By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

“Somebody should do something.”

After nearly five years of being rebuffed for his common-sense stance on the Ethics Commission, Dr. Stewart Hill Tankersley is doing something significant: Exposing institutional corruption and the particular failings of the Commission, sworn to hold every public official to the letter of the law.

Tankersley’s interview with APR confirms what close observers of the Commission have seen over the years.  By peeling back the ugly mechanisms of an almost lawless Commission, Tankersley has exposed  members who routinely entertain ex parte meetings with those seeking favorable outcomes on advisory opinions. Will it stop?  Will these revelations curtail the practice of granting sweetheart rulings for lawyers, lobbyists and their well-heeled clients? Will the Legislature step in and follow through on the ethics reform package prepared by the Attorney General’s Office for last session?

Tankersley’s candid insight reveals a Commission that operates without oversight, where fixed rules and procedures are few and exceptions are many.

After publishing Parts One and Two of APR’s Exit Interview with Tankersley, he has found that effecting change has its cost, as some of the State’s powerful elites have pushed back against him. For now, they’re content to nitpick around the edges of his disclosures while privately seething at Tankersley’s bold revelations.

For instance: Birmingham-based attorney, J. Mark White, sent a letter to the Commission, complaining about Tankersley’s observation that Commission Chair Jerry Fielding had called on him during a suspect Ethics hearing, even though White was not registered to speak at the meeting. White responded by saying his partner was signed in to speak and did. Obtuse whining by thin-skinned attorneys apparently is the norm for a Commission that appears to favor the well-connected.

Tankersley has little to fear from such piffling retorts as his integrity and years of medical, military and public service shielded him from such silliness. Undeterred, Tankersley says he will continue his crusade to restore trust in the State’s institutions without fear or hesitation.

With less than a month remaining on his appointment as a member of the Ethics Commission, Tankersley will likely vote on two significant advisory opinions that could upend the meaning of Ethics laws as they are presently understood.

While he would not comment on these opinions in APR’s interview, his public comments are enough to show the weight he puts into deciding these impending decisions.

One request for an opinion pertains to the revolving door statute and the other to conflicts of interests when working in economic development.

The first issue before the Commission is whether, under current law, former Acting Finance Director, Bill Newton, can open a consulting firm, despite a ban on public officials being allowed to “lobby,” within two years of leaving government service.

Newton is being represented by the same law firm that unsuccessfully represented disgraced former Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard during his criminal trial.

Tankersley at a recent Commission hearing said, “The purpose of the two-year revolving door statute is to keep somebody from rigging the system to set themselves up to walk out the door the next day and use the system they had created to benefit themselves.”

Newton, who was pushed out as Acting Finance Director, signed hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts for State goods and services over his years in government. He is now asking, according to his attorney Joel Dillard, “Would I [Newton] violate Code Section 36-25-13(f) if, under my plan, and within the two-year period after termination from office or employment, I provided the professional services of advice and consultation to my clients in connection with a non-judicial matter?”

Subsection (f) was revised to become subsection (g) and is part of the greater language that prohibits public officials or public employees from representing clients, including his or her employer before a board, agency, commission, department or legislative body, within two years after departure from government service.

Newton, a lawyer himself, wants the Commission to approve his consulting business because he says he will be providing “professional services of advice and consultation to my clients in connection with a non-judicial matter.” The odd phrasing here “my clients in connection with a non-judicial matter (singular)?” is because of the construct of Subsection (g). In this section, Newton sees an opening to circumvent the revolving door statute based on a wishful interpretation of one sentence in the code.

Subsection (g) reads in part, “No former public official or public employee of the State may, within two years after termination of office or employment, act as attorney for any person other than himself or herself or the State, or aid, counsel, advise, consult or assist in representing any other person, in connection with any judicial proceeding or other matter.”

In this sentence, the word judicial is being used as an adjective to modify the proceeding word. If the code stops there or isn’t followed by, or other matter, then it would be talking about one thing.

Even if it read, “judicial proceeding ‘AND’ other matter” it would only be referring to judicial proceedings; but it doesn’t.

The code reads, “judicial proceeding or other matter.” The word other in this sentence is an adjective, which modifies matter. Therefore, a strict reading concludes that it is referring to groups other than lawyers. This may not be the intent of the draft, but that’s what it says.

Newton is hoping it will be interpreted, as if it only applies to lawyers in a judicial proceeding, giving him a way around the revolving door statute.

Do words have meaning? A closer look at Subsection (g)

Lawyers, as Tankersley has pointed out, are often seen as looking for ways to navigate around State Ethics Laws for their clients and themselves. In his Exit Interview with APR, he spoke about a time when he found a provision in a piece of legislation,  that would have excluded attorneys from the Ethics laws altogether.

“When tucking campaign finance under the Ethics Commission, someone slipped in a simple amendment that the Ethics laws did not pertain to lawyers,” Tankersley said. He says Ginger Avery, who represents the Trial Lawyers Association, was called to explain the exception but, “she said she was shocked it was in the Bill. After hearing Avery’s response Tankersley said,  “good then we can remove it.”

Catching sneaky legislation and lawyerly attempts to circumvent the intent of the Ethics Code, places an extra burden on part time commissioners, Tankersley believes. “The one suggestion I have for an incoming commissioner is: be ready for a lot of work and read the statutes and know them.”

It’s not only lawyers but business interests that want exemptions from the Ethics rules, which leads to the other important vote Tankersley will most likely cast before his time on the Commission expires.

The Commission is being asked to allow those in economic development to be excluded from the Ethics laws. Currently, those who participate in economic development are required to register as lobbyists. Those who want to be exempt from economic development from lobbyist-type restrictions claim it places an undue burden on those working to bring business to the State.

Secretary of Commerce Greg Canfield is a supporter of lifting the lobbyist requirements.

While Tankersley withheld his opinion when speaking with APR, he has in the past said that if a legislator’s full-time job is economic development than it would be improper, because, in his opinion, that would be lobbying while serving as a lawmaker.

Emails uncovered in the Hubbard criminal trial showed that Hubbard wanted former Governor-turned-lobbyist Bob Riley to forgo his lobbyist registration and claim he was merely engaged in economic development. When crafting the current Ethics code, Riley saw that his young protege, then-Senator Bryan Taylor, wrote the right exceptions for the type of work Riley wanted to engage in, according to those who witnessed the process. During his tenure as Governor, Riley doled out millions in economic incentives to companies which he later  would represent as a lobbyist. Hubbard thought there was a way around registering as a lobbyist, which would have given Riley greater latitude to grow his consulting business without the constraints of the Ethics Laws.

Flouting Ethics Laws is what landed Hubbard in trouble and led to his conviction on 12 felony counts of public corruption. He called it economic development, but the jury found it was a crime.

Now, it appears the Commission is being asked to codify Hubbard’s activities as just business as usual. It is important to note that Hubbard’s case is under appeal pending a ruling by the State’s Court of Criminal Appeals.

An exception for those who conduct economic development appears to be yet another rouse to thwart the spirit and intent of the laws.

Tankersley hopes to see the Legislature address the issues he has raised. He would also like to see changes to the statements of economic interest filings that would demand public officials to report any money they receive from gaming interests including any casino winnings. He would also like to see lawyers report individual clients on the SOEI forms like any other public person.

The State’s appointed Attorney General, Steve Marshall, has shied away from making waves on the Ethics front, as a host of special interests continue to push to further weaken Marshall, leaving the people with little reason for confidence in the system as it stands. However, there is a group of lawmakers intent on bringing Legislation to fix some if not all of the problems highlighted by Tankersley.

His service to the State is an example to all Commissioners who will follow him.

The post Tankersley Exit Interview: Final  appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

“If we had an Attorney General, there’d be a Grand Jury,” said a retired judge referring to revelations in APR’s exit interview with Ethics Commissioner, Dr. Stewart Tankersley.

Examples of collusion, questionable opinions, and other suspect activity, he said, “should be before a Grand Jury, and we should ask them: ‘What do you want us to do with this?'”

Speaking truth to power or shining a light on a brood of vipers undoubtedly has consequences both negative and positive. At the moment, Tankersley is feeling the wrath of those he has criticized.

It is, perhaps, expected that fixer attorney J. Mark White would bully Tankersley with a lawsuit claiming Tankersley had defamed him, but the fact that Ethics Commission Chair Jerry Fielding would also threaten legal action against Tankersley is shameful. Tankersley is being coerced to recant his statements to APR, but so far he is holding firm to his principled stand to expose the failures of the Ethics Commission.

There are days when I long for a time when the Codes Duello would settle such matters. It is doubtful that White or Fielding would meet a man on the “field of honour,” as the dueling grounds were called. Frivolous law suits are the dull swords of cowards.

Words like honor, duty and justice seem to have slipped from the heart of so many, that it’s like they were part of distant America that no longer exists except in yearning memories.

Sophocles’ admonishment that it is preferred to fail with honor than win by cheating is now an arcane notion.  But the high places of government are often inhabited by men of low character, who manipulate the levers of power to wicked ends.

What Tankersley has done is to stand in the midst of public heretics and cry “repent,” and his call should be heard by lawmakers who can reform the Ethics Commission before it’s too late.

Lawmakers are usually reluctant to champion controversial issues before an election, but are there no leaders in State government willing to stand for principles while running for office?

At the State’s Attorney General’s Office sits an Ethics bill that was crafted with care listening to all the stakeholders while preserving the nation’s tight Ethics code.

Will someone call and ask for a copy?

Attorney General Steve Marshall would not let the bill come before the Legislature at the last Session, saying he needed to get up to speed and make it his own. Marshall, by all accounts, is a smart guy; he had plenty of time to understand the Legislation and give it his imprint, but he chose to play politics.

Heaven forbid he should anger his newly found donor base. Marshall’s campaign has signaled its willingness to play footsies with the very groups who would undermine our State’s Ethics code. Marshall it seems is willing to trade his integrity for political office.

The most famous American duel was between Vice President Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. On the plains of Weehawken, New Jersey, in July 1804, Burr’s deadly shot mortally wounded Hamilton. Revisionist history, courtesy of a Broadway play, has made Hamilton a loin of the liberal left. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hamilton was a monarchist and perhaps the inventor of crony capitalism.

It was Burr who was a “disciple of the Enlightenment, but also an advocate for criminal justice reform, freedom of the press, women’s rights, and the rights of immigrants,” as noted by Nancy Isenberg in The Washington Post.

Burr killed Hamilton for a number of reasons, but primarily for, as Isenberg points out, “Burr’s villainy is actually the result of a smear campaign invented by his political enemies centuries ago, and then disseminated in newspapers, pamphlets, and personal letters during and after his lifetime.”

So if Dr. Tankersley is being vilified by lesser men, so be it. Many times a man’s detractors are a sign of his true character. Jokers may be nipping at his heels but honest people know it’s Tankersley who is right.

