By Jim DeFede Thursday, Mar 26 1998

Courtesy of Miami New Times

Alex Penelas has a problem. An image problem. After rising to power as a reformer, Penelas is now seeing his reputation challenged. Ironically (some might say fittingly), this attack comes not from the mayor’s enemies but from some of his oldest allies, the very people who helped put him in power.

The public phase of this struggle began earlier this month, after Penelas fired County Manager Armando Vidal. The mayor said the manager — the man he handpicked to be the county’s top administrator — was wildly incompetent. Vidal countered by claiming he was fired because he wasn’t willing to do favors for the mayor’s supporters, including a small cadre of lobbyists. The squabble offered the public a rare, insider’s view of how business is conducted on the 29th floor of county hall. The State Attorney’s Office is now investigating Vidal’s allegations.

But another legal skirmish could further sully Penelas’s noble facade. Church & Tower, the company owned by the family of the late Jorge Mas Canosa, last November filed a lawsuit against the county after Penelas terminated its $58 million paving contract. The mayor’s action was prompted by critical stories published in the Miami Daily Business Review and a subsequent Miami Herald investigation that found the county had been billed nearly a million dollars for work that was never done.

In its lawsuit, Church & Tower posits that Penelas canceled the contract not because he believed the company had done anything wrong, but rather because the mayor was worried about how he would look if he didn’t lash out at the firm.

The company may be right.
Depositions taken in the case over the past two months offer a glimpse into Penelas’s administration. The most telling statements to date have come from Brian May, the mayor’s chief of staff. (Penelas has fought efforts by Church & Tower’s attorneys to take his deposition, but earlier this month a judge ruled that the mayor will have to comply with the company’s request.) In February, over the span of two days, May was questioned under oath by a lawyer for Church & Tower.

Attorney Mitchell Bloomberg, of Adorno &Zeder, attempted to establish that the mayor’s actions were driven by the fact that County Commissioner Miguel Diaz de la Portilla had become an outspoken critic of the Church & Tower contract.

Q: Have you heard anybody say that Commissioner Diaz de la Portilla is a potential candidate for mayor against Mayor Penelas in the next mayoral election?

A: Yes.
Q: As a political adviser to the mayor, is that something that you are at least watching?

A: It’s something that would be on my radar screen.
Q: You are concerned about it?
A: Not concerned about. Something I would be aware of.

Bloomberg moved on to a meeting held November 1 in the lounge of the Hotel Sofitel near Miami International Airport. Former Latin Builders Association president Sergio Pino arranged the private tete-a-tete. The participants included Penelas, May, Pino, Jorge Mas, Jr., and Juan Carlos Mas.

Q: How did the meeting start? Tell me as best as you can recall how it started, who said what.

A: Mr. Mas Jr. started the meeting and he looked at the mayor and he said oye, Alex, what you have here, and he pointed to Mr. Pino and he went like this [pointing to others], what you have here is the greatest political force in the State of Florida, and this is a team and we need to stick together and we shouldn’t let Mr. Diaz de la Portilla make an issue of this paving contract. In essence, that’s how it started.

…
Q: Did Mr. Mas at the meeting make mention of the fact that Church & Tower would like to continue doing the work?

A: Yes.
Q: So you recall that comment being made?
A: Yes. Obviously, that’s what the mayor was responding to. He was saying — when Mr. Mas made his comments early on about, you know, we have the political force, the greatest political force in the State of Florida, in essence what he was saying was we shouldn’t be messing with this political force because it was very, very powerful. That was what came across.

Q: That’s how you took it?
A: I believe that’s the way the mayor had taken it, too, because he mentioned it to me afterwards.

Q: But Mr. Mas didn’t say we shouldn’t mess with this political force; that’s the way you took it?

A: Yes, that’s true. But he did say that the reason he was saying that and that he was making the point, this is a very powerful force and that he would get Mr. Diaz de la Portilla at the appropriate time.

Q: Mr. Mas said he would?
A: Mr. Mas said he would take care of Mr. Diaz de la Portilla at the appropriate time electorally. In other words, they would run someone against him and go after him and defeat him. That’s what he was saying.

…
Q: Did Mayor Penelas at the meeting talk about the political ramifications of allowing Church & Tower to continue doing the work?

A: Yes.
Q: What did he say?
A: He said that he thought that the entire incident surrounding the contract was an embarrassment to both the county and the company and the subcontractors, and that his interest was to see that the taxpayers got their money back, and that he agreed with the manager that the work should not continue under the contract. And he also mentioned that Church & Tower should have agreed voluntarily to the [inspector general] when it was brought up, that this kind of snowballing effect is what led this incident to become as controversial as it was.

Q: Let me go back to the question I asked. Did the mayor talk about the [political] ramifications of allowing Church & Tower to continue doing the work?

A: Yes. He said he thought that it would be an embarrassment to the county to allow them to continue doing work.

Q: Did he say whether it would be politically bad for him or not?
A: I believe when he was speaking of the county he was speaking of himself as well.

Q: Did the mayor make mention of the fact that allowing Church & Tower to continue doing the work would provide political ammunition to Commissioner Diaz de la Portilla; did he say that at the meeting?

A: I don’t recall specifically, but he may have made reference to that.

Typically during depositions, attorneys commonly tell their clients to answer questions as directly and as succinctly as possible and not to volunteer information. If May was given such advice, he obviously ignored it. Several times during his deposition, May — who has a reputation as a political street fighter — tried to throw a little mud on the Mas family for the embarrassment this lawsuit was causing him and Penelas. Indeed he went out of his way to put on the record comments Mas Jr. allegedly made about the Dade State Attorney’s Office.

A: Mr. Mas Jr. made mention at that [November 1] meeting that the state attorney overseeing the investigation was no accident. He had implied that he had talked to the state attorney about actually taking that out of the county’s hands.

Q: You said he implied. What did he say?
A: He said exactly that, that the fact that the state attorney has agreed to oversee the county’s audit was no accident, that he had influenced that to happen.

Q: Did he say he had influenced that?
A: No, those weren’t the exact words, but that’s a paraphrase of what he said.

Q: Tell me as best you can what the words he said were.
A: That it was no accident…. I can’t recall specifically the words that he used in his description other than he said it was no accident, and that he, and I believe he referenced Mr. [Hank] Adorno as well, had had discussions with the state attorney about overseeing the audit.

The State Attorney’s Office and Hank Adorno deny May’s assertion. “We didn’t have any contact with the State Attorney’s Office about taking over the investigation,” Adorno says.

May also recounted another meeting, this one on November 18 in his office with Juan Carlos Mas and Adorno. The day before this meeting Penelas issued a memo rejecting all of the bids for a new paving contract Church & Tower was in line to win.

