a sitting commander-in-chief to trade an action like approving military aid in return for a foreign leader going after one of his top political opponents.

“I obviously trust the judgment of our [Intelligence Committee] chair, Adam Schiff, and he’s following this very closely with an expert eye on what the law is, what protections there are for whistleblowers and where does it cross a line of a conversation that the president may have or a commitment he may make for our nation that the public should be aware of. And they’re having conversations as we speak,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday.

[Still confused about Trump’s demands of Congress? Maybe it’s you]

Some Republicans also are concerned about the prospect of a sitting president possibly seeking a political quid pro quo from another country to help him secure a second term.

“No president should ever utilize or use American power in any way like to affect an election,” said House Foreign Affairs Committee member Adam Kinzinger, an Illinois Republican. “So, if that happened, that would be a problem.”

“It’s one thing to go after corruption. We should. That’s a huge problem in Ukraine,” Kinzinger said Friday on CNN. “That’s a huge problem in Ukraine. But if you say, ‘Go after it specifically for a political target that affects somebody in office in the United States,’ that’s a major problem.”

No lawmaker, however, Republican or Democratic, has suggested what Congress might do about it — if anything — should Trump admit it or the whistleblower be able to prove their case.

Iran sanctions

Trump announced sanctions at the “highest level” on Iran’s central banking system. He said the economic penalties go to the “very top” of the country’s government. He said Iran’s economy is “going to Hell” and is “broke” because of sanctions his administration has imposed over its nuclear program.

“There’s never been another country more prepared,” Trump said of the U.S. military’s ability to strike Iran, veering again toward hawkish rhetoric after Tehran allegedly hit Saudi oil facilities with a missile strike.

Above is from:  http://www.rollcall.com/news/whitehouse/trump-tries-to-discredit-intel-whistleblower-as-highly-partisan

John Bolton PAC gives Rep Kinzinger’s campaign $10,000

Former Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Ambassador John R. Bolton was fired last Tuesday, and has already re-entered the political arena. Bolton returned to overseeing his political action committees (PACs): John Bolton PAC and the John Bolton Super PAC.
The John Bolton PAC announced on its website its endorsements of Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado, Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (IL-16), and Rep. Lee Zeldin (NY-01) and that it will contribute $10,000 to each candidate's primary and general election campaigns, for a total of $50,000 of campaign contributions.

Read More Related Articles

• Bernie Sanders chose Linda Sarsour: Can Jews overlook her views?
• Muslim civil rights group ‘appalled’ by John Bolton’s interim replacement

• The Cost of Medicare Supplements Might Change Your Mind about Them (Yahoo Search)

Recommended by

"The experience that these incumbent members of Congress have provides them with a remarkable understanding and knowledge of the threats we face from international terrorism and rogue regimes such as Iran and North Korea," Bolton said in a statement on the PAC's website.
The PAC reported that since 2014 it has contributed $1,504,500 to 219 candidates and that simultaneously, the John Bolton Super PAC spent $6,183,797 on "independent expenditures in support of national security."
On September 10, President Donald Trump tweeted about Bolton's resignation.

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

· Sep 10, 2019

I informed John Bolton last night that his services are no longer needed at the White House. I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration, and therefore....

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

....I asked John for his resignation, which was given to me this morning. I thank John very much for his service. I will be naming a new National Security Advisor next week.

77.1K

10:58 AM - Sep 10, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

33.5K people are talking about this

Bolton quickly responded to the president's tweet.

John Bolton

✔@AmbJohnBolton

I offered to resign last night and President Trump said, "Let's talk about it tomorrow."

63.9K

11:10 AM - Sep 10, 2019

Bolton Reportedly Returns To Leading Political Action Committees After White house Departure

“His view was not always the same as everybody else in the room. That’s why you wanted him there. The fact that he was a contrarian from time to time is an asset, not a liability. I’m very, very unhappy to hear that he’s leaving. It is a huge loss for the administration in my opinion and for the nation,” Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) told reporters Tuesday, according to The Hill.
“He wants people who basically are yes-men. I may not have agreed with Ambassador Bolton on a whole host of issues and his bellicose views, but the one thing about him is he obviously presented counter views at times for his consideration. That’s not something the president wants,” Senator Bob Menendez told reporters, according to the Jewish Voice.
Prior to his time in the Trump administration, Bolton served as the US ambassador to the UN and was a commentator on Fox News.