I have stood on the plains of Weehawken, high above the Hudson River and it felt good.

Let’s pray that someone takes a cue from the good doctor and champions the reform he is advocating.

The post What can we learn on the Plains of Weehawken? appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

If you’ve lost a loved one to drug abuse, as I have, anger and sadness might color your resolve to fight a war against a substance, rather than address the causes that drive someone into the arms of darkness.

We have been told by the President of the United States and the US Attorney General that there is an opioid epidemic and that war has been declared against it. But, we are ignoring the factors that lead to its use.

For decades, the government has engaged in a failed effort to attack the “supply-side” of the drug trade, while turning a blind eye to the real problem.

This week, Gov. Kay Ivey signed an Executive Order to create the Alabama Opioid Overdose and Addiction Council. Ivey said in a statement, “We must find ways to curtail this crisis in Alabama. I look forward to reviewing the Council’s recommendations for strategies to reduce the number of deaths and other effects caused by opioid misuse in our state.”

Gov. Ivey creates new Council on Opioid addiction

Gov. Ivey is right that we must find ways to curtail the crisis, but how we address it will be crucial to any hope for success.

Prescription opioids like Vicodin, Percocet and OxyContin are now so-called gateway drugs. And while the use of prescription opioid has decreased (just as the government found it a problem) deaths from narcotics such as heroin and fentanyl are rising.

All of these drugs have one thing in common: they dull the perception of pain, physically, mentally, and emotionally.

The President, during an August address to Congress, gave his thoughts on the proliferation of drug use and illegal distribution saying, “We must set realistic objectives, giving our foremost attention domestically to those drugs that pose the greatest threat to health, and to our ability to reduce crime. Since heroin, barbiturates and other sedative/hypnotic drugs account for 90 percent of the deaths from drug abuse, they should receive our principal emphasis.”

Sounds relevant? It was President Jimmy Carter who spoke those words on August 2, 1977, almost 40 years to the date.

It is abundantly apparent the endless war on drugs is a failure because the government is attacking a thing and not confronting the very human problems.

Yet, it now seems inevitable that we will engage in another costly “War on Drugs” while ignoring mental illness, poverty, and the other causes of drug use.

A border wall is one proposal from the current administration to stop illegal opioids from entering the country. But a wall between Mexico and the United States will be about as effective in stopping drug trafficking as The Maginot Line was in stopping German hordes during The Battle of France.

Many individuals who once depended on a doctors prescription for opioids have turned to street drugs like heroin because it is “cheaper” and “easier to find” despite the legal problems not associated with prescription opioids.

Perhaps Wal Mart and CVS are better suppliers of painkillers than street gangs or cartels.

Four decades after Carter’s address, bold headlines like, “STAT Forecast: Opioids could kill nearly 500,000 Americans in the next decade” are rallying lawmakers and law enforcement officers to act. But what action? To what end?

STAT forecast: Opioids could kill nearly 500,000 Americans in the next decade

Attacking a substance will never stop what drives an individual to drug abuse, nor will it cure the ills that father such madness. Perhaps more alarming in this new fight against substance abuse is that lawyers stand to personally profit by suing drug manufacturers as they did in the 1990s with tobacco makers.

Multiple states are pursuing litigation that targets big pharma just as they did big tobacco. Is this the best means of stemming a tide of substance abuse that may already be in decline or is this something else?

Lawyers see big profits from a renewed war on drugs as do state lawmakers. Law enforcement enabled by Legislators to fight one more war on drugs is folly and a futile remedy which may be worse than the cure.

In Alabama, thousands of good paying jobs go unfilled because the applicant can’t pass a drug test. It is also a fact that many can’t fill out the job applications because they can’t read or spell. Is there a cause and effect here?

Lack of education, poverty, and little hope for gainful employment are soul killers.

Many times, the quiet agony of living a life void of purpose is filled with the escape provided by an alluring chemical. Similarly, physical pain, real or imagined, cries out for simple relief. Few families avoid the disruptions and heartache caused by loved one who turns to substance abuse.

My older brother Tony’s wife (his “high school sweetheart”) found him lifeless in their bed with a syringe in his arm, dead at 29 years old. On a bright Carolina blue morning, I said the last words over my brother’s coffin. My mother’s pale green eyes, glistening in the sun without tears, watched as her first born was lowered into the ground never to see his face again.

A lethal mixture of heroin and cocaine was the compound, but eradicating opioids from the earth would not have saved his life because he would have founds another escape from a life he found unbearable. Could he have been saved by other means? We will never know.

My mother, rarely if ever, spoke of my brother’s death. But what she did talk about often was how it is our responsibility to tackle the hard things, not to avoid doing what’s right, even if it is difficult.

In one of our last conversations before her passing, she said to me as she had many times before, “It’s easy to do nothing, it’s is easy to do what is convenient. But life is not about what is easy or convenient. It is about making a difference.”

Drug abuse is a horrible thing but nipping around the edges of a problem while ignoring mental illness, poverty and a lack of education is not an answer it is what is easy and convenient.

Gov. Ivey is not known for taking the easy way out. Hopefully, she will continue on that path when it comes to finding a prescription for our present opioid problem.

The post What’s the prescription for the opioid problem? appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Brandon Moseley
Alabama Political Reporter

Monday, August 21, 2017, State Senator Greg Reed (R-Jasper) and State Representative Connie Rowe (R-Jasper) met with the Walker County Commission six days after voters went to the polls and rejected a sales tax that the Commission had billed as Walker County’s only way to avoid bankruptcy.  The voters said. “No” and now the Commission is looking for alternatives.

Sen. Reed said that he has been looking at several possibilities. Reed thanked the Commission for working with them in a collaborative manner.  The sales tax, “Was the best option.”  “We have spent the last 15 months working toward that option. That opportunity has come and gone.”

“Now we have to dig deeper.  I know your heart and mind and you want to do the best for Walker County. I have been on the telephone and I have spoken with Governor Kay Ivey (R). She is aware, she is interested and wants to know what she can do for Walker County.  She knows we have got issues. She is willing to dispatch State Finance Director Clinton Carter and a team of finance experts to analyze the issues that you know well. After our meeting Mr. Carter is expecting a call from me. I have spoken with Congressman Aderholt and there are grants that could be available for roads. That is a challenge because of the match.  I also talked with Sonny Brasfield at the Association of County Commissions Alabama.  He said his team was willing to come to Walker County and see what they can do.”

Walker County Commissioner Keith Davis said the majority of the people in the rural areas want their roads fixed.  I don’t want to go bankruptcy.  And I love our employees.  They can’t go from five days a week to three days. Bankruptcy and hurting our employees is two things I don’t want to do.

Walker County Commissioner Steven Aderholt said, “Looking at the numbers we can come up with a budget, but there is no money for roads. The last five years we have worked very hard not to lay off a single person.  Looking at these numbers that won’t be possible going forward.”

Commissioner Aderholt said that in the seventies and eighties Walker County received over $one million in coal severance money every year and then asphault and gravel cost ten percent of what they do now.  The severance check is 15 to 20 percent of what it was in the eighties. The money has gone away and the coal business is not coming back to be what it used to be. The People in Walker County said that they do not want to pay any more taxes,”

State Representative Connie Rowe said, “We are certainly all in this together.  Not only because of the positions we hold but also because of the citizens we serve. Bankruptcy is the last possible option.  That is not something that we should more toward.”

Rowe said, “Clinton Carter is extremely highly respected regarding government financing. He is a impressive sharp fellow.  We continue to be very supportive of you as individuals and the commission collectively. My family has been in this county for 12 generations.”

Aderholt said that $1.2 million is being pulled out of the $1.8 million for roads and bridges to the General Fund. According to the county engineer they only have enough money in the budget to maintain 35 miles of road in each district.  Emphasis will be on the most traveled roads in each district.  As the roads deteriorate every side road will go back to gravel.

County Commission Chairman Jerry Bishop said that the Commission maintains seven buildings and they need work.  “When I came down here we had 20 buckets, we have got that down to 10. Some people are not going to like what we are going to have to do.”

Commissioner Jeff Burrough said that a large county like Jefferson can go into bankruptcy and can recover.  “We can’t.  Greene County never recovered from its bankruptcy.  I am committed to this county. we live in the county. I could choose to live in other places, I don’t because I love Walker County. All options are on the table.”

In 2002 an earlier commission borrowed $9.5 million and deferred interest and principle payments for ten years.  That growing debt is now at $25 million and Walker County has to begin making $1.5 million a year payments on that debt early next year.

Commissioner Ralph Williams said that when Commissioners across the State receive their training, Walker County is used as the example of what not do.

Com. Aderholt said that the coming budget cuts will be, “very impactful” and could “start as soon as this week.”

The tax proposal would have generated $7 million a year.  Opponents questioned why only $1.5 million of that would go to debt reduction and questioned the need for the county to be so dramatically increasing government spending.  Walker County already has a 2 cent sales tax; but most of that is earmarked for the schools. The “NO”s won out 6564 (52.1 percent) to 6034 for the “YES”s (47.9 percent).  35 of the 46 boxes chose no.

The post Walker County has no easy answers for financial mess appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

At a recent press gaggle,  a reporter asked Governor Kay Ivey what the chances of Alabama passing a lottery are? Alabama is one of only six states that does not have some form of lottery. Her statement while clear to those who understand Alabama’s 1901 Constitution was taken out of context to say that the Governor opposed letting the people vote on a lottery.

APR reached out to Gov. Ivey’s office to clarify her position on whether the voters of Alabama should decide the fate of a lottery and not politicians.

“Governor Ivey absolutely supports the people’s right to vote on a constitutional amendment allowing a lottery in Alabama,” answered Ivey Press Secretary Daniel Sparkman. With under 20 words, Gov. Ivey showed the honest leadership, which has earned her a positive approval rating of 64 percent among all Alabamians and 74 percent among Republicans.

Past Governors have dodged or equivocated on the issue while others acted as if they were protecting unruly children from running amuck.

As Ivey’s spokesperson Sparkman points out, passing Legislation allowing the people an up or down vote of a lottery is completely controlled by the Legislative Branch and not the Governor’s Office.

“That is an issue that has to be tackled by the Legislature,” said Sparkman, “because bills creating or amending constitutional amendments are not sent to the Governor but directly to the people for approval.”

However, knowing that Gov. Ivey supports the people’s right to decide is a significant step toward finally putting this decisive matter to rest. As Gov. Ivey alluded too at the press gathering, a statewide lottery is very popular among voters with even Republican’s favoring a constitutional measure by over 60 percent.

There is already gambling in the State, as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians control a massive monopoly over gaming, thanks to former Gov. Bob Riley and current Senator Luther Strange when he was Attorney General. Both men relying on a controversial opinion by one of Riley’s junior attorneys, and later rulings by handpicked judge declared local constitutional amendments didn’t mean what the voters thought they said.