A: Mr. Mas was apoplectic I guess would be the best description.
Q: What is that?
A: Very upset, very emotional.
Q: What did he say?

A: He said that if the mayor did not turn this around, that he was going to go to Cuban radio and tell everybody that the county was corrupt all the way up to the mayor, including the mayor, and added that, whether it was true or not, he was going to go to the radio and say that, if the mayor did not reverse these actions.

Q: What did you say?
A: I felt a little bit intimidated by the conversation.
Q: Why?

A: The threat of a lawsuit being one and the tone and tenor of Mr. Mas’s comments were a bit upsetting to me. I felt uncomfortable that he would be saying those things to me.

Brian May might have been uncomfortable, but that didn’t prevent him from nearly reaching an agreement with Adorno the next day. Adorno argued that the problems uncovered by the Herald were the result of collusion — possibly involving bribes or kickbacks — between one of Church & Tower’s subcontractors and a supervisor in the county’s Water and Sewer Department. The supervisor not only handed the subcontractor phony orders for street repairs but signed off as an inspector that the work had been completed when it hadn’t. (Depositions recently taken in the suit bolster this theory considerably.)

Adorno told May that Church & Tower had done nothing wrong and was being unfairly punished. On November 19 Adorno met with May and said the company would be willing to immediately reimburse the county for the million dollars it was apparently overcharged and to place another five million dollars in an escrow account to settle any new discrepancies uncovered during the audit by the State Attorney’s Office. Adorno’s only requirement was that Church & Tower be allowed to continue working under its county contract, known as W-755.

May told Adorno it was a fair compromise.
Penelas wasn’t so sure. Before the mayor would decide whether to accept the Adorno/May proposal, Penelas — forever image-conscious — wanted to know how the public might respond.

Within 48 hours Penelas called together a group of his political advisers to review the proposed settlement. Included in the discussion, which took place in the mayor’s conference room, were Jose Cancela, general manager of WSCV-TV (Channel 51); Raul Pozo, an insurance broker; Manolo Reboso, a former Miami city commissioner; and Sergio Pino. In his deposition, May was asked why the mayor wanted to meet with the men.

A: I think there were two reasons. One, he trusted their opinions as not being biased, that he would get good straight answers from them and opinions, and the second was that they were not directly involved in this. Although Mr. Pino, I believe, had been talking to the Mases and was present at the Sofitel meeting…. And the others, Reboso, Pozo, and Cancela, were invited because they were not involved and there were no opinions formed.

Q: And they were, I believe as we discussed at the earlier session of your deposition, you classified them as sometime political advisers to the mayor?

A: Yes. And I think certainly the mayor was sensitive to the politics of settling this situation, that there would be some public opinion as to whether this was the right thing, wrong thing to do from the county’s perspective, and that inherent in seeking the opinions from them was also a recognition that that was a factor, a dynamic in all of this.

Q: So you presented the so-called Adorno/May proposal?
A: Yes.
Q: And did you make a recommendation to the assembled group?
A: Absolutely. I recommended that we should pursue settlement.
Q: Along the lines of the Adorno/May proposal?
A: Yes.
Q: And what did each of these individuals say, do you recall?

A: Well, let me clarify how I expressed that to them. I laid out the proposal and put out on the table that there was one issue that was still problematic from my perspective and the mayor’s perspective and the manager’s perspective, which was continuing work under W-755. But I thought what was put on the table was a fair and reasonable proposal and maybe there were ways that we could work through that issue; in other words, that it wasn’t like a final — this wasn’t final and maybe there was some way we could do it. But I also explained that Mr. Adorno was just as adamant that it was this or forget it. Could you restate your question?

Q: What did each of the people who was present say?
A: Mr. Pozo and Mr. Reboso were against settling. They thought that the community at large would not accept the proposal, that they would view it as some inside negotiation that was taking place for the simple fact to appease the Mas Canosas as a powerful political force and not because it was the right thing to do.

…
Q: And what about Cancela?
A: Mr. Cancela, I believe, was under the impression that we should try to pursue settlement. He recognized that the issue of continuing work was a problem, but the fact that getting the money back and trying to put an end to the whole issue and whole matter was something that was worthwhile, and that the mayor should consider doing it for that reason.

Q: What about Pino?
A: Pretty much along the same lines as Cancela.
…
Q: How did the meeting break up?

A: The mayor basically, after hearing everybody, offered his opinion, which was that he felt that continuing work under the contract in light of all that was going on, and he recognized that Church & Tower would be putting forth considerable amounts of money, things that were in dispute and in question, but that continuing work under the contract, even with some of the disputed amounts in hand while an independent investigation was being conducted, would be problematic. And he thought that the public would not accept the fact that we were trying to resolve the issue before the state attorney’s investigation had concluded and made its findings, and that, really, he thought, and he thought the public would agree, that that investigation and audit should take place and be concluded before continuing any work or resolving monetary issues with them.

In his own deposition, Sergio Pino recounted that after the meeting, Cancela spoke to Penelas privately and reportedly asked the mayor, “Are you doing this for a political reason or are you doing this because you feel Church & Tower has done something wrong?” Not surprisingly, the mayor denied he was being guided by politics. But the mere fact that a friend and ally of Penelas would have enough doubts about the mayor’s motivation to pose such a question is itself revealing.

May, in his deposition, disclosed for the first time that lobbyist Rodney Barreto was brought in by the Mas family in an effort to push the settlement agreement. Barreto, however, is not registered to lobby on behalf of Church & Tower. His involvement will confirm the view, held by many, that Penelas allows lobbyists such as Barreto and Christopher Korge to play a larger role than they should in the behind-the-scenes affairs of county government.

May also discussed a meeting between Cuban American National Foundation president Pepe Hernandez and the mayor shortly before Jorge Mas Canosa’s death.

Q: What did [the mayor] tell you about his meeting with Mr. Hernandez?
A: He told me that Mr. Hernandez had come to his house, the mayor’s house, and had pleaded with the mayor that Mr. Mas Canosa, Sr., who was very ill at the time, had sent Mr. Hernandez to plead with the mayor to please allow the matter to be resolved. I believe all of that took place subsequent to my meeting with Mr. Adorno.

Q: And did the mayor tell you what he said to Mr. Hernandez?
A: Not specifically. The only thing he mentioned was something to the effect that he had indicated to Mr. Hernandez that he didn’t have any intention of changing his position.

Chris Korge Rides Again

Doing the phone card shuffle at MIA

By Francisco Alvarado Thursday, Feb 13 2003

Courtesy of Miami New Times

Despite the efforts of Miami-Dade Aviation director Angela Gittens to reform Miami International Airport, the brewing set-to over a prepaid phone card vending contract shows that it’s business as usual at MIA. Contracts get awarded to individuals with the most political juice; prominent among the rewardees is big-time lawyer/lobbyist Chris Korge.