Above is from:  https://www.jpost.com/American-Politics/John-Bolton-returns-to-PACs-and-endorses-5-incumbents-601807

Only one Democrat seeks Rep Kinzinger’s seat but it is early

LaSalle County Democratic Chair to Seek 16th District Seat in Congress

• WSPYNEWS
• Sep 12, 2019 Updated 6 hrs ago
• <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = "[default] https://www.w3.org/2000/svg" NS = "https://www.w3.org/2000/svg" />
• Click Here to submit a News Tip or Story

Get the WSPY Newsletter in your inbox every Evening.

Sign up

Manage your lists

(Dani Brzozowski for Congress photo)

• 
  
The chairwoman of the LaSalle County Democratic party has announced a run for Congress in Illinois' 16th District.

Dani Brzozowski of LaSalle announced her candidacy this week.

The seat, currently held by Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger, is up for election in 2020. Currently, no other candidates have announced candidacy.

Brzozowski is a former small business owner and she describes herself on her campaign page as having a background in non-profit management with diplomas from La Salle-Peru High School and Purdue University. Brzozowski lists economic justice, sustainable environment and political justice as key issues on her platform.

In 2018, Brzozowski was elected Chair of the LaSalle County Democrats. Pending any other Democratic announcements and pending a re-election announcement from Kinzinger, the two would battle for the seat in the 2020 general election.

Kinzinger, now in his fifth term, defeated Democrat Sara Dady of Rockford in 2018.

A rebate from the Post Office? Keep your receipt--

Postal Service licked in court fight over stamp price hike

• 5:00 pm
• September 13, 2019

• NATIONAL NEWS FROM THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court in Washington has thrown out a 5-cent hike to the price of a first class “Forever Stamp” along with other adjustments made in January to the price of first-class mail.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Friday that a postal commission failed to provide an adequate explanation for the increase from 50 to 55 cents and failed to respond to public comments challenging the increase.

A U.S. Postal Service spokesman says the service is reviewing the decision and considering its legal options. Spokesman David Partenheimer confirmed in an email that at this time customers will still be charged the new January rates for first-class mail, including 55 cents for a Forever Stamp.

Above is from:  https://wrex.com/category/2019/09/13/postal-service-licked-in-court-fight-over-stamp-price-hike/

Capital Fax explains Pritzker’s request for 2021 budget with cuts

Pritzker wants “actionable scenario” from agencies on potential cuts, other reductions

Friday, Sep 13, 2019

* I told subscribers about this memo a few days ago. Here’s Illinois Public Radio…

State agencies are getting a warning from Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s budget office: Be prepared to make significant cuts next year.

A memo orders agencies to include a scenario in which 6.5 percent of current year funding would go away. They’re to find the savings through “operational efficiencies.”

The document was issued under the names of Deputy Gov. Dan Hynes and Budget Director Alexis Sturm, who say the current-year budget is still balanced. […]

“I understand the fiscal realities, but to be thinking about taking this backwards step when we’re still trying to get out of the danger zone is discouraging,” [the Illinois Collaboration on Youth’s Andrea Durbin] says. “And I hope the General Assembly and this administration are able to come together and find ways to avoid that.”

* Here’s the memo…

To: All Governor’s Cabinet Directors
From: Dan Hynes, Deputy Governor, Budget & Economy
Alexis Sturm, Director, Governor’s Office of Management and Budget
Subject: Fiscal Year 2021 Spending Efficiencies Proposals
Date: September 9, 2019

Although the spring legislative session produced a successful balanced budget for fiscal year 2020, Illinois continues to face significant financial challenges, and we must continue to be wise fiscal stewards of the limited resources of State government. The State’s backlog of unpaid general funds bills that were left behind by the previous administration remained in excess of $7 billion as of June 30, 2019, and the extensive bill payment delays continue to strain the State’s network of providers and translate into millions of dollars of unnecessary interest costs.