After spending nearly ten million in taxpayer dollars on Riley’s and Strange’s bingo raids, the State is no closer to addressing an issue easily settled by letting the people vote.

In the past Republican State lawmakers were reluctant to pass legislation for a vote on a Constitutional Amendment that would have paved the way for a lottery, claiming their constituents opposed such measure. However, this worry has not caused Republican legislators from taking a campaign contribution from outside gaming interests who want to protect their turf.

Finally, Alabama has a Governor who doesn’t see the State’s citizens as children who can make up their minds but stands by the cherished value of letting the people and not the politicians decide.

Now it is up to lawmakers to show the same leadership as Gov. Ivey by putting the burden of the gaming issue in the people’s hands.

The post Does Governor Ivey support a vote on the lottery? appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

Most people are familiar with the phrase, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” but the context from which the thought is drawn is seldom mentioned. In a series of letters, Lord Acton argues that kings and clergy should be judged by the same standards as everyone else. In the same paragraph as his most famous quote, Lord Acton also writes, “There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.”

Our nation’s founding fathers understood that our union was always just one election away from being ripped apart by human passions, which are so easily ignited by a quest for power.

Today, I see fear and hate, hear jealousy and greed, and smell the foul stench of selfish corruption that threatens to invade the very soul of our Republic. It seems we are only 140 characters away from a “we” verses “them” uprising that is ruinous to a democratic republic such as ours.

But what do I know?

Maybe too much time reading about the birth of our nation, the rise of the American experiment, and the daring wisdom of our founding fathers is why I turned out so badly. Then again, could it be all those superhero comics that gave me hope one man or woman could perform amazing feats like Superman’s never-ending battle for truth, justice, and the American way?

What a wasted youth.

The fault could be my parents, who encouraged me to watch William F. Buckley Jr. and Dick Cavett. Didn’t they understand that listening to opposing viewpoints could cause a deep-seated personality disorder that would lead to weighing arguments in light of evidence? How was I to grow sturdy and strong without a daily dose of confirmation bias?

All those books. All that listening to smart people with differing opinions … terrible, just terrible.

It made me think that I was thinking, and as Sylvester the Cat said, “The shame, the horror.”

Suffering succotash, what a waste it all was, squandering my youth believing honesty, integrity, hard work, and service to others built character.

Character, right? Who needs that anymore?

Even worse were all those misspent decades prayerfully studying scripture to gain understanding and wisdom to discern good from evil.

Add to all that the fact that my life’s work is dedicated to a “fake” industry that hates America, and my existence is about as worthless as a hammered cow patty.

Of course, I’m not so foolish as to believe that listening, learning, or giving your life in service to something greater than yourself is a waste, but it’s tempting when I look around at the current political landscape.

The Republican Party is so far adrift that neither Buckley nor Ronald Reagan would recognize it. Likewise, the Democratic Party would be entirely foreign to a JFK or FDR.

It is my policy to keep my opinions on national matters private on these pages because our mission is to cover State politics.

However, after seeing President Donald Trump’s treatment of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and other good men and women, after witnessing his equivocation on racist hate and hearing him time and again degrade the office of the presidency, my conscience will no longer allow me to remain silent. I hope this will be my last time to write on the subject — for which many of you will be grateful.

Our country is in desperate need of moral clarity because our government is being debased by arrogance, lies, and a willing denial and even acceptance of intolerance and violence.

Our founding president, George Washington, set the tone for those who would follow him by displaying wisdom, temperance, and impeccable character.

In a letter to the Jewish congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, he assured the assembly that, “the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens.”

However, today we are told that those who chant, “Jews will replace us,” have some fine people in their ranks. As the son-in-law of a man who endured the horrors of a Nazi starvation camp, it’s hard to imagine any man who wears a swastika or hoists the Nazi flag as a fine person.

Recently, someone said to me, “This is payback for the years Obama pissed on us.”

Payback, really? That’s what this is all about?

Another individual, with whom I no longer associate, said after Obama’s election, “They elected that [N-word] again, I hope to one day walk over the dead bodies of those who put him in office.”

Was Obama ever as bad as his critics claim, or was he as good as his champions believed? It’s doubtful.

During Barack Obama’s presidency, certain religious leaders proclaimed our nation was experiencing heavenly wrath and that God sent hurricanes to punish us for Obama’s heresy. Is Hurricane Harvey, which is now covering Texas in a deluge, a delayed reaction?

It would seem only a false prophet or a fool would attribute a devastating hurricane as God’s punishment for one president and not another.

When hatred is based on lies, does it matter why they hate?

I’ve been horrified and sorely disappointed in certain men of the cloth in our state who remain quiet and even defend these outrages.

The other day, I spoke with a minister I have respected over the years and to whom I’ve taken my worries. We talked about scripture as we often do, but when I asked him how to square our president’s character, words, and actions to biblical principles, he recited the same line as others, “He is appointing conservative judges.”

How many judges will be needed to restore decency, the rule of law, and the reputation of our nation?

Like many of our citizens, I pray daily for our State and country’s leaders, in that we might live a quiet and peaceful life as instructed by scripture, but just as Jesus ran the money changers from the temple, I’m ill-disposed to remain complacent in the face of growing dishonesty and discord.

I wish President Trump success as leader of our nation. However, as a man, Mr. Trump’s sense of American values and mine diverge greatly, even when it comes to basic human decency.

So, here we are. The press is an enemy of the State, lies told under the mantle of the presidency are simply jokes we don’t get, and if a buddy is charged with disobeying a federal order then lies about it, he should be pardoned.

OK, what next?

Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.”

Jefferson was a smart man; too bad I wasted all that time believing him.

I’ve never thought America wasn’t great. So, the red cap emblazoned with “Make America Great Again” was, to me, a marketing slogan at best, or at its worst, a cynical mockery of our great nation.

For me, like President Reagan, America remains a shining city on a hill that stands as the last great refuge for those longing for freedom. Our Republic is built on the promise of the Declaration of Independence and solidified by our Constitution.

But what do I know?

All is vanity and a vexation of the spirit, but it is not a waste.

The post All that wasted time appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

Labor Day celebrations began at the height of the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s. It became a national holiday in 1884, a time of abject poverty for many and spectacular prosperity for a few. Over time, the holiday became the unofficial end of summer and also the date when wearing white clothing, especially for women, was seen as inappropriate.

What lies behind the tradition of “No white after Labor Day”?

While there are varying stories on the fashion rule’s origin, there is little doubt as to why it became an inviolate custom.

Labor Day, according to the Department of Labor, “constitutes a yearly national tribute to the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country.”

Perhaps a lack of irony is the most undervalued characteristic of the American conscience, given that Labor Day sprang to life at a time when the average American worker clocked a 12-hour work day seven days a week just to make ends meet. It was also a period when even preteen boys and girls toiled away in mills, sweatshops and mines to help put food on the family table.

After the Civil War, a new moneyed class emerged in society, thanks to new technology and manufacturing. These newly-minted interlopers seriously threatened the old money elites who couldn’t imagine unwittingly hobnobbing with the vulgar rich, as they were sometimes known.

Among the many rules and bylaws meant to exclude others by race, religion and gender on all fronts, it was the women of high-society who adopted strict dress codes to distinguish themselves from the nouveau riche.

As Kathy Benjamin notes, “By the 1880s, in order to tell who was acceptable and who wasn’t, the women who were already ‘in’ felt it necessary to create dozens of fashion rules that everyone in the know had to follow. That way, if a woman showed up at the opera in a dress that cost more than most Americans made in a year, but it had the wrong sleeve length, other women would know not to give her the time of day.”

Laura Fitzpatrick writing for Time found, “By the 1950s, as the middle class expanded, the custom had calcified into a hard-and-fast rule. Along with a slew of commands about salad plates and fish forks, the no-whites dictum provided old-money élites with a bulwark against the upwardly mobile.”

However, social society in America is not fixed in a way that a smart up-and-comer can’t cross its barriers.

As Fitzpatrick wrote, “Such mores were propagated by aspirants too: those savvy enough to learn all the rules increased their odds of earning a ticket into polite society.”

For politicos, Labor Day in an election year marks the beginning of campaign season. It’s a time for solidifying a team, planning strategy and, above all, raising money — lots of money.

Successful politicians learn the rules:

Tout humble beginnings.

Cite business experience.

Pander to the base.

Kiss babies and the back sides of political power brokers.

Don’t mention any policy that sounds remotely intelligent, and if all else fails, blame Democrats who haven’t been in power for almost eight years.

Also, leave the Rolex and Mercedes at the house — they make working folks wonder and prosecutors curious.

Try not to fail in lust or love on the campaign trail.

And finally, never think we at APR are not watching.

You may break these rules at your peril but never, under any circumstance, wear white after Labor Day.

Then we’ll all know you just don’t get it.

The post Why not white? appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

It’s been 16 years since 19 hijackers flew jet airliners into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania. We are told to “Never Forget.”

In the years since 9/11, I’ve asked myself if I should never forget or always remember? There is, at least in my mind, a difference.

My wife, Susan, and I were living in New York City on Sep. 11, 2001, and heard the first airplane fly over on its path toward death and destruction in our adopted city. Much has happened to our nation and to us since that bright fall morning.

Our office was mere blocks from the World Trade Center, a place we had visited frequently and where we were scheduled to meet our attorneys on Thursday, Sept. 13, two days later. One of our lawyers left his office on the 85th floor of tower two in an elevator and walked out just as the second plane hit. The other, Joanne, did not. Her body was never found. She had recently planned a move to Arizona, but her hopes and dreams were buried in an empty casket in upstate New York.

What began as our nation’s resolve to hold those who attacked us on 9/11 responsible became a never-ending war at home and abroad.

Fear remains the most recognizable legacy of the attacks here at home.

When did the citizens of our great country become cowering masses? Was the American will forged with trembling hands or cowardly minds? Even here in Alabama, far from the media markets terrorists crave, there is fear.

The troubles in the Middle East do not exist because of their hatred of our freedom, and it is not a new phenomenon. The roots of today’s bitter battles are found in the aftermath of World War I, known at the time as The Great War.

As writer Scott Anderson found in his book “Lawrence in Arabia,” it was the West meddling in foreign affairs that shaped the Middle East thought the Sykes-Picot Agreement, the Balfour Declaration and the Arab revolt. In a New York Times review in 2013, Alex Von Tunzelmann wrote of “Lawrence in Arabia” and said, “It is arresting to look back 100 years and see a familiar picture: Britain, France, Russia and the United States gingerly stirring the pot of the Middle East from as far away as possible.” Anderson shows how reckless interventions in the past create the turmoil of the present. But it appears that far too often our leaders ignore the past wanting to create the world anew in their image.

Even now the federal government stands ready to deploy more troops in this so-called War on Terror.

Our state has sent more than its share of fighting men and women to the front line of the wars spurred by the events of 9/11.