The millionaire Korge is well known in political circles, raising campaign cash for the Democratic National Party and local politicians, including county Mayor Alex Penelas and former (and recently indicted) county Commissioner Miriam Alonso. And Korge, who did not return phone calls seeking comment, is a veritable renaissance man when it comes to getting a piece of the action from public contracts awarded at MIA.

Over the past decade, Korge has assisted major corporations and local firms in winning lucrative airport contracts. He, along with lobbyists Rodney Barreto and Eli Feinberg, represents Dade Aviation Consultants, a consortium of private engineering firms paid $15 million a year by the county to oversee MIA’s massive $5 billion construction program. Korge and his partners have received roughly $1.3 million in lobbying fees from the consortium to simply curry favor with county commissioners and bureaucrats.

Another noteworthy Korge client is Host Marriott, a national company that operates 70 percent of the food and beverage concessions at MIA, which generate an estimated $40 million in sales. Korge’s reward for helping Host win and maintain the contract: ten percent of the company’s profits from the MIA concessions. State and federal investigators are examining Korge’s role in the agreement to determine if he and Host skirted federal laws on minority hiring at airports.

Now Korge is leading a foray into telecommunications; he’s teaming up with client Ed Meegan, principal of WTN Inc., a company based in Richmond Hill, New York, to sell prepaid phone cards in MIA’s terminal and concourses. Under a three-way partnership called WTN/Blackstar LLC/CKOR Vending, Korge and Meegan won a new contract to be the sole prepaid phone card providers at the airport, pending county commission approval. The third partner is John Oxendine, a black TV and radio station venture capitalist who is accused by the competition — Latin American Enterprises, or LAE, and Communitel, two rival Miami-based telecommunications firms — of being a minority front for Korge and Meegan. The two firms accuse the county’s aviation department of unduly favoring WTN et al. because of Korge’s influence. Korge, Meegan, and Oxendine would have won the new contract outright last month if not for strong objections by LAE and Communitel. “Their decision to award the prepaid phone card business to WTN once again demonstrates the serious problems afflicting Miami International Airport,” growled Pedro Pelaez, owner of Communitel, which placed third behind WTN and LAE in a competitive bid process called an Invitation to Bid, or ITB. “The whole process is a joke!” A bid protest hearing, in which the county conducts an internal review of the ITB, was scheduled for February 12. After that, the matter goes to the county commission for approval.

An ITB is a competition for public contracts based solely on the best price offered by a bidder. WTN offered the county a guarantee of $1,089,312; LAE offered $1,081,495; and Communitel offered $1,080,000. But in order to qualify for the ITB, companies are asked to submit crucial information. WTN was allowed to circumvent some of those criteria.

For example, Pelaez and Miguel de Grandy, the lawyer-lobbyist representing LAE and its owner, Argentine businessman Juan José Pino, complain that airport staff did not disqualify WTN, as required, after the partnership refused to submit an audited financial statement; the statement would have determined whether Korge and his colleagues had the financial wherewithal to run their business.

According to public records, Korge informed airport staff that WTN “cannot justify the inordinate cost [$15,000 for LAE] of preparing audited financial statements, [and as such] WTN will not provide such statements.” Assistant county attorney Abigail Price Williams determined on November 8, 2002, four months after bids were submitted, that WTN should not be disqualified for refusing to produce its audited financials. “This creates the appearance of favoritism for WTN that my client didn’t have,” asserted de Grandy, LAE’s lawyer. Communitel and LAE did provide the required statements.

WTN’s proposal also should have been disqualified based on Korge’s decision not to list his other business interests (the food and beverage deal and the construction contract) at the airport. Under the bid rules, companies are asked to detail their involvement, directly or indirectly, in any other airport contracts.

But apparently this doesn’t apply to Korge, who put down “not applicable” in WTN’s proposal. In another show of favoritism, Pelaez claimed, the Miami-Dade County Aviation Department extended the deadline for bidders to submit their proposals from July 10, 2002 to July 17, 2002. Coincidentally, Korge did not incorporate CKOR Vending until July 10. Pelaez asserts the deadline was obviously extended to accommodate Korge.

Regarding the accusations about John Oxendine, Pelaez and de Grandy allege that the county’s Department of Business Development ignored its own procedures in certifying Oxendine’s firm, Blackstar LLC, as a disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE), a program used to set aside portions of county contracts for minority firms. In order to qualify as a DBE, firms must offer proof that they are conducting business. They must provide the county with executed contracts and utility bills, and demonstrate that they are fulfilling a “commercially useful function.” When Blackstar was certified as a DBE in May, Oxendine had not provided any of the required information. In fact Oxendine listed his residential condominium in West Palm Beach as his business address and had not set up a business phone line for Blackstar. He got the certification nonetheless. Yet the county continues to deny certification to other businesses that fail to submit the proper documentation, according to public records. “It is obvious that Mr. Oxendine is a front,” Pelaez complained. “The same day Oxendine [got] the DBE certification was the day he incorporated Blackstar,” de Grandy chimed in. “It’s a total perversion of the county’s minority program.”

Reached at home, Oxendine, who has made millions of dollars financing TV and radio stations across the country, affirmed that he only recently formed Blackstar to participate in WTN’s bid. “I am a strategic partner,” Oxendine explained. “I don’t think it takes rocket science to sell prepaid phone cards. I view this as an entry-level opportunity to participate in economic development in Miami-Dade County.”

Yet Pelaez doesn’t have kind words for LAE or its owner, Juan José Pino, either. Pelaez, a politically connected Cuban-born businessman whose company placed third in the ITB, needs to undercut LAE in order to get the contract. During an interview at Communitel’s office near Florida International University’s University Park campus, Pelaez attacked Pino’s allegedly unsavory past. Pelaez is known to go on the offensive when his business interests are in peril. In fact, three years ago he used his friend and political ally Alex Penelas to veto an airport contract that Pelaez had lost. The county commission, however, overturned the mayor’s veto and awarded the contract to Pelaez’s competitor, Secure Wrap of Miami.

Pelaez, sitting near a picture of himself posing with former President George H.W. Bush and his wife Barbara, pointed to an article in El Nuevo Heraldlast September that detailed allegations implicating Pino in the Argentine criminal probe of former president Carlos Menem’s administration. The article published accusations that Pino may have laundered money for Ramon Hernandez, Menem’s confidant and private secretary. The article also reported, and court records verified, that Pino was held in contempt of court for refusing to disclose his bank records to his ex-wife, Claudia Rasso, who was suing Pino for not paying her $500,000 in alimony. Pelaez additionally accused Pino of not being overly forthright with airport officials about the sale of LAE three years ago to Ursus Telecom, a now-bankrupt telecommunications firm; ditto Pino’s subsequent repurchase of LAE from Ursus during the company’s bankruptcy proceedings last year. (LAE, for its part, did disclose the information in its bid proposal.) “These are serious problems going on at the airport and no one is doing anything about it,” Pelaez moaned. “Who the hell is minding the store?”