In that context, it remains essential that agency leadership continue to evaluate current operations and procedures and set parameters for operational expenses in all agencies. Directions regarding submissions of fiscal year 2021 budget requests will be forthcoming in a few weeks from GOMB; however, even now, agency directors – working in conjunction with their Deputy Governor and GOMB staff – should be prepared to:

1) Propose in your annual submission to GOMB an actionable scenario that includes operational efficiencies reflecting a 6.5% reduction from an estimated maintenance level of fiscal year 2021 operations funding across all appropriated funds (additional details will be forthcoming in GOMB’s budget submission request forms);

2) Conduct a review of boards and commissions within your agency’s purview and propose elimination of statutorily created boards and commissions that would lead to a 10% reduction of them;

3) Identify at least two significant efficiency and savings ideas for consideration in the fiscal year 2021 budget. Ideas could include (but are not limited to) items such as elimination or consolidation of duplicative programs, reduction in funding for underutilized or inefficient services, or improvements in service delivery that streamline costs. Reviews of agency audits from the last few years can provide ideas for cost savings for fiscal year 2021.

Your proposal will need to be submitted with your fiscal year 2021 budget request to GOMB. Agency directors should be prepared to implement any ideas submitted in the fiscal year 2021 budget requests. We and our staffs are available to discuss this memo and answer any questions you may have.

Above is from:  https://capitolfax.com/2019/09/13/pritzker-wants-actionable-scenario-from-agencies-on-potential-cuts-other-reductions/

Did You Know That These Common Household Items Are Meant To Be Used This Way?

Gas Gauge Arrow

Perhaps you have already noticed this if you happen to drive a car. Beside the gas gauge of just about every car manufactured from 2010 onwards, you will see an arrow pointing either to the right or left. This serves as a way to remind drivers which side of the car the gas cap is located! If you have been using the car for a while, you might not need the reminder. However, it is useful when you are driving a rental car or a brand-new vehicle. If you ask us, it sounds pretty handy.

15 American landmarks that were built by slaves

James Pasley

Former President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama walk across the South Lawn. Pete Souza / Flickr

• Four hundred years have passed since the arrival of the first 20 slaves into the US.
• Many of the United States' most famous buildings were built by enslaved African Americans, including the White House and the US Capitol.
• Here are 15 famous American landmarks you may not have known were built by slaves.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

In December 2016, former first lady Michelle Obama declared as a sign of how far the nation has come: "I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves."

She was talking about the White House. And as the first African American first lady speaking to the Democratic National Convention, she struck a chord. Some fact checkers and political pundits may have raced to their history books, ready to dispute the claim. But she was right.

Obama could have been talking about the US Capitol, or Trinity Church in New York, or Georgetown University in Washington. Slaves built some of the United States' most symbolic buildings.

This month marks 400 years since the arrival of the first 20 slaves into the US. Earlier this week, Reuters published a photo-series called " Built by my family: America's grand buildings built by slaves." It's showcasing the issue, looking at some the most well-known landmark buildings built by slaves. Here are 15 of them.

The White House in Washington, D.C.

The White House. Lambert / Getty

Slaves helped build the White House. Work began in 1792, and it took eight years to finish.

Originally there were plans to use workers from Europe, but when that failed, slaves were brought in. They were trained to quarry stone and brick, as well as helping to build the actual structure.

Records of wages in 1795 show there were at least five slaves, four owned by the White House architect James Hoban, and one owned by his assistant. Hoban earned $60 for each slave each year. In 2016, author Michael Daly estimated the total amount owed in reparations should be $83 million.

Slaves also rebuilt the executive mansion after it burned down in the War of 1812.

After its completion, presidents continue to use slaves to maintain the household, and seven presidents even brought their own slaves, including Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Andrew Jackson, and Zachary Taylor.

The US Capitol in Washington, D.C.

Storm clouds hang over Capitol Hill in Washington. J. Scott Applewhite/AP

The US Capitol took more than 30 years to build, from 1793 to 1826. While it's not clear how many slaves helped build it, a 2005 task force found slaves were definitely involved. Between 1795 and 1801, 385 payments were made to African American slave owners.

The report said slaves would have done the hard work, like sawing logs and moving stones, as well as working at quarries to get raw materials. They were also responsible for more skilled labor, like plastering, painting, and carpentry.

In 2012, a marker was unveiled to remember the slave labor that went into the building.

The Statue of Freedom atop the Capitol.

The Statue of Freedom atop the Capitol Dome in Washington. J. Scott Applewhite / AP

On top of the Capitol sits the Statue of Freedom, an important statue of a 19-foot bronze woman holding a sword and a laurel wreath. It was made by a slave named Philip Reid.

Reid was paid $1.25 a day to cast the statue. He was chosen because no one else had the skill to make a bronze statue out of a plaster cast made by Thomas Crawford, who had been commissioned to make the statue, but was in France at the time.