Many of our warriors were just children when 15 citizens of Saudi Arabia and others from the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon drove planes into symbols of our country’s financial and military might. We now ask our nation’s children to finance and to fight a war where there are only means with no end.

Perhaps a quote attributed to Winston Churchill is appropriate, “Americans will always do the right thing — after exhausting all the alternatives.”

For most of our nation’s history, we have been reluctant warriors, suspicious of foreign entanglements and adventures. We are horrible nation builders because when we win a regional war, we immediately return what we’ve won.

On 9/11 we were attacked at home, but we were also attacked in 1812 in a war that lasted nearly four years. As history.com notes, “the War of 1812 is remembered as a relatively minor conflict in the United States and Britain.” However, “it looms large for Canadians and for Native Americans, who see it as a decisive turning point in their losing struggle to govern themselves.”

As a nation, we’ve pretty much forgotten the War of 1812, and we barely remember when the British razed Washington. On Aug. 24, 1814, British forces occupied the city and set fire to the White House, the Capitol, as well as other public buildings. The occupation lasted only about 26 hours, but the British siege ravaged the capital and shocked the nascent Republic.

Instead of instilling fear in the hearts of our citizens, it ushered in the Era of Good Feelings, in which confidence, not cowardliness, ruled the day.

For me, the United States will always remain the land of the free and the home of the brave.

As President Ronald Reagan said overlooking France’s Omaha Beach on the 40th Anniversary of D-Day, “We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will always be prepared, so we will always be free.”

For me, the phrase “Never Forget” stirs an air of revenge, where “Always Remember” evokes a soul’s commitment.

The human mind has a great capacity to see the past as better than it actually was; we most often can think back on the terrible times and see the good that surrounds a tragedy.

So, today I will remember the kindness of strangers on 9/11, the way a city and a nation joined together to help those in need. I will remember the men and women who fought for us after that day and continue to do so. Yes, I will always remember we were attacked, but America’s greatest strength lies in its ability to look forward to brighter days, not behind at our darkest hours.

Let’s always remember that part of the American Spirit.

The post Always remember that’s the American Spirit appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

A recent issue of “The Business Advocate,” a publication which is a part of the Business Council of Alabama, features a full-page photo of Chairman Billy Canary with a headline proclaiming, “Business Council Governmental Affairs Conference Best Ever.” The commanding picture with its fraudulent headline is an example of how a once important business organization has been co-opted for personal gain.

Canary has gained considerable wealth and power as BCA’s chieftain, but today, he finds himself under fire.

“Canary is not only a pariah in Washington, he is a joke in Montgomery. Most folks thought he would be indicted with Mike Hubbard. His credibility has continued to diminish since that time. His cavalier, sinister, overbearing and boorish New York behavior has made him a caricature,” as the political historian and columnist Steve Flowers observed in a recent article for The Alabama Political Reporter.

Alabama’s senior U.S. Senator Richard Shelby has personally informed politicos and business leaders that he considers Canary’s persona non grata. He has made that clear to all with ears to hear and half a brain to understand, and his office doors are shut to all who support Canary.

It is now widely known that Alabama Power Company’s C.E.O. Mark Crosswhite has delivered a similar message, even telling Canary and individual board members that if Canary stays, the power company will leave BCA. Even under the crushing weight of such absolute denunciation, BCA board members seem prepared to accept a Pyrrhic victory rather than toss Canary back on the dung heap that spawned him.

“When Dick Shelby says it time to go, pack your bags, when the company says go you’d better already be on the road,” one political operative explained. “Does Perry Hand want to be the man leading BCA when Alabama Power leaves?” he also added. Hand is president and CEO of Volkert Inc. from Mobile and BCA’s first vice chairman. He will chair BCA next year.

Other board members are aware of Shelby and Crosswhite’s displeasure, but they remain loyal to Canary like supine lackeys. “Canary may hang on, but the organization will be in ruins,” one former board member explained.

Formerly admired by business and public officials, BCA is now referred to by many as the new AEA, a pejorative reference to the once powerful Alabama Education Association, which served as the state democratic powerhouse before Canary, Speaker Hubbard and former Gov. Bob Riley brought it to heel.

Riley, Canary and convicted felon, former Speaker of the House Hubbard forged a Triumvirate to manipulate state government for personal gain as revealed at Hubbard’s criminal trial. During testimony, Riley, Canary and others in their cabal described how they used the speaker’s office under Hubbard to shape legislation that favored business interests aligned with the trio. It was even made known that Canary, lobbyist Dax Swatek and John Ross were Hubbard’s kitchen cabinet, which met daily during legislative sessions to determine the body’s agenda. Canary and Swatek remain fixtures at the State House, while Ross hustled off to Memphis to work for a company owned by Republican Senate President Pro Tem Del Marsh. Ross’ wife, Allison, recently took control of Yellowhammer News, an organization closely allied with Canary, Swatek and the BCA during the Hubbard years. Many questions surround the sudden departure of Josh Jones, who only months ago purchased Yellowhammer News from its founder, Cliff Sims, who left to work in President Trump’s administration.

Even now, Riley, Hubbard and Canary have a fifth column spread throughout state government, law-enforcement and the legal community who, like sleeper cells, are waiting for an opportunity to stir mischief for profit.

Former Riley staffers, and those who enabled Hubbard’s schemes to use his office for personal benefit, serve as top lobbyists at marquee law firms, others are agency heads, as well as advisors in the state’s executive branch. Like Canary, none of the acolytes have proven to be the best or brightest; only their political connections keep them employed.

As Hubbard noted in his vanity tribute to himself, “Stealing the Statehouse,” Canary was essential in the successful takeover of state government by “pro-business” Republicans in 2010. Many of those who owed their elections to Riley, Hubbard and Canary have moved on or out. Few among the current leadership owe anything to Canary, and it showed in the last legislative session.

BCA’s board members who hold Canary’s fate are:

Jeff Coleman
Chairman
President and CEO of Coleman Worldwide Moving, Dothan
Triumvirate

Perry Hand
First Vice Chairman
President & CEO, Volkert, Inc., Mobile

Mike Kemp
Second Vice Chairman
President & CEO, Kemp Management Solutions, LLC, Birmingham

Denson Henry
Secretary
Vice President, Henry Brick Co., Selma

Tommy Lee
Immediate Past Chairman
CEO, Vulcan, Inc., Foley

C. Charles Nailen Jr.
Treasurer
President, BBG Specialty Foods Inc., Dothan

Fournier J. “Boots” Gale, III
Legal Counsel
Senior Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary, Regions Financial Corporation, Birmingham

Will these men risk their reputations and the future of BCA for a pariah, or will they heed sound wisdom as given by Shelby, Crosswhite and others and show him the door?

The post Does a pariah deserve even a Pyrrhic victory? appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

After President Donald J. Trump’s speech in Huntsville Friday night, it is tempting to feel sorry for the state’s appointed junior U.S. Sen. Luther Strange, but as it turns out, it was a fleeting bit of nausea.

If Strange wins, he can thank President Trump. If he loses, he has himself to blame.

Four lines in the president’s nearly 90-minute talk should leave Strange and his supporters wondering why they even held the rally.

During the event, President Trump said the following:

“And I might have made a mistake. And I’ll be honest; I might have made a mistake.”

“And I told Luther, I have to say this, if his opponent wins, I’m going to be here campaigning like hell for him.”

“I don’t know him. I met him once.”

“I’m taking a big risk because if Luther does not make it, they are going to go after me.”

Like most presidents, Trump is loath to admit false steps, but twice he said endorsing Strange may have been an error.

During the debate, the night before Trump spoke in Huntsville, Strange hammered home the notion that he and the president were close friends and that Trump picked him over his opponent, Judge Roy Moore. Strange’s entire debate on Thursday consisted of Donald Trump likes me best, but President Trump undercut Strange’s best argument by saying, “I don’t know him. I met him once.”

Big Luther’s finishing argument for election boils down to this, “If you love the president you’re gonna like me,” or perhaps more simply put, “Big daddy likes me better than you Roy Moore.” *add raspberry sound effect*

Forget the fact that Trump thought he was responsible for Strange’s nickname “Big Luther,” which is a campaign moniker Strange has used since his failed run for Lt. Gov. in 2006, or that the president said, “The last thing I want to do is be involved in a primary, OK? I could be sitting home right now getting to watch some of the games tomorrow.” The real zinger of the night was, “And I told Luther, I have to say this, if his opponent wins, I’m going to be here campaigning like hell for him.”

Strange and Moore are very different men. One is a well-heeled politico with deep ties to Washington and Alabama’s power elites. The other an up-by-the-bootstraps fighter who rails against the D.C. and Montgomery sophisticates who consider him an embarrassment.

Moore spent 40 years kicking against the picks. Strange’s career as a lobbyist and politician is devoted to getting the best deal for those who own the oxcart Moore refuses to pull.

Strange’s political career saw success as a cog in the wheel of then Gov. Bob Riley’s 2010 victory plan. Riley’s goal was to retain power after he left the governor’s mansion through surrogates. Riley’s 2010 scheme would make Bradley Byrne governor, Mike Hubbard speaker, Del Marsh as Senate president pro tem and Luther Strange as attorney general. But AEA Secretary Paul Hubbert thwarted Riley’s efforts by supporting Robert Bentley, and as they say, the rest is history.

Alabama conservatives are crazy about Trump, seeing him as a man of the people. The president even he seems to find this a little amazing.

“Isn’t it a little weird when a guy who lives on 5th Avenue in the most beautiful apartment you’ve ever seen comes to Alabama and Alabama loves that guy?” Trump said during his Huntsville speech.

Strange said at Thursday’s debate that he and Trump shared the same background, and to a degree that is true, but not the way Strange hoped it would be interpreted.

Some call the president a racist, but maybe he’s a classist who lives in the most beautiful apartment you will never see or live in. Strange is a classist, and like Trump, he was also to the manner born. But that’s about where the two men diverge as Strange, at his core, is a country club Republican.

Some have compared Moore and Trump favorably in that both men are outsiders who want to drain the swamp that is Washington politics. Both men appear to be populist and neither of them mind spitting in the eye of establishment elites. Other than that example, there is a stark contrast and a broad valley that divides the two.

Trump’s victory hinged upon his promise to Make America Great Again. Moore wants to make our nation great again, but he says it must first be good again, and by that he means traditional values rooted in scripture and the constitution. Like him or not, Moore’s beliefs align with the majority of Alabama’s Republican primary voters. The same voters who love Trump trust Moore, and perhaps they love him more deeply. But don’t tell the president that because like others before him, he wants to be the bride at every the wedding, the baby at every christening and the corpse at every funeral.

Trump worries the blame will fall on him if Strange loses. Don’t worry, Mr. President, that won’t happen.

As a Moore supporter said, “If Big Luther wins he can thank Trump if he loses we can thank God.”