De Grandy, a former state prosecutor and former state representative, refused to comment on Pelaez’s allegations. “What does any of that have to do with this bid?” de Grandy asked incredulously. “Whether the man was in an acrimonious divorce or whatever has nothing to do with this bid process. It’s all rumor and innuendo. And you know what? No one has the balls to stand in front of the podium at the county commission and try to prove it.”

Meanwhile, as his competitors duke it out, Korge, along with Meegan, recently approached assistant aviation director Steven Baker for another favor. According to a January 15 letter from Baker to Meegan, they asked Baker to remove discount long-distance pay phones from the airport. Meegan and Korge reasoned that the phones would prevent WTN from meeting their guarantee to the airport. Baker, however, balked and informed Meegan that the airport was keeping the discount phones. If WTN can’t meet the guarantee, Baker said, the partnership could either modify its price or withdraw its bid.

Of course, it’s highly unlikely that renaissance man Korge is going to allow that to happen.

A Feast of Thieves, Part 2

More curious characters from the criminal conspiracy at Miami International Airport

By Tristram Korten

published: March 24, 2005

Courtesy of Miami New Times

Christopher McFarlane, according to the investigative report: “What’s it going to take to get the big money jobs. I want little overhead and big profits”

There is more to come in the enormous criminal-corruption case at Miami International Airport’s fuel facility. That’s clear from the 12,000-word statement made by the state’s star witness, Richard Caride, who managed the operation (known as the “fuel farm”) for Aircraft Services International Group (ASIG).

But first I must correct an error. In the last issue I wrote that the Miami-Dade police, along with the State Attorney and the county’s inspector general, participated in the investigation that led to the arrest of nineteen people for allegedly stealing some five million dollars from the county through fraudulent billing and the theft of jet fuel. I was wrong. County cops are handling a case involving a fuel-farm defendant who is cooperating in the corruption case against ex-Miami City Commissioner Arthur Teele.

The airport is spawning so many criminal investigations my head’s beginning to spin. At the moment, however, the main character is 46-year-old Caride, a former Hialeah cop who pleaded guilty to murder in 1985; he took part in a home-invasion robbery in which his partner killed two people. Caride testified against his accomplice.

Now Caride is once again squealing on his partners in crime, recounting for investigators scams in which he took part from 1999 through 2002 with a host of companies and individuals. (The full report is available at www.miaminewtimes.com.) According to Caride, they stole jet fuel by the truckload, ordered unneeded equipment and obscenely marked up the prices, hired corrupt friends for work that was never done, exploited county programs designed to assist minority-owned businesses, and lavished money and gifts on Miami International Airport employees who kept the enterprise running smoothly.

This past week I wrote about a 47-year-old Miami businessman named Antonio Junior, who hit up Caride for a contract to provide security at the fuel farm. Then Junior managed to include some of his friends, including contractor Evens Thermilus, in the free-money feeding frenzy that ensued. Junior, who has long been close to county Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler, allegedly bragged he could have the commissioner renew contracts and promote people necessary to protect their scams. Carey-Shuler acknowledges meeting with Caride and Junior but denies she was ever asked to do anything illegal or unethical.

Many of the people Caride incriminated have been arrested. Investigators are beginning to look at others. One of them is 38-year-old Christopher McFarlane, a Fort Lauderdale lawyer and accountant who has been doing business at the airport for years.

McFarlane, who is black, was a partner in the notorious Host-Marriott contract to run concessions at the airport. For the past three years authorities have been investigating Host-Marriott for allegedly paying individuals to pose as partners so the company could meet the contract’s requirements for minority participation. No charges have been filed.

Caribbean Airport Cuisine, McFarlane’s company, is now a 30-percent minority partner in Global Concessions, which holds an MIA contract that earns Caribbean roughly four million dollars annually.

In his statement, Caride describes some odious encounters with McFarlane. Authorities, of course, have not charged McFarlane with any crimes; Caride’s accounts are simply allegations at this point. McFarlane himself declined comment.

In 2000 Junior and Thermilus had a falling out, prompting Junior to insert his buddy McFarlane into the MIA schemes. The two have known each other since at least the late Nineties, when Junior was a consultant to the county’s Housing Finance Authority, where McFarlane briefly served as director. (McFarlane had worked for the county since 1990.) Today McFarlane is a partner in Junior’s company, Diversified Management International. In 2002 McFarlane sold his Aventura home to Junior for $465,000.

Here is Caride’s version of events as summarized by investigators: “Antonio Junior phoned Caride and told him that he was sending a very close friend of his over. Antonio Junior told Caride to give his friend ösomething.’ A short while later, Christopher McFarlane, along with a white male, appeared in Caride’s office…. McFarlane asked Caride what he needed. Caride told McFarlane he didn’t have anything for him at that time. McFarlane left unhappy.

“Within fifteen minutes Caride received a phone call from Antonio Junior asking, öAre you having a bad day? You were not very receptive to Chris.’ Caride told Antonio Junior that McFarlane was OK, but he didn’t like the white guy with him.”

The next day, during a breakfast meeting at the Airport Hilton, Caride said that Junior asked him why he hadn’t given McFarlane work. “Caride replied that McFarlane had to at least offer [Caride's company] something related to the airport.” A day later, Caride said, he met Junior, McFarlane, and a landscaper named Mario Lignarolo at Junior’s office. Lignarolo is a convicted drug-money launderer who owned the now-defunct National Landscaping, formerly Recio and Associates, which had been accused of rigging a contract in Coral Gables and billing the county for 3000 missing trees. “Caride stated that Antonio Junior and McFarlane made it clear that he had best find something for their friend Mario.”

That same night, Caride told investigators, he met McFarlane at a hotel in Coral Gables. “McFarlane called Caride over and greeted him. Caride asked McFarlane what he wanted, and he replied, öWe can make a lot of money, let’s have a drink.’ … McFarlane stated, öWe have got to get as much money as we can before the DBED rules change.’” (A reference to a county program that ensured work for minority-owned businesses.) “McFarlane told Caride not to worry because he has numerous connections at county government…. Caride noticed that Antonio Junior was peering down from an upper level at the hotel while McFarlane continued to work on him. Chris McFarlane stated to Caride, öI can do more for you than Evens [Thermilus] because I am better connected.’ At that time, Antonio Junior came down and joined them, asking, öDid we work things out?’ Caride told Antonio Junior that he would see what he could do.”