Interestingly, by the time the statue was set on the roof of the capitol in 1863, Reid was a free man since the the Emancipation Bill was passed in 1862.

The Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C.

Smithsonian Institution, known as the "Castle." Salwan Georges / The Washington Post / Getty

The Smithsonian Institution, built between 1847 and 1855, is made from red sandstone, which was quarried by slaves.

It's thought the slaves were owned by Martha Washington, former President George Washington's wife. Unlike the White House and the Capitol, slaves didn't work on the actual building of the institution.

Wall Street in New York.

Lucky-photographer/Shutterstock

Wall Street was named after an actual wall, which slaves built in 1653. There also used to be a slave market in Wall Street that was one of the largest in the country in the 1700s.

Trinity Church in New York.

Trinity Church in Lower Manhattan in New York. Kathy Willens / AP

Trinity Church's architects rented slaves slaves to build the church. The slaves helped construct the first version of the church, which was finished in 1698 and burned down in 1776. The slaves' owners were paid for the work done.

Fraunces Tavern in New York.

Fraunces Tavern is seen in New York. Seth Wenig / AP

The Fraunces Tavern was built in 1719 and is one of the oldest buildings in Manhattan. The New York Historical society says it was built by slaves, along with New York's first prison and hospital, but there aren't many details on the process.

Faneuil Hall in Boston.

Crews work to clear snow from the plaza in front of Faneuil Hall in Boston. Michael Dwyer / AP

Faneuil Hall was built in the 1740s. Known as the "cradle of liberty," this spot is popular for both tourists and politicians giving speeches. It was named after Peter Faneuil, a slave owner and slave trader. Feneuil helped fund the building of the hall, which was bolstered by money he made off slavery.

People have argued the hall's name ought to be changed. One alternative would be Crispus Attucks, who was an African American thought to be the first casualty of the American Revolution. But no name change has been agreed upon.

Fort Sumter in South Carolina.

Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina, 1955. Pictorial Parade / Archive Photos / Getty

Based in Charleston Harbor in South Carolina, Fort Sumter is an artificial island that was built in 1829— from bricks that were made by slaves. In 1864, during the Civil War, the Confederate Army made slaves repair the fortress while it was under attack, and at least 20 slaves died.

Harvard Law School in Massachusetts.

A bicyclist walks by Harvard University's Langdell Hall. Charles Krupa / AP

Harvard Law School, built in 1817, was funded by Isaac Royall Jr., a slave owner. A lot of his wealth came from the African slaves he had working on sugar plantations and farms.

In 2017, the school unveiled a plaque to remember the slavery money that went into building the law school. There are no names for the slaves on the plaque, because the identities of Royall's slaves are not known.

Castillo de San Marcos fort in Florida.

Castillo de San Marcos in St. Augustine Florida. Wikimedia

Castillo de San Marcos, which is the oldest masonry fort in the US, was built in part by enslaved Native Americans, for Spanish forces. They worked in tough conditions for about 25 years in the 17th Century to build the fortress.

Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

Isaac Hawkins Hall, on the Georgetown University campus, in Washington. Jacquelyn Martin / AP

In 1838, Jesuit priests, who were the founders of Georgetown University, sold 272 slaves, and used the money, which today is worth about $3.3 million, to pay off debts and build its campus. To offset some of the damage, in 2016, the university provided preferential administration to the descendants of the slaves who had been sold.

At least one descendant, Melisande Short-Colomb, ended up attending the university. She told Reuters the buildings on campus were beautiful and she was in awe that her family built them.

The University of North Carolina in North Carolina.

The University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. Gerry Broome / AP

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is the oldest public university in the country. Built in 1793, it harnessed slave labor to build many of its early structures. Slaves continued to maintain buildings on campus until 1865.

To honor the slaves' work, researchers compiled a list of 119 slaves who built and worked for the university, although they did not include children and women slaves on the list.

Monticello in Virginia.

Monticello, the home of Thomas Jefferson, in Charlottesville. Steve Helber / AP

Thomas Jefferson's Monticello home in Charlottesville was built by slaves. They quarried limestone, made bricks, and built the house's frame.

In 2014, former President Barack Obama took former French President Francois Hollande on a tour, and said the house represented the US' complicated history with slavery, including Jefferson's ties to it, despite helping to draft the Declaration of Independence. "We just visited downstairs where we know the slaves helped to build this magnificent structure," Obama said.

Montpelier in Virginia.