The post Moore supporter says, “If Strange wins thank Trump if he loses thank God” appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

The jubilation felt among hardcore conservatives over Judge Roy Moore’s win in the Republican primary runoff Tuesday night also brought recrimination from the Democratic left and the sophisticated right.

After Moore’s triumph, the wife of a top White House official wrote on social media, “For the first time in my life, I have to say, I’m embarrassed to say I’m from Alabama.”

Moore’s Democrat rival Doug Jones on the same night took to social media to announce, “After years of embarrassing headlines about the top public officials in this state, this race is about the people of Alabama and about choosing a candidate with character and integrity they can be proud of. I will never embarrass the people of Alabama.”

So, when the wife of a deputy chief of staff to the president is embarrassed by Moore’s election, and Democrat Jones promises he won’t embarrass the state; what is the message?

These views are perhaps shared by some Alabamians, but the vast majority who fulfilled their civic duty by voting on Tuesday chose Moore.

It’s not hard to see why Moore’s brand of conservatism might offend some because it is rigid and unmoved by urges of modernity. Moore stands for the traditional values of God, country and the U.S. Constitution. Is there shame in such beliefs? Why is Moore vilified for saying out loud what hundreds of thousands of church-going-Alabamans believe?

Moore is bombastic, confrontational and a religious street-fighter. Are we, as a state and nation, so delicate that dissenting voices are too harsh for the public forum?

Jones insinuates that Moore doesn’t have character or integrity; how absurd. Jones is either pandering to his base or doesn’t understand what those words mean. If being pro-life or for traditional marriage means a person lacks character, then there are a lot of unscrupulous people in our state. To believe that the only way for America to be great is for it to be morally good is not a foreign concept to most of us.

If the Ten Commandments offend you, it is not Moore who has a problem.

During his victory speech, Moore said he would support President Trump’s agenda, “As long as it’s constitutional, as long as it advances our society, our culture, our country, I will be supportive. … But we have to return to knowledge of God and the Constitution of the United States to the United States Congress.”

How can we ask for more from Alabama’s U.S. senator?

Yes, there are times when Moore’s turgid rhetoric has caused me to cringe and think, “Oops. He went a little too far with that one.” But the man believes what he says, and it is grounded in what many of our neighbors believe and our forbearers held sacred. As a nation, we have recognized the separation of church and state, but throughout our great nation, many people believe that our society is weakened when we remove God from country.

I’m not as right-wing as Moore, nor am I as fanatical about certain things, but I know the difference between an honest politician and one that’s bought and paid for. Years of observation has also given me some measure of insight in how to discern good and evil by a person’s actions. Moore is many things, but he’s not a crook; and he is a good person. He and I don’t have to agree on any issue for me to say those things about him as his life’s work, not his words, are his witness.

Who, then should be embarrassed?

Luther Strange should be ashamed because as attorney general, he accepted the Senate appointment from then Gov. Robert Bentley. Strange knew Bentley was under investigation by his office, but that didn’t matter… the golden ring was in sight. The people made Strange the state’s top law-enforcement officer. He should have shown more commitment to the voters who believed in him. But Big Luther did what weak men do. He took the easy path.

Republican U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should be ashamed. He was certainly humiliated in his failed attempt to meddle in our state’s politics. And his Senate Leadership Fund is a disgraceful organization, which flooded our state airwaves with profound lies about Moore. The NRA is a joke – don’t hold your breath for me to renew my membership – and the Business Council of Alabama is, well, beyond contempt.

Moore was twice removed from the state supreme court, and twice the people sided with Moore, sending him back into the political arena because they believe he was wronged by the state’s elite on the right and left. Who from the political class came to Moore’s defense when he was improperly indicted by a shadowy panel led by an elite corps of do-gooders? Where were those who beat the Bible to get elected, only to shrink from scriptural teaching when it became inconvenient or perilous? The Republican establishment abandoned Moore when he was judged by a unconstitutionally appointed court, but voters did not.

If elected U.S. Senator in December, those same people who ignored Moore’s treatment by the well-meaning left and cowardly right will be solicitous of his office, as if they had been his friends all along.

Others who must feel the sting of shame are Chief Justice Lyn Stuart, Justices Mike Bolin and Jim Main for their part in Moore’s removal from the bench.

We, as a state, should be embarrassed by our underperforming schools, our lack of good paying jobs and inadequate healthcare. Far too many of your people are unhealthy, under-educated and underemployed.

To be commended is Gov. Kay Ivey, who showed great wisdom and courage in moving the election of Jeff Sessions’ replacement in accordance with the state 1901 Constitution. Secretary of State John Merrill can hold his head high, as he worked with Ivey and her chief of staff, Steve Pelham, to follow the law and not the whims of Bentley and Washington insiders.

Alabama is home to good, honest and hardworking folks, and many of them find no shame in electing Moore.

Many of our state’s leading figures have given us a reason to hang our heads in shame. There are still some who hold power. For now the people have spoken, and they are not embarrassed by Judge Roy Moore. Are you?

The post Are you embarrassed? appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

Close to twelve hundred people filled Troy University’s Davis Theatre to watch the Montgomery premiere of Atticus v. The Architect last Sunday. The Alabama Political Reporter and The Voice of Alabama Politics sponsored the event because it was banned by the Capri Theater due to pressure from Leura Canary and her husband, BCA’s chieftain, Billy.

Our news organization is dedicated to the First Amendment and all that it stands for, even as politicians continue to lie with impunity by chanting a tired refrain of “Fake News.”

The First Amendment reads as follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Some of Montgomery’s power elites worked to abridge freedom of speech because it cast them in a negative light. Ironically, the Canarys’ actions ensured that even more people would see Atticus v. The Architect, as the Capri Theatre doesn’t have twelve hundred seats.

The film, produced and directed by Steve Wimberley, paints a very dark and detailed picture of the federal prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman, The Canarys are alleged to have played a significant role in framing Siegelman.  What the movie portrays is a political prosecution acted out on a grand scale. According to the film’s narrative, Karl Rove, “The Architect,” in conjunction with former Gov. Bob Riley, his son Rob and a small cast of other characters set out to destroy Siegelman.

APR and The V did not present the movie to re-adjudicate Siegelman’s trial, at which he was found guilty. Our mission, as always, is to bring information to light so that people can see all sides of an argument and decide for themselves. By all appearances, much of the evidence reported in Atticus v. The Architect was known, but certain key elements were left out of the jury trial as well as the appeals process. Especially illuminating was the role of President Barack Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, and his ties to Rove and Canary.

Filmmaker Wimberley said he wanted the audience to leave angry because of the injustice perpetrated by a few rogue agents bent on consolidating power in the Heart of Dixie. Siegelman said he was motivated to see that this could never happen to another individual.

Before APR’s four-year battle to expose former Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard for the crook he is, it would have been difficult to believe a cabal of ruthless political operatives could have construed such a sweeping conspiracy. However, having investigated Hubbard, Riley and Canary, it now not only seems possible; it is almost certainly probable.

The Riley machine, as exposed during Hubbard’s trial, is a finely tuned coterie of smart individuals dedicated to power and money. Hubbard was the weak-link that damaged the Riley brand and left Billy Canary hanging on to his job at BCA by a very thin thread.

From Citizen for a Better Alabama’s, participation in the bingo wars to the many deals Hubbard pushed through the state legislature to benefit the Rileys and Canarys, there is ample evidence to suspect many other nefarious deeds were carried out by this cell of self-serving agents.

Siegelman is no Atticus Finch, but despite the title of the film, it is a compelling documentary that weaves an all too familiar web of corruption seemingly inherent in our state.

As Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, “If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a state has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his house, what books he may read or what films he may watch.”

But that is exactly what the Canarys attempted to do, but a few individuals banded together to make sure that our constitutional rights were upheld.

No-one has the right to tell the people of our state what they can see, hear or think. In this case, our state motto prevailed. “We dare defend our rights,” as enshrined in our state’s Great Seal, means many things to many people. Far too often it has meant trampling on the rights of others.

It is often the worst people who rage against a free press and free speech.

One writer said the following, “It is the press, above all, which wages a positively fanatical and slanderous struggle, tearing down everything which can be regarded as a support of national independence, cultural elevation, and the economic independence of the nation.”

It is our prayer that we at APR will faithfully stand for free speech and a free press even while the shouts of fake news and oppression of symbolic protest is under siege at the highest levels of government. Here, for once in our state, those who fought for censorship failed.

Atticus v. The Architect, for us at APR and The V, was never about the subject of the documentary but about the substance of our beliefs in freedom.

The above quote is from Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Read it sometime. It sounds a lot like what we hear today.

The post The First Amendment lives appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

The National media, alt-right and even the left hope Judge Roy Moore’s win in the Republican primary signals a seismic movement toward more disruptive candidates in GOP primaries.

Those who hope to replicate Moore’s success in other states don’t seem to understand that Moore is not an insurgent candidate but a fixture of conservative politics in Alabama for decades.

While Moore appeals to the same base of conservatives as President Trump, the two couldn’t be more different.

But that doesn’t stop the media and those hopeful Trumpians from seeing an omen where none exists.

“Final Alabama election results show Trump losing to Steve Bannon with Moore victory,” was a typical tweet on election night. Continuing stories that cast Moore’s win as a proxy battle between the establishment and nationalist-populist wave started by President Trump and Bannon is an overblown narrative without much basis in fact.

With no disrespect, but neither Bannon or Trump should see Moore’s triumph as a referendum on their particular brand of republicanism.

To believe Moore’s victory portends the future of the U.S. Congress is akin to wishing for leprechauns or unicorns to magically appear over the Capitol.

Moore is a good-old-fashioned southern politico, one part populist, one part firebrand with a healthy measure of God, guns and country. Unlike many wannabes, Moore is the real deal, not an imitation. Appointed Etowah County Circuit Judge in 1992 by Republican Gov. Guy Hunt, Moore went on to win the seat in his own right in 1994 with 62 percent of the vote.

He was one of the first Republicans to win a county-wide seat in Alabama since the Reconstruction.

Upon his appointment in 1992, Moore hung his now-famous wooden Ten Commandments plaque in his courtroom. So anyone who thinks Moore is an upstart or a renegade doesn’t know much about the state’s history.

Moore is controversial, given to blistering sermons and polarizing political speech, but that is where any similarity between Trump, Bannon and Moore ends.

Moore is a devout Christian who is a firm constitutionalist. As he has said on numerous occasions, he thinks to make America great again, it must be good.

Why is Moore so widely vilified? Why is he considered out of the mainstream? Moore doesn’t think same-sex marriage is constitutionally sanctioned, and he believes federal courts shouldn’t ban prayer in school and at ball games, these are a few. He says these things with harsh, lacerating words that seem hateful. But while it is easy to portray him as a resident evil, his beliefs hardly put him outside the social-conservative wing of the Republican party.