The next morning McFarlane’s friend Lignarolo stopped by Caride’s office. “What do you have for me?” Lignarolo asked, according to Caride, who sent him away empty-handed. This led to another meeting with Junior and McFarlane at Soyka restaurant. “Caride recalls Chris [McFarlane] was very upset and he told him that he wanted to invoice more money. McFarlane stated, öWhat’s it going to take to get the big money jobs. I want little overhead and big profits.’”

Eventually Lignarolo did get work at the airport and soon handed Caride an envelope containing $1000 cash for his efforts. “Caride told Mario [Lignarolo] that instead of future cash, he wanted some trees planted at the new house he was building off Sunset Drive. Mario agreed to plant some trees at the house.

“Mario then informed Caride that he had to go see the öbloodsuckers’ Antonio Junior and Chris McFarlane. Mario told Caride that they were getting more on this job than he was. Mario asked Caride to please give him more work because those guys were killing him.”

A Feast of Thieves

Scoundrels allegedly gorged themselves on millions stolen from MIA, and now a prominent politician is implicated in the conspiracy

By Tristram Korten Thursday, Mar 17 2005

Cortesy of Miami New Times 

It was an uncharacteristically gloomy afternoon last week when I visited county Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler at her office on the second floor of the government center. The sky was an unyielding mass of gray, releasing a steady downpour. If that sodden day wasn’t enough to dampen her spirits, the State Attorney’s report I was about to show her was bound to do the job. The 12,000-word investigative report linked her to a criminal defendant accused of fraud at Miami International Airport.

Carey-Shuler, of course, is one of the most popular and influential politicians in the county, and perhaps the most powerful black official. Even after stepping down as chair of the county commission this past November, as term limits required, several of her commission colleagues said privately they would have voted for her again if the rules allowed it. Last year she was re-elected to her District 3 commission seat by an overwhelming margin.

Now she’s poised for another distinction: Carey-Shuler is the next political figure targeted for investigation by authorities as a result of an ongoing criminal case at the airport. Sources close to the case say they are looking into one defendant’s allegations she was deeply involved in airport corruption — allegations she denies.

In July 2004, a team from the offices of the State Attorney, the county’s Inspector General, and the Miami-Dade Police Department’s public-corruption unit announced the arrest of nineteen people for participating in a wide-ranging conspiracy to steal millions of gallons of high-grade jet fuel from MIA, as well as siphon money from the airport in a variety of billing schemes. The estimated amount of public money stolen: five million dollars.

Among those arrested were Richard Caride, manager of the airport’s “fuel farm,” where jet fuel is pumped from Port Everglades and stored for airline use; and Antonio Junior, a local black businessman who for years has had close ties to Carey-Shuler. Journalists and political insiders were bug-eyed as they waited to see if she would catch any splatter from Junior’s arrest. Now it appears the first wheel has hit the puddle.

Caride, who is Hispanic, has pleaded guilty and is cooperating with authorities. If he lies to investigators, he faces severe consequences: His plea deal will be nullified, major racketeering charges will be reinstated, and prosecutors will use his admissions against him. The document I showed Carey-Shuler is a summary of what Caride told investigators. In it he explains in compelling detail how he accepted payoffs from Junior to steer contracts his way. He also alleges that Junior repeatedly boasted he could get contracts renewed and county employees promoted through his influence with Carey-Shuler. Never stated but clearly implied is that Junior was paying Carey-Shuler from the proceeds of his schemes. The State Attorney’s Office released the document last week as part of the discovery process in the fuel-farm case, and it is now a public record.

As of now there is little to incriminate Carey-Shuler other than Caride’s word, and that is easily impugned. A former Hialeah cop, Caride served three years of a seven-year sentence for murder after two people were killed in an armed robbery in which he participated. As Junior’s lawyer Jay Levine puts it: “Caride is a sociopathic liar, thief, and murderer.” Caride’s word, he adds, is worthless.

For her part, Carey-Shuler admits meeting Caride at Antonio Junior’s request for a series of lunches, but denies she was asked to do anything illegal or that she even knew they were involved in allegedly criminal activity. “Antonio was a friend, and he asked me to have a meeting with someone,” she says. “It was innocent. He said they were applying for an award and asked if I would write a letter saying they had been good to minority businesses. I listened and I wrote that letter. I’m always interested in promoting black entrepreneurship.”

She has an aide find the letter, and shows it to me. It’s addressed to “The Performance Track Information Center c/o Industrial Economics Incorporated,” in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and titled “Letter of Recommendation — Miami International Airport Fuel Facility National Environmental Achievement Track.” It is dated October 19, 2001.

After Junior’s arrest, investigators from the State Attorney’s Office called her. “They asked me for some records and my calendar, and they said I wasn’t involved in this investigation,” she recounts. That was then. Now authorities say they are following up on the information Caride has given them, meaning Carey-Shuler is in fact involved in the investigation.

At the least Caride’s detailed account reveals a hidden nexus of business and politics, where county commissioners’ names are used, with or without their knowledge, as currency to gain access to lucrative contracts, and where Miami International Airport’s sprawling bureaucracy is easily manipulated. At worst his narrative describes a criminal enterprise in which thieves saw the airport as one vast ATM machine to be plundered with impunity, in which crooks cynically exploited county programs designed to assist minority business owners, and in which lawbreakers were facilitated by yet another Miami politician.

The “Report of Investigation” is described as “a synopsis of debriefings with Caride.” It was prepared by Robert A. Fielder, State Attorney investigator, this past January. This is Caride’s version of events. All quotations that follow are drawn directly from the report.

It begins chronologically, with Caride describing how, in 1996, he joined Aircraft Service International Group (ASIG), the company that manages the fuel farm’s operations. He began as an operator and rose quickly through the ranks, largely because other employees were lazy and unqualified. By 1999 ASIG had promoted him to the position of fuel facility manager.

After the promotion, Caride said he “found evidence of fuel theft, such as open valves from the fuel tanks and the large filter vessels that had been drained.” He claimed he tried to foil the thefts by removing unnecessary valves. As a result, he said, an employee named Maurice Williams told Caride he was upsetting people. That sentiment was echoed by Roberto Finale, vice president of Waldron Enterprises, a company that did maintenance work at the fuel farm, who allegedly told Caride that fuel theft was a tradition and “a lot of people feed their families” from it. When Caride decided to follow tradition, he claimed that other subcontractors gave him cash bribes to look the other way as fuel was stolen by the truckload. From there he accepted money to approve new contracts, renew existing ones, and assist in fraudulent-billing schemes. Caride said he bought a pickup truck with one $20,000 cash payment. In all, he told investigators, he pocketed more than $230,000.