Montpelier the home of former President James Madison. Kenneth M. Wyner / The Montpelier Foundation

The land owned by the family of former President James Madison had two houses built by slaves. The first house was built under orders from his grandfather Ambrose Madison. In 1723, he sent slaves to clear the land, and plant tobacco.

The Madisons arrived to live there nine years later, and called the plantation Mount Pleasant. Following that, in the 1760s, the family's slaves built Montpelier, a Georgian brick mansion.

Mount Vernon in Virginia.

The home of former President George Washington in Mount Vernon. Susan Walsh / AP

Slaves built George Washington's home Mount Vernon. The house has steps and walkways made from aquia sandstone, which was also quarried by slaves.

After building the house, slaves maintained it and worked on his plantation. It wasn't until after Washington died that he freed some of the estate's slaves in his will.

State Response to a 2015 request

This was a request for the resume and job application  for Growth Dimension’s Director, Jarid Funderberg.  The state made no response until now but wants now to clear its record.  Mr. Funderberg left Growth Dimensions several years ago.  The City of Belvidere held that it needed not supply the information even though Growth Dimension received a substantial portion of its budget from local governments and administered its Enterprise Zone program.

My original request:

February 23, 2015

Public Access Counselor

Office of the Attorney General

500 South 2^nd Street

Springfield, Il 62706

REQUEST FOR REVIEW

Sir or Madam:

Please consider this an appeal request regarding the records denied in a February 6, 2015 Freedom of Information request to the City of Belvidere.

The records concern files possessed by Growth Dimensions, a non-profit corporation, performing governmental duties for the City of Belvidere. The original FOIA request, City Attorney’s initial response, my statement regarding their non-compliance with the FOIA request and the City Attorney’s final response are enclosed. The specific record which was refused is the employment application and resume (at time of application) for current Growth Dimensions’ Executive Director, Jarid Funderburg.

Growth Dimensions plans and implements economic development strategies and projects for the City of Belvidere and is the administrator for the city’s Illinois Enterprise Zone. It was clearly spelled out that the information requested was guided in part by Illinois Attorney General Opinions 13-018* and 14-015**.

More than half of Growth Dimensions’ budget is funded by units of local government: namely the City of Belvidere, Village of Poplar Grove, Boone County government, two k-12 school districts, Rock Valley College and Northern Illinois University. Growth Dimensions’ general meetings are closed to the public and to the news media; Growth Dimensions has been criticized for this in the local newspaper. Mr. Funderburg is the third Executive Director in the past three years. He is connected to a prominent family in Belvidere/Rockford. No employment history was supplied to the public despite questions regarding such at Belvidere City Council. Based upon these facts it is appropriate and necessary for the public to have access to the job application and resume which was submitted when Mr. Funderburg applied to head Belvidere’s economic development agency and became administrator of its Illinois Enterprise Zone.

I appreciate the gesture which Growth Dimensions made by voluntarily supplying minutes of its monthly meetings. The public has the right to these records because Growth Dimensions is acting for governmental units in local governments’ efforts to plan and facilitate area economic development. Without access the public has little awareness of what actions in economic development are occurring and no means of evaluating if their tax funds are being well spent. The public has a right to these

*http://foia.ilattorneygeneral.net/pdf/opinions/2013/13-018.pdf

**http://foia.ilattorneygeneral.net/pdf/opinions/2014/14-015.pdf.

records on a regular basis, with or without Growth Dimensions’ consent. This will not happen without your clarification of whether Growth Dimension is providing governmental services for the City of Belvidere and your grant of the requested resume and job application. In the letter dated February 9, 2015 the City Attorney supplied Growth Dimensions ‘minutes “in the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act”. This amounts to a de factor recognition that these records should be in the public view.

The City Attorney did not properly handle my initial FOIA. I made it very clear that I was seeking records of Growth Dimensions and the basis for that request. When some of the specific records requested were refused, the City Attorney did not apprise me of my appeal rights. How can an FOIA officer, no less an officer of the Seventeen Judicial Circuit Court of Illinois neglect to inform a citizen of his rights? I would appreciate if you also would comment to the City of Belvidere regarding proper administration of FOIA requests.

Thank you for your consideration.

YES—I have requested their review continue

Bartelt, Leah <LBartelt@atg.state.il.us>

To:'bill pysson'

Sep 12 at 8:43 AM

Thank you Mr. Pysson, we’ll proceed with our analysis.