Moore’s base also supports a president who is on his third marriage, thinks grabbing women by their genitals is a perk of being a celebrity and has a less than comfortable relationship with facts. Social conservatives have rallied behind a man who bullies his enemies and friends, demands loyalty while giving none in return and whose life has been directed by a moral compass generally unacceptable in the Christian faith without repentance.

In Trump, evangelicals believe that they have found a strong man who will protect the faith. In Moore, they actually have one who is unburdened by the moral ambiguities of the current president.

This is said not to defend Moore or demean the president. These are facts. Moore is a strong social conservative whose bombastic verve is unsettling to some.

Moore isn’t an anomaly; he’s just an old-school politico who knows how to win in the heart of Dixie.

Bannon and Trump will find out he’s a disrupter to those he believes betraying his faith and the constitution; something they would be wise to understand.

The media, the left and the right don’t get Moore.

Forget it, Jake; it’s Alabama.

The post Forget it, Jake; it’s Alabama appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

As is often the case, one country’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter; and likewise, one person’s anonymous source is a patriot and someone else’s traitor.

Like much in politics, traitor versus patriot largely depends on who’s blowing the whistle and who’s caught up in the malaise. The press who reported weekly on the so-called scandal against Gov. Don Siegelman’s administration were heroes, and their confidential informants were simply whistleblowers doing their duty, according to state Republicans. But when APR spent four years chronicling the wrongdoings of then Speaker Mike Hubbard, we were liars and worse, and our sources, well, they were false and dishonest. Of course, during the Siegelman era, the same was said by the Democrats.

It is a shame that partisan loyalty allows for so much mischief waved aside, as if being faithful to the team is more important than doing what is right. Perhaps being faithful to the law, moral conscience and decency are better qualities than blind allegiance to a party.

Recently, ALGOP Chair Terry Lathan said, “Any party member that anonymously shares inside organizational bumps or espouses their opinion with a lack of information to the press should be ashamed of themselves.” Here, perhaps channeling the party’s standard-bearer, she adds, “Hiding behind anonymity is cowardly.”

Lathan’s comments in context are not altogether misguided, as a party official should speak boldly about internal disputes. They also should talk to the press when their concerns are not taken seriously by leadership.

ALGOP Chair, Steering Committee reprimand Hooper

U.S. law holds that whistleblowers should come forward when they see wrongdoing, even if it is done anonymously. The first ever whistleblower protection law was enacted on July 30, 1778. Records from the Continental Congress show that the original resolution stated, “Resolved that it is the duty of all persons in the service of the United States … to give the earliest information to Congress or any other proper authority of any misconduct, frauds or misdemeanors committed by any persons in the services of these states, which may come to their knowledge.”

On the 236th anniversary of the first whistleblower law, a unanimous, bi-partisan resolution passed designating July 30 as National Whistleblower Appreciation Day.

The measure was sponsored by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ron Wyden, D-Ore. Grassley noted on the occasion, “Whistleblowers are pivotal pieces of the oversight puzzle. Their work ensures that our system of checks and balances operates effectively.” Wyden added, “Individuals with the courage to blow the whistle in the face of government wrongdoing, waste or abuse are an integral part of our democracy. Too often, whistleblowers risk retaliation and scorn for drawing attention to misdeeds, so it is only right for the Senate to recognize their vital contributions.”

When reporting on government abuse, waste or fraud, anonymous sources are vital and often are the only way to get to the root of corruption. “Anonymous sources,” is a misnomer because the individual, or individuals, are known to the journalist and are generally someone who is a trusted government figure. They remain anonymous to the public so they can perform the critical task of helping a reporter find facts. Most often, their tips allow a reporter to find corroborating documents to expose the truth.

In a state like Alabama, where the open records act is rarely adheres to, and any tinpot agency lawyer can claim bogus privilege background sources are the only guides to facts concerning fraud, waste and incompetence. Informants who aid the press are placing their jobs, and in some cases even their lives, in danger. Their confidentiality is utmost to them and a trust that a good journalist will never betray.

According to the Society of Professional Journalist Ethics Committee Position Papers, “Few ethical issues in journalism are more entangled with the law than the use of anonymous sources. Keep your promise not to identify a source of information, and it’s possible to find yourself facing a grand jury, a judge, and a jail cell. On the other hand, break your promise of confidentiality to that source, and it’s just possible you might find yourself on the receiving end of a lawsuit.” In addition any reporter who exposes a anonymous sources under any circumstance is ruined.

President Trump thinks leakers should be jailed, but so far, unlike the Obama administration, he has not acted on those words. In 2013, it came to light that the Obama administration’s justice department, under U.S. Attorney Eric Holder, had named Fox News reporter, James Rosen, a “criminal co-conspirator” under the Espionage Act of 1917 to gain access to his emails and phone records. The Washington Post, in 2013, reported that the Justice Department had monitored reporter Rosen’s State Department visits through phone traces, the timing of calls and his emails. The state alleged Rosen received leaks of classified information in 2009 about North Korea.

During Obama’s tenure as president, seven Americans working for the U.S. Government, or government contractors with security clearances, faced criminal charges under the Espionage Act of 1917 because of alleged leaks to members of the press or online outlets. The administration said it didn’t target journalists, but Rosen proves that’s not the whole truth.

Hubbard targeted us, so did Gov. Bentley and others. We have been mocked for using anonymous sources and recently called fake news.

The real fake news almost always comes from corrupt politicians, not a journalist. In our state, the press, in general, serves as stenographers due to corporate pressure to sell advertisements, which many times means not offending anyone with power.

More often, it is the state that is the enemy of the people through corruption and greed. The free press, as envisioned by the founding generation, were the watchers who protected the people from government misdeeds and overreach. So, the next time someone uses the term “fake news” because a journalist uses an anonymous source, remind them what the Continental Congress declared 235 years ago. It is the duty of all persons to report misconduct, frauds or misdemeanors committed by any persons in the services of these states.

That means the press, too.

The post Doing our duty as free press appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

A recent poll of the U.S. Senate race in Alabama is giving liberal Democrats hope that Judge Roy Moore’s beliefs are too far out of the mainstream for him to win in December’s general election.

A recent Fox poll shows Moore and former U.S. Attorney Doug Jones in a statistical dead heat for the U.S. Senate. This outlier survey is reverberating through the national media, and here at home, as a glimmer of hope for progressives who wish to defeat a man they called bigoted, hateful and a lawbreaker.

This seems like an exercise in magical thinking of the kind that handed the White House to a man who is seen by many as void of character with only a slight notion of reality. But some of the same Democrats that put President Trump in office are needed to lift Jones in the Senate. Democrats myopathy on left-wing social issues and identity politics has resonated adversely with white middle-class and rural voters in Alabama who care more about jobs, education and their children’s future than who’s sleeping with whom or who gets married or uses what bathroom.

Rural Alabama is Moore country, not because the people who call it home are stupid, mean, or ill-informed; it’s because they are rooted in traditional ideas of faith, community and family. Jones will likely lose the rural vote by two to one.

Jones is a decent man and the great white hope for liberals, but to win, Jones will have to sweep Jefferson County with big wins in predominantly African-American communities. Just the other day, I asked some of those voters what Jones has done for Birmingham and Jefferson County? The blank stares told the story. When I asked a prominent black doctor if he thought Moore was a bigot, he said, “From all I know is he is a good man.” When asked about Jones, that same vacant expression.

It may be easy to hate Moore because he has not excepted secular modernity the way Jones has, but hundreds of thousands of Alabamians think like Moore and not Jones, especially evangelicals. Jones’ stand on social issues, not Moore’s, is seen as out of touch by many of those voters, especially Jones’ support of late-term abortion.

When Moore was suspended from the bench for his order in Obergefell v. Hodges, critics claimed: “love wins.”

However, Jones’ support of a woman’s right to abort a child after 20 weeks is seen as more radical than any of Moore’s opinions by a majority of Alabama voters.

Liberals may think that Moore’s beliefs are extreme, but I would contend that most Alabamians view Jones’ as down-right murderous. They might even ask, “How does love win when a viable fetus is scrambled like an egg before being sucked from a woman’s womb after 20 weeks?” Recently, I received an text with a friend’s sonogram showing a perfectly healthy 20-week old unborn child. Under what circumstance should we as a society feel it is morally just to abort that baby?

The nation’s largest denomination – the Roman Catholic Church – opposes abortion in all circumstances. The second-largest church, the Southern Baptist Convention, also opposes abortion, although it does allow an exception in cases where the mother’s life is in danger, according to a Pew Study. The same is true of the predominantly black African Methodist Episcopal Church.

In a Facebook post on my timeline, a woman wrote, “I’m pro-life, but I’ll be voting for Doug Jones because Roy Moore will not stand for families, healthcare, better wages or civil rights.” Really? I thought, how do you know? Have you ever seen any of his many legal opinions that sided with the little guy over big business or his writings on other areas of the law?

Columnists continue writing that Moore was twice removed from the state supreme court. That’s not accurate. He was removed once and was suspended once under very suspicious circumstances. Funny how facts never get in the way of a good narrative.

I am not an apologist for Moore, but he is not evil, and painting him as so just shows a failed understanding of the traditional values held by many Alabamians. We may disagree with his stand on specific issues, but we should not merely brush his beliefs aside by name-calling without thought. And if that offends some, then perhaps they are harboring bias, as well.

When Moore goes to Washington, he will bring a conservative view of the Constitution and its role in governing. That’s a good thing because it is slowly being degraded by Republicans and Democrats, alike.

Those who think love is letting people marry who they chose, while believing it’s okay to kill a 20-week old fetus, fail to fully understand what love is.

The post Does love win when a 20-week old baby is aborted? Some liberals think so appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

October 21 of this year marked the third anniversary of former Republican Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard’s indictment on 23 counts of felony public corruption. The day passed without notice except to wonder about his legacy and to question, “Why is he not in jail?”

Hubbard was found guilty of 12 of the 23 indictments and was sentenced on July 8, 2016, to four years in state prison, eight years probation and ordered to pay a $210,000 fine.

To this day, Hubbard remains free on bond awaiting a ruling on his appeal. Given the state of the criminal appeals court and the state’s supreme court, Hubbard will likely see another anniversary of his indictment before he sees the inside of a state penitentiary.

Lawyers will say there are not two justice systems; one for the rich and connected and another for the poor and friendless. Try telling that to a penniless man convicted of stealing over a million dollars like Hubbard.

What is the legacy of Hubbard’s conviction?

A building on the Auburn University campus still bears his name, as does Mike Hubbard Blvd. Why do the city of Auburn and the university resist erasing its most notorious felon’s name from these sites? Are Hubbard’s friends at the university and city hall afraid of offending him or do they hold out hope that Hubbard will escape justice? His name brings shame and doesn’t deserve to remain on a public road or building paid for with tax dollars. What are Auburn’s board of trustees and the city council thinking?

Perhaps adorning public property with a conman’s name is the least egregious reminder of Hubbard’s corruption.