Caride said Williams told him he wanted to introduce someone who could help him. That’s how Caride ended up having lunch with Antonio Junior at a Bennigans restaurant on NW 42nd Avenue near the airport. “Antonio Junior told Caride that ASIG needed his help and influence to get the fuel farm management contract a few years back.” Junior wanted to offer his help again, according to Caride, allegedly explaining that “I have go-betweens with lobbyists and politicians.” And when Caride said he was new to this stuff, Junior allegedly replied, “You’re a babe in the woods, you need all the help you can get.”

Caride said Junior told him that “in exchange for his help he wanted in at the tank farm.” Caride thought about it and said he wasn’t happy with the current security company. Junior allegedly responded, “We can do that for you, I have had some training in that area.” Shortly after that, Caride said, he approached his ASIG supervisor, John McGhee, about hiring Junior’s company, Diversified Management International, to handle security at the fuel farm. “McGhee resisted but Caride said he reminded him that they needed 10 percent minority participation. McGhee agreed.”

At some point after DMI’s no-bid contract was approved, Junior invited Caride to lunch “in order to meet somebody.” They arranged to dine at Piccadilly Square restaurant in the Miami Design District, downstairs from Junior’s office. After being seated in a corner booth, Caride asked Junior who they were going to meet. “Antonio Junior told him it was Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler.” The commissioner showed up fresh from a commission meeting “and she was commenting on Commissioner Katy Sorenson. Barbara Carey-Shuler stated that Sorenson was Merrett Stierheim’s girl all the way and that there was a clique.” After introductions were made, she remarked that Junior had told her about Caride’s intention to help minority businesses.

Junior reveled in showing off his connection to Carey-Shuler, according to Caride. In one episode he described, he and Junior were watching a county commission meeting on television in Junior’s office when Junior told Caride: “Watch this.” Then he called Carey-Shuler’s office and told an assistant to deliver a note telling the commissioner to call him. Caride watched as an aide passed the note to Carey-Shuler on the commission dais. She promptly left the meeting and called Junior. “After the phone call, Caride asked Antonio Junior why he didn’t work as a registered lobbyist. Antonio Junior stated, öToo much scrutiny, I make out alright and I could get more but I’m happy with what I got.’”

Rapidly, Caride said, he found himself swept into a world of politically connected businessmen; he even attended their private parties, like one he recounted at the Miami Beach home of Evens Thermilus, who owned the contracting company T.L.M.C. (Thermilus was also arrested in the fuel-farm case, has pleaded guilty, flipped, and is the lead witness in an unrelated political corruption case — the upcoming trial of former Miami City Commissioner Art Teele.)

Also attending the backyard barbecue at Thermilus’s home were Art Teele and Barbara Carey-Shuler, who Caride said gave him a hug when she saw him there. “Caride said that during the party he was pulled into a private meeting with Evens Thermilus and Antonio Junior. Antonio Junior stated, öWe can all make a lot of money at the airport.’ Antonio Junior asked Caride if he could start Evens Thermilus with some jobs at the fuel farm.”

Caride explained it would not be easy. Miami-Dade Aviation Department project manager Patricia Nichols, who signed off on all payments, might object. “Antonio Junior promised Caride a lot of cash if he could work things out. Caride told Antonio Junior that he was interested in getting the ASIG contract renewed so that he could keep his job. Caride told Junior that the cash was secondary to keeping his job with ASIG. Antonio Junior told him not to worry because he could have Barbara Carey-Shuler renew the contract. Antonio Junior insisted that Caride get some cash too.” (Carey-Shuler denies being asked to renew the contract, adding that, at the time, only the airport director had the authority to approve the contract.)

Caride said he approached Nichols in early 2000 about giving general-contracting work to Thermilus’s company, T.L.M.C., and when Nichols expressed some skepticism, Caride told her “about Antonio Junior’s influence with Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler and other county officials. Caride told Patricia Nichols that Antonio Junior could help them, or really hurt them.”

That, apparently, was enough for Nichols. Thermilus’s T.L.M.C. was hired to remodel buildings at the fuel farm. In exchange Thermilus would pay Caride kickbacks for the work and for passing along fraudulent billing invoices. Junior would act as a middleman and deliver Thermilus’s payments to Caride.”

Shortly after approval of the first T.L.M.C. invoices, Caride said, Junior called him. They arranged to meet in the parking lot of Junior’s office, where he handed Caride a box. “Here I got a little gift for you and it should brighten your day,” he reportedly told Caride. Inside the box was a shaving-kit bag from Sharper Image. Inside the bag was a bundle of $50 and $100 bills, about $1500 in all. “See green? Bye,” Caride recalled Junior telling him.

Another time, Caride said, “Antonio Junior stopped by Caride’s office … with a Lord & Taylor box. Antonio Junior told Caride: öI figured that you would like something nice.’ Caride looked in the box and observed a blue and burgundy colored silk shirt. Caride discovered that $3500.00 in fifties and hundreds was under the shirt. Antonio Junior stated to him, öJust keeping my part of the deal.’ Caride asked why he [Caride] wasn’t getting more money. Antonio Junior replied that Caride should remember that he had to pay their friend downtown from his share.”

After a while, Thermilus suspected Junior was skimming the kickback money meant for Caride. He told Caride he wanted to deal with him directly. Caride, however, was reluctant because “it would make Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler and Antonio Junior mad at him and would put the ASIG contract in jeopardy. Evens Thermilus told him not to worry because he is hooked up with Barbara Carey-Shuler too. He stated that he had previously dated her goddaughter or relative. Evens Thermilus convinced him that it was OK.”

When Junior found out “he had been cut out of the fraud with the TLMC invoice,” Caride said, he became upset and warned, “You can’t trust them [Thermilus and his associates], they are connivers.” Then Junior flexed his political muscle, according to Caride. He summoned Caride to a meeting at Carey-Shuler’s office at the school board’s annex building. “Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler asked Caride if everything with the fuel farm security was O.K.? Caride informed her that it was. Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler told Caride: öWell, keep him there and keep him happy’ referring to Antonio Junior…. Caride stated that Antonio Junior reminded him that Barbara Carey-Shuler is the one who votes on his job. Caride stated that Antonio Junior made a regular habit of reminding him öspecial friends keep you in place.’”

Caride was back in business with Junior, but Caride still had his deal with Thermilus. In fact, Caride told investigators, he received more than $230,000 in cash from Thermilus, adding that several T.L.M.C. invoices Caride sent to Patricia Nichols for approval were utterly fake, “submitted solely to generate cash to steal from the [Miami-Dade Aviation Department]. Patricia Nichols approved all invoices despite the fact that much of the work was never done or was grossly overpriced.” Thermilus has admitted submitting more than one million dollars in invoices to the airport through Caride.

Patricia Nichols is described as the key to the smooth operation of the various fuel-farm scams. According to Caride, that’s why Thermilus and Roberto Finale, from the maintenance company Waldron Enterprises, showered her with gifts, including visits to spas, coupons to Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse and other restaurants, a digital camera, and more. Caride said he was present when Thermilus had a large flat-screen TV loaded into her car (which Thermilus independently confirmed for investigators). When Nichols at one point balked, Caride said he had another company allegedly involved in the fraud, American Petroleum Services, buy yet another TV for her. Caride himself delivered the large projection-screen unit to her house. (When investigators confronted Nichols, she claimed she became suspicious about the gift and disposed of it the next day by taking it to the dump.)

So when Nichols said her job might be in jeopardy, the whole operation was at risk. Caride described a meeting with Nichols in which she complained that her job status was temporary, she was only an acting project manager. “I have been playing ball and I have been nice, but now I want something,” Nichols allegedly told Caride. He asked her if she wanted another TV or a day at the spa. Nichols reportedly responded, “No, I want a promotion, chief of the department.” Caride said he’d see what he could do. “Quid pro quo,” she supposedly told him. Caride said he gave her a puzzled look and she responded, “You know, tit for tat, something for something.”

Caride said he immediately contacted Antonio Junior on Nichols’s behalf with a “top-priority request,” telling him: “Let’s see how good you are.” Caride said Junior told him “he would get with Barbara Carey-Shuler and get it done.” The next day Junior called Caride and allegedly said “that he had contacted Barbara Carey-Shuler and she said that it would be taken care of.”

When a couple of weeks passed and there was no word of a promotion, Nichols became impatient, Caride said. She told him she “wanted to hear from öthe horse’s mouth’ that she was going to be promoted,” otherwise she wouldn’t sign any more invoices, fraudulent or legitimate.

“Caride told Antonio Junior about Nichols’ new demand to meet the Commissioner. Junior told Caride that he would set up lunch. Junior called Caride and told him to purchase take-out lunch with Nichols and to come to Commissioner Barbara Carey-Schuler’s office at the school board building. Caride said that he and Nichols went to Pollo Tropical and picked up salads.”

Caride recounted that when Junior introduced Nichols to Carey-Shuler, he said, “Remember I told you about her and how she is helping us and about her promotion.” Caride said that Nichols and Barbara Carey-Shuler hit it off and began to talk about how they both had gone to the same university. At the end of the meeting Nichols and Barbara Carey-Shuler hugged and said goodbye.

Caride described Nichols as “giddy” when she left. He asked if she would sign invoices now and claimed she responded, “Yes, I’m happy, make sure you call Antonio Junior and tell him thank you.” Then she reportedly added, “I like this whole thing with politics.”

But after a couple of months went by and still no promotion, Caride said Nichols became impatient again and told him to set up another lunch, “or she won’t sign any more invoices.”

According to Caride, Junior acted swiftly. He scheduled a meeting the next day with Carey-Shuler at the now-defunct Café Del Mar on Biscayne Boulevard and 87th Street.

“Nichols asked Barbara Carey-Shuler about the status of her promotion. Barbara Carey-Shuler told Nichols that it was a case of bad timing because she had had a friend in personnel; however, she now has to go through other channels. Barbara Carey-Shuler stated that she appreciated her patience and thanked her for being so nice to Antonio and Rick [Caride]. Barbara Carey-Shuler told Nichols öThey came to me to make sure you are happy.’”

Caride grumbled about having to pick up the tab for the $100 crab-and-lobster lunch. But Nichols was pleased, he said, telling him “she really liked Barbara Carey-Shuler and that she was very happy.”

Invoices began flowing again, and paperwork for Nichols’s promotion was eventually submitted, according to investigators.

After taking a day to read and consider the report, Carey-Shuler wants to meet again. The day is sunny as we have lunch at the Blu Moon restaurant on Biscayne Bay. But while the literal clouds have passed, the metaphoric ones linger.

The commissioner recalls the meetings described in Caride’s statements (investigators confirmed them after examining her calendar) but asserts she was never asked to do anything illegal or unethical.

“I do remember meeting with her [Nichols], but I never called anyone on her behalf. I don’t get involved in personnel issues. If she got a promotion, it was not on my call,” Carey-Shuler says, adding that she meets with many people. It could very well be that Nichols asked for help in her job, she allows. “I probably said I’ll look into it. A lot of people ask for that kind of thing, but there’s nothing I can do.”

Carey-Shuler also points out that she didn’t have a very good relationship with the county manager at the time, Merrett Stierheim, or former airport director Gary Dellapa. The airport, she notes, is not even in her district.

And although it’s true Antonio Junior set up luncheon meetings with Richard Caride, she again asserts she believed it was to help the fuel farm win an award. If Junior was using the lunches as proof he was on good terms with the commissioner, implying she would get things done for him, “I just can’t help what he might say about me. People do that all the time.”

Cast of Characters

Barbara Carey-Shuler, age 65, was appointed to the Miami-Dade County Commission in 1979. Since then she has repeatedly been re-elected to the commission. She has had a long and storied career in politics, instrumental in establishing affirmative-action programs and minority set-asides for companies doing business with the county. She holds a doctorate in education and has worked as a teacher, administrator, and assistant superintendent for the Miami-Dade school district. She is no stranger to controversy. A technical school she founded shortly after the 1980 Liberty City riots, Carey Technical Institute, defaulted on a $300,000 loan from the City of Miami; the federal government later accused the school (though not Carey directly) of numerous financial and ethical irregularities. In 2002 the State Attorney’s Office concluded she falsified time sheets for a part-time job with the school district but said the matter was not criminal. A subsequent ethics complaint was dismissed. Carey-Shuler denied the accusation, stating she had personal records that investigators did not examine. Now she has been implicated in a scandal at Miami International Airport.

Richard Caride, age 46, is the former Aircraft Services International Group supervisor who managed the fuel facility at Miami International Airport, known as the fuel farm. He is also a former Hialeah police officer who took part in an armed robbery at a Coconut Grove home in 1985 during which two people were killed. Prosecutors cleared him of being the triggerman, and he pleaded guilty and cooperated with authorities. He served three years of a seven-year sentence for second-degree murder. Caride pleaded guilty in the fuel-farm case and is now cooperating with prosecutors. The information he provides must be truthful or he’ll be charged with racketeering and his information will be used against him. In exchange for his assistance, he is expected to serve two years in prison. He was also forced to sell his home. The $200,000 in proceeds was transferred to the Miami-Dade Aviation Department as restitution.

Antonio Junior, age 47, is the owner of Diversified Management International, which was awarded a contract to provide security at the MIA fuel farm. Junior was also a minority partner in a company that won the contract to provide baggage-cart services at the airport. As a minority businessman (Junior is black), he has been a partner in other MIA contracts as well. For years he has maintained a close relationship with county Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler. In 1996 he loaned her county commission election campaign $20,000. Carey-Shuler says she didn’t ask for the money and that it was used to cover payroll when banks were closed. The money was immediately repaid, she says. He is charged with two counts of racketeering and one count of organized fraud.