Efforts to clarify and strengthen ethics laws under the leadership of the attorney general’s office died with the appointment of Steve Marshall by debased former Republican Gov. Robert Bentley. Marshall, a former Democrat appointee of another disgraced governor, Don Siegelman, has accepted campaign contributions from those who would see Hubbard be the last amoral politician convicted under the state’s ethics code. Marshall is also accepting large donations from those who would see Hubbard set free on appeal. Marshall, a thin-skinned neophyte, continues playing with fire while shunning adult advice as he seeks to hold onto a position he doesn’t deserve and is ill-equipped to handle.

Another troubling reminder of Hubbard’s petty rule over state politics lives on in Republican State Rep. Mike Ball’s efforts to reshape state ethics laws to protect dishonest lawmakers like Hubbard. Ball remains chair of the House Ethics Committee. He continues to press the idea that he will use his power as head of ethics committee to pass legislation to alter state ethics laws to favor the corrupt political class.

Ball, a former law-enforcement officer, has for nearly two years falsely accused Special Prosecution Division Chief Matt Hart of criminal activities. Ball continues to claim Hart tried to suppress his political activities. A claim that was soundly rejected by Hubbard’s trial judge, Jacob Walker III.

Ball Claims Political Suppression

Is Ball merely a stooge shilling for Hubbard, or is he actually a deranged troglodyte intent on changing state ethics beyond enforcement?

There was hope that after Hubbard’s conviction the state ethics commission might perform its duty as envisioned at its creation. Instead, select commissioners like Judge Jerry Fielding place political cronyism above the strict interpretation of the laws. So dishonest is the ethics commission that Hart’s team must monitor its every action to keep commissioners from turning it into a wholesale bazaar for political favoritism and special interest lobbying.

There are, however, some bright spots that manifested after Hubbard’s banishment.

One of the most shining examples in the Secretary of State’s Office is Secretary John Merrill, who is leading a revival of good government and accountability. Not only has Merrill and his team brought great efficiency to the office, but he has also worked tirelessly to hold those who abuse campaign finance laws responsible for their actions.

Hubbard’s legacy might well be summarized in a cautionary sermon given by Frederick Lewis Donaldson in Westminster Abbey, London, on March 20, 1925.

“The Seven Social Sins are:

Wealth without work.

Pleasure without conscience.

Knowledge without character.

Commerce without morality.

Science without humanity.

Worship without sacrifice.

Politics without principle.”

Until Hubbard is finally behind bars and his henchmen dispatched from government, there is little hope for a new day in our state.

Of course, wishing, hoping and even sometimes praying is not enough. Good government demands watchers on the wall who, without fear or favor, stand athwart history to call wickedness by its name.

Hubbard, who at this hour remains free, worked to build a government in which he and his cronies could prosper by favoritism; passing laws to enable them to plunder the state, accepting bribes to make them rich while holding hostage every man, woman and child they were elected to serve.

Those of us who believe in what is right and good must remain vigilant to protect against the next Hubbard who will surely come, because villains are always at large.

The post A villain still at large appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

Conspiracies both great and small have staked the political landscape since the dawn of human reason. Conspiracy implies a secret agreement between two or more people usually involving some dark intentions.

Reason, in plain speech, is a cause, explanation or justification for an action. As the Oxford Dictionary explains, “The power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments logically.” However, to assume that individuals exercise good judgement in all situations is as silly as subscribing a grand scheme to every collaborative effort.

And today, social media is the unsupervised playground where scandalmongers and conspiracy kooks gather like so many malevolent teenagers spoiling for a fight.

With the political world focused on Russia’s use of social media in the 2016 presidential election, Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, says that foreign influence is a small percentage of the problems people have created on these power technology platforms.

“I don’t believe that the big issue are ads from foreign government. I believe that’s like .1 percent of the issue,” Cook told NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt. “The bigger issue is that some of these tools are used to divide people, to manipulate people, to get fake news to people in broad numbers, and so, to influence their thinking.” Which Cook concludes is a much greater worry.

Twitter and Facebook are now the front-line of political battle, whether its an election, a policy debate or to simply spread spurious lies about an individual. A war is waging for the hearts and minds of those tuned into social networks for news, especially anything that affirms what they already believe.

As Republican strategist Angi Horn Stalnaker recently shared with the Alabama Federation of Republican Women, “Fake news is not a story you do not like. It is not an op-ed you don’t like…Fake news is simply something that is not true.”

She likens “fake news,” to gossip, which is a staple of Alabama politics.

Montgomery’s chattering class is constantly engaged in a high stakes parlor game of connecting the dots based on rumors, whispers and other fragments of information. And more frequently these days, politicos are relying on social media platforms to spread personal theories of what’s happening and why.

Like in so much of life, information is a potent tool, and if used wisely, will give the user a marked advantage. However, small bits of knowledge fitted together in bizarre or deceptive fashions can be destructive. As the old saying goes, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”

Perhaps derived from Alexander Pope’s poem in An Essay on Criticism, “A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.” Caution is a watchword for those who drink daily from technology’s fountain, particularly when consuming news.

For years the Alabama Political Reporter was accused of publishing false reports by former speaker and convicted felon Mike Hubbard and his ilk. Even today, any story that doesn’t fit someone’s preconceived narrative is often labeled “fake news” or is discounted as “paid content.” APR doesn’t deal in dishonest or pay-to-publish journalism.

Generally in The Gump, a pursuit of money or power is thought to be the underlying cause of any given action. This desperately flawed thinking casts every deed under a dubious cloud of suspicion. And while personal gain or enrichment is not unusual, or even a reason not to do a thing, it is also foolish to think individuals act with only those two goals in mind. Most often, those who accuse others of only pursuing riches or influence are themselves guilty of that very motivation.

As Cook points out, we live in an era when a politics of division is being gamed-out on social media. The proliferation of so-called news sites backed by both Democrats, Republicans and even Russians is spurring further hateful and stilted discourse with an underlying message of “us against them.”

The internet is a boomtown of disinformation, fostering the most outrageous conspiracy theories with a goal of fermenting strife and division.

In the late 1990s, I was asked by a world-class businessman in New York City what I thought the internet would become. I replied it could be the greatest repository of knowledge since the fabled ancient Library of Alexandria or a place for porn and silly kittens to explode. I shared with him that it could become a place where learning would lead to service in the pursuit of democracy. But my bet was on porn and kittens.

In his 2000 fiction, “Killing Time,” Caleb Carr envisioned an internet that propagated magnificent hoaxes, audacious lies and mind-numbing conspiracies that led to an unstable world where sacred beliefs and long-held understanding would give way to deceptions that devastated the world financially, ecologically and morally. Under a banner “Mundus vult decipi,” a latin phase meaning “The world wants to be deceived,” Carr paints a planet in crisis in which, “It is the greatest truth of our age: Information is not knowledge.” While not a great novel, its message is proven prophetic by today’s social media scams.

What are we to make of what we are seeing and hearing on these social media outlets or the easy with which some are quickly deceived?

We, as a sociality, should pursue both knowledge and understanding, but perhaps even more so, we should seek wisdom to know truth from error.

Or perhaps, just stop and think before reposting.

The post Stop and think before reposting appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Brandon Moseley
Alabama Political Reporter

I prefer the grind of every day reporting to sharing my opinions with the readers. I let Bill, Josh and Joey focus on the opinion writing, which they do so well. This time I will make an exception. We are now in the start of the third day of a carefully orchestrated character assassination of the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate, Judge Roy Moore.

If we are to believe his accusers, Roy Moore dated a number of 16, 17 and 18-year-old young ladies in the late 1970s. As I read the current law, it is perfectly legal to have consensual sexual contact with a 16-year-old in Alabama. That is not considered abuse or a crime. It is still legal, and likely was in 1979, and most of the accusers say that their dates with Moore never got much more exciting than some kissing and Moore playing his guitar. One of the ladies, who was 18 at the time, says that Moore served her alcohol. Alabama did not raise the drinking age to 21 until 1984.

The most troubling allegation is that Roy Moore went out with a 14 year old, took the willing young lady to his trailer where he removed her shirt and her pants and then there was some touching of private parts through the underwear. When she got uncomfortable with it, she shut it down, and that was that. It is illegal to have sexual contact with 14 year olds. I am not a lawyer and have never seen what the Alabama statute read during the Jimmy Carter administration. But according to my lay reading of current Alabama law – which admittedly was written 27 years after this alleged incident, that act today would likely be sexual abuse, a Class A misdemeanor. One attorney has already told me that he does not think we even had a sexual abuse statute on the books in 1979. This is a 38-year-old cold case of an incident that may or may not have happened. This is never going to see any court.

That being said, how can any of us really know what might have happened in a trailer in Etowah County in 1979? Those of us who want to believe the best in Roy Moore believe his account and think the WaPo story is false.

Those of us who want to believe the worst about Roy Moore will believe the worst about Roy Moore and are inclined to believe his accuser. If we are all intellectually honest, we don’t have any video, DNA evidence, eyewitness accounts — other than Moore and the accuser, the testimony is 38 years old, so facts blur.

Roy Moore is innocent until he is proven guilty, and I don’t see this case ever being brought to trial. We just have to accept that we are never really going to know with any certainty what happened on that day in 1979, or if the two even met that day.

We now have had three days of histrionics about this in the mainstream media. Every talking head on cable news has an opinion on this, even though most of them have never stepped foot in Alabama, have never met any of us, including Judge Moore or his accusers, and will move on from this story when it plays out, or they find something more titillating for them to chatter about in front of the cameras.

Again, I — unlike any of them — have actually met Judge Moore and have known him, either through my journalistic work or through Republican politics for almost 20 years. Judge Moore believes what he says he believes, and I trust him on this.

The once respected Washington Post has changed ownership and has become the leftist version of the right’s Breitbart News, an increasingly low-brow publication that aligns itself with progressive causes and the Democratic Party. In this story, they have hit a dangerous new low for political journalism. If you like their reporting, send them a check so they will let you through their paywall.

Going 38 years back into the past to talk to the former girlfriends or boyfriends of a political candidate — or people who claim to be former love interests of candidates — is incredibly sleazy, and it is disgusting that the editors at the Post thought this was somehow a newsworthy endeavor for them to pursue.

I like Roy Moore, and I am certainly not going to vote for Roy Moore’s opponent, Clinton-era U.S. Attorney Doug Jones (D). I have nothing personal against Jones. I just think his positions and ideas are far too liberal for Alabama to seriously consider for even one moment.

Even though I would like to see Moore win and Jones lose, I will swear to all the readers right here and now, that I, as a journalist, will never stoop to interviewing any of Jones’ former girlfriends from before his marriage. I don’t know whom Doug took to the prom. I don’t want to know where they went after the prom, and I don’t want to know what age his date was or if he tried to initiate sexual contact or not, and who touched who where and what clothes were removed and by whom.

With the exception of those of you who are test tube babies, all of us are here because our moms, at least once in their lives, let our dads do what dads wanted to do all along. I hope that was not an upsetting revelation to anyone.

Roy Moore never claimed that he was God, and neither did he ever claim that he is without sin. I never thought that the kinds of things that happen in human mating rituals was news and never thought that the candidates’ premarital love lives were the sort of thing that we as investigative journalists should really devote our time and talents toward exposing in such detail.

I know there is a market for voyeuristic celebrity gossip out there. I let TMZ and People Magazine cater to that market, and apparently, the Post wants to colonize that space now, as well.

I know that I am getting old, and my ways are not as ‘hip’ as some people’s in this business, but at its core, this business is supposed to be about news. We report about real people, real issues, real policies in the now.

The sexual adventures of Roy Moore after he got home from fighting for us in Vietnam is not a topic I ever thought would be a headline here or anywhere else. Thank you, Washington Post, for becoming a more sleazy version of the National Enquirer. What’s next? Ranking all the former love interests of Presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump?

I would not want my byline associated with this kind of gossip-level reporting in any way. None of this is relevant to my life, and none of it is relevant to anybody’s lives here and now in the state of Alabama.

We have real problems. We have real issues. There are things I want to see done by the federal government in the next four years. What do you believe we should be doing on health care, on taxes, on immigration, on the border wall, on reforming Washington D.C., on protecting religious liberties, on guns?

I will be voting for Roy Moore because he is the candidate most likely to pass tax reform, vote to cut down on out-of-control immigration policies, confirm conservative judges. Why would anyone change their vote based on these accusations? You either agree with Roy Moore’s views on the issues, or you agree with Doug Jones’ views. This sensationalized journalism I don’t think has any place in a rational person’s decision-making process.

You vote for the person with the agenda closest to your own. For me, that is Roy Moore.

Moore is the candidate who will vote to confirm conservative selections to the Supreme Court; steadfastly defend our Second Amendment rights; vote for Republican budgets that make America great again by increasing defense spending; keeping Alabamians employed in defense sector jobs; fight for religious liberty; and oppose abortion.

Doug Jones posted pictures of himself partying with Planned Parenthood. Jones will not fight to protect the lives of millions of pre-born Americans; support President Donald J. Trump’s agenda; vote to repeal Obamacare; fight to repeal Obama administration era regulations that shut down American coal jobs and sent our jobs overseas; fight to decrease the regulatory state; or advance conservatism. Moore is the conservative candidate. Moore is the pro-life candidate.

A vote for Jones puts Chuck Schumer, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders one vote closer to control of the U.S. Senate, and the current Republican majority is just two seats.

Whatever you believed happened 38 years ago, that should not sway Alabamians from voting for the candidate who most closely shares our conservative Alabama values, and that is Roy Moore. Don’t be swayed by emotion or the mainstream media. They do not share any of our Alabama values and do not care about us or our beliefs. They have made that abundantly clear over the years.

It is time for Republicans and conservatives to vote with our brains and not be swayed by media hysteria and the politics of personal destruction.

The post I believe Judge Roy Moore appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt

Alabama Political Reporter

As one more accuser stepped forward, it is now difficult to see Roy Moore’s path forward in his bid to become a senator from Alabama. There is already too much carnage left in the wake of the allegations against him.

But knowing Moore, he will not stand down. If he quits, he’s admitting guilt. If he stays, it will most likely only get worse for his accusers, the state of Alabama and for Moore and his family. But I don’t think retreat is in his nature.

Those women who have come forward with allegations against Moore should be respected and their claims not simply dismissed as a political ploy.

Let me be clear. Any impropriety with a child is abhorrent and should be not only condemned but prosecuted as a heinous crime. That is my position and that of the Alabama Political Reporter.

To destroy a child’s youth to gratify carnal lust is to rob a tender soul of trust, kindness and even hope. What animals some can become in search of sexual satisfaction, and Susan and I will never condone or defend such actions.

APR will always dig for the truth, as anyone who knows our work will attest.

Along with our reporting, we are a forum for opinions. As editor-in-chief, I do not always agree with what is written, but I stand for the right to express thoughts that are left, right and center. APR doesn’t filter or bridle our writers, nor do I feel we should. The antidote for speech that we don’t like is more speech.

The brittle discourse on social media and the willingness to vilify from both left and right in the most hateful terms is disheartening to me as a person who still believes we are better when we talk than when we shout.

Longfellow said, “Youth comes but once in a lifetime.” Let me add to that – anyone who scars a young one, especially to satiate base desires, is the lowest of creatures.

Roy Moore is being judged even now. What will come, I fear, is a continued fight in which there are no winners.

These are the times when I wish politics was not so wretched, that there was more light than darkness, and our hearts and minds are not hardened beyond repair.

Pope Paul VI said, “Never reach out your hand unless you’re willing to extend an arm.” These words are the heart of what Susan and I have for the people of our state. We began APR with the hope that its pages would serve as a home for good journalism and engaging thought.

While we have and will fall short of that goal, never let it be said that we or those who work with us are not trying.

The post Let me be clear; any impropriety with a child is abhorrent appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.

By Bill Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

National opinion writers, network talking heads and even random strangers are slamming Alabama as a clannish bunch of backwoods, inbred rubes simply too dumb to determine who to elect as U.S. Senator on December 12. And even here at home, much of the same criticism is amplified in print, online and even in these pages.

At the Alabama Political Reporter, we allow all voices with few exceptions, but our primary focus is on accuracy in reporting.

In a time when our nation is experiencing a much-needed outing of misogynistic behavior, it is difficult to look at any charge of sexual exploitation with cool-eyed dispassion. The benefit of the doubt is given to the accuser, not the accused, as hopefully, a widespread cleansing will result from earnest and honest conversation about our past and the way forward.

As individuals, we can argue about the wisdom of voters. We can even disagree on the outcome of an election. But for better or worse, all political contests are winner take all in Alabama.

As editor-in-chief of APR, my job is to ensure that our publication presents accurate reporting.

APR also has a policy of publishing opinion/commentary from the right, left and center.

During the latest scandal to rock state politics, my goal is that our overall coverage of Republican U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore is accurate and fair.

As I’ve told our reporters, Moore is a complicated man to cover even in the best of times. His propensity for what many feel is hateful speech can chill even some conservatives. Moore’s coarse, inflammatory rhetoric is meant to cut through a veneer of modernity like a rusty blade. Like a fire and brimstone preacher, Moore condemns a world he sees as increasingly secular and godless. His view of a wicked and sinful world is shared by many Alabamians.

There are those who believe Moore is a target of the Republican establishment and left-leaning journalists. And there are those who think that he is a sexual aggressor who must be stopped at all costs.

Reporters should not be judge and jury, rather, they should present evidence without fear or favor. However, in the real world, it is difficult to disengage emotions fully when covering someone like Moore. Perhaps this is why we see media reports stating imperially that nine women have come forward to accuse Moore of sexual misconduct and hear the words pedophile or child molester used to describe Moore.

Perhaps the national media and even our homegrown reports and opinion writers believe Alabamians can’t count or don’t know the meaning of words. Factual errors and incorrect usage of clearly defined words is the very thing that gives credence to the phrase “fake news.”

Are two acts of alleged sexual aggression against teenage girls not enough to cause concern about a Senate candidate’s character? Is not a single accusation of grabbing a 28-year-old woman’s butt not enough to give us pause to reconsider our vote?

Of the nine women being reported as “Moore accusers,” only three have alleged him with sexual assault. Is that not enough?

Two of the other women said they dated Moore. One of those two said Moore brought her drinks when she was 18, and the legal age for drinking was 19. The others only claim that Moore pursued them when they were of the age of consent.

Reasonable people can agree that a man in his 30s chasing teenaged girls is inappropriate, but to lump these women in with Leigh Corfman and Beverly Young Nelson is to diminish the severity of their accounts. It further gives support to claims of unfair and manufactured news reporting.

Do we as a society not believe that even one claim of sexual assault on a minor is enough? This inflation in the number of accusers again undermines the seriousness of the accusations because not everyone in Alabama lacks basic reading comprehension skills. And most of us can count to eleven without removing our shoes.

Is Alabama a conservative state? Yes. Does it have a troubled past? Yes. Is the state’s collective conscience void of judgment? No. But to read or listen to commentators around the country and here at home, we are not only ignorant but mean and uncaring.

Also, when reporting or giving opinions, words matter; and as best as possible, journalists and commentators should use words as properly defined.

Here again, national press, state press and many on social media, are suspect because they have mislabeled or not understood the nature of what Moore’s victims accused him of doing. This mischaracterization is dismissive and perhaps harmful to real victims of other heinous crimes.

Since The Post‘s first report on December 9, the hashtags #RoyMoorePedophile and #RoyMooreChildMolester have been trending on social media. News shows have also used the word pedophile to describe Moore on numerous occasions.

Writing in The Post, Rachel Hope Cleves, a professor of history at the University of Victoria, and Nicholas L. Syrett, a professor of women, gender and sexuality studies at the University of Kansas, explain why assigning the word pedophile to Moore undercuts the real crisis engulfing young women and men who have been preyed on by others.

“[A]ccounting for sexual abuse with a diagnosis of pedophilia obscures the way that abusive behavior fits into our everyday sexual system that privileges powerful men to take advantage of the younger, the female and the less powerful,” according to Cleves and Syrett. Pedophilia is a particular legal and medical term and a much different offense than what Moore’s accusers have cited.

From Harvey Weinstein to Kevin Spacey to Roy Moore, the problem as Cleves and Syrett describe it is one of powerful men taking advantage of females and males who are younger and have less power. If we as a society are to address serious problems, we should call these actions by their proper names, and the press should as well.

The media has a responsibility to state facts without inflating the story for shock-effect. Any act of sexual violence or assault should be disturbing enough to not need embellishment by a click-hungry media.

Recently, I received an email from a woman saying she is an Ohio businesswoman who has built an international business. She says, “If Alabama citizens vote for Roy Moore, yes you are ignorant rubes!  Do you support young Alabama women and their potential?  Do you even tbelieve (sic) in evolution??? As a strong Ohio woman from middle class family who built a large international company, I ask:  Could an Alabama young woman do this! I’m scared for them. Of course the women speak truth. Please believe them! Otherwise you confirm my view of Alabama as scarily, hopelessly backward, i.e. dumb. Please support your women citizens. MS.”

It is my view that Alabamians do care genuinely about our young women, children and families. I also believe we as a whole take these allegations leveled at Moore seriously.

Advice from emailers, national pundits and even the opinion pages of al.com or alreporter.com, do not trump the wisdom of Alabama’s voters. They are not ignorant, mean or stupid, and that is my opinion. But it could be that I, too, am a southern rube.

The post Are we rubes who cannot read nor count? appeared first on Alabama Political Reporter.