Patricia Nichols, age 50, is a former Miami-Dade Aviation Department project supervisor who oversaw expenses at the fuel farm. She is charged with three counts of unlawful compensation for allegedly accepting expensive gifts from airport vendors and jockeying for a promotion in exchange for signing fraudulent and overpriced invoices.

Jacques Evens Thermilus, age 46, is the owner of the general-contracting firm T.L.M.C. He admitted paying Caride $230,000 in kickbacks and bribes and submitting to the county’s aviation department more than one million dollars in fraudulent invoices. He pleaded guilty in the fuel-farm case and is cooperating with prosecutors in the upcoming corruption trial of former Miami City Commissioner Arthur Teele. Thermilus admitted paying kickbacks to Teele to steer city contracts his way.

You be the judge…

Lucia Whalen’s (who made the 911 call to Cambridge police, who eventually arrested the owner of the house, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr.) comments seem to contradict the police report filed by Sgt. James Crowley.

Ms. Whalen: said that the only words she exchanged with Sergeant Crowley in person were, “I was the 911 caller.” She said that he responded, “Stay right there.”

Sgt. Crowley: claims that Ms. Whalen told him outside Mr. Gates’s home that she had seen “what appeared to be two black males with backpacks.”

courtesy progreso-weekly.com

By Amaury Cruz

In Much ado over a non-coup (Miami Herald, July 26, 2009, p. 6L) William Ratliff writes in definitive tones that it was ousted Honduran president Manuel Zelaya “who was in the wrong,” instead of the new government, and complains that the OAS has painted him as a hero instead of the “country’s No. 1 lawbreaker.” Ratliff exemplifies a horde of commentators that have tried to put a rightist spin on the Honduran crisis in order to justify the recent coup d’état.

Why is Zelaya the country’s No. 1 lawbreaker? According to Ratliffe, for something the OAS, the U.N. and other leaders did not know: “he triggered a constitutional provision that automatically removed him from office.” “Google the Honduran Constitution and read it for yourself,” Ratliffe urges, pointing to Article 239 of the constitution.

This Article has been cited so much by the spinners, it’s hard to comprehend how the OAS, the U.N. and “other leaders” could have missed it. Among others, lawyers representing the new government of Honduras cited the provision in congressional testimony. No one ever read it out loud, however, and it has not been seen in print in any of dozens or articles about the recent Honduran coup. Duly Googled, here is a translation of that constitutional provision:

“Article 239 – A citizen who has held executive power shall not be President or Vice-President of the Republic.

“Whoever violates this provision or proposes a change to it, as well as those who support it directly or indirectly, shall immediately cease to carry out their respective offices and shall be disqualified for ten (10) years from the exercise of any public office.”

See http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Honduras/hond05.html.

So, the gist of the provision is to impose a term limit on the executive and whoever violates the proscription against the term limit or proposes to change it, shall be thrown out of office and stay out for ten years.

How did Zelaya supposedly violate this provision? According to a CNN report online, “He sought [a] referendum, which he planned to hold [in June 2009], to see if voters wanted a measure on November’s ballot to establish a constitutional assembly to study whether a president could run for re-election.” See http://www.cnn.com/

2009/WORLD/americas/07/19/costa.rica.honduras.talks/index.html (July 19, 2009).

So, it is not clear that Zelaya did anything to violate Article 239, nor is it clear that, even if he had, that provision triggered his automatic removal from office. Zelaya did not stay in office beyond his term, or said he wanted to, and the referendum merely called for a constitutional assembly, not the actual change in the constitution.  Even if he had done any of these things, all Article 239 says is he should be thrown out of office, but presumably after an impeachment proceeding, not by the military, even if the military was wearing the fig leaf of a Supreme Court order issued summarily.  Nowhere does Article 239 say the president should have been kidnapped in the middle of the night, under threat of assassination, and taken to another country.

In fact, in an interview with The Miami Herald, army attorney Col. Herberth Bayardo Inestroza acknowledged that “top military brass made the call to forcibly remove Zelaya and violated the law when they did it.” “We know there was a crime there,” said Inestroza, “the top legal advisor for the Honduran armed forces.” “In the moment that we took him out of the country, in the way that he was taken out, there is a crime.” Top Honduran military lawyer: We broke the law, Miami Herald, July 3, 2009, available at http://www.miamiherald.com/honduras/v-print/story/1125872.html.

It is also not clear that Article 239 is immutable. At least one other provision in the Honduran Constitution is at odds with the proscription against change (which also applies to seven other articles).  Article 2 of the Constitution reads: “Sovereignty resides with the People[,] from whom all the powers of the State emanate [and] which are exercised by representation. The Sovereignty of the People can also be exercised directly, through a Plebiscite or Referendum.”

So, the powers emanate from the people, and the people can exercise their sovereignty through a plebiscite or referendum. It follows that the people, through a referendum, can amend all articles in the constitution. Hence, Zelaya arguably acted well within the parameters of the constitution as well a rule of reason allowing the people to amend the constitution that they themselves have created.

Therefore, it is not a foregone conclusion that, as Ratliff claims, “it was quite legal for the military to remove Zelaya.”  Ratliff recognizes that “the nighttime act” of the military removing Zelaya gave the impression of a military coup to outsiders.  But it was not only the nighttime act, it was his removal to exile in Costa Rica, shooting down the door to his house and other brutal acts, and the total lack of due process, implicitly recognized by Col. Herberth Bayardo as crimes.

It is not that “Zelaya, [OAS chief Jose Miguel] Insulza, [Venezuelan president Hugo] Chávez, the U.N. and all the OAS member-states are playing at banana republic politics,” as Ratliff says. It is Ratliff et alia playing at banana republic journalism.

Amaury Cruz is a Miami lawyer, writer and political activist

Thanks to a Havana Note blog entry from John McAuliff

A story came across the McClatchy wire on Friday night that felt like a punch in the gut.

It made it seem as though the President had joined the conditionality caucus. However, either the reporter misunderstood or her Miami Herald editor had an agenda.

Thanks to Phil Peters on the Cuban Triangle blog we can contrast (below) the actual transcript with the article.

Ironically, the reporter’s question contains a tantalizing nugget about rumors of long overdue action on non-tourist travel. The President did not confirm or deny that anything was imminent. But it is clear that the only time frame he was relating non-tourist travel to was progress on practical matters discussed during the migration talks, and possibly, earlier bilateral meetings in Washington. “We’re not there yet” is not a big obstacle given that many of the topics discussed are of mutual interest to resolve.

Only “full normalization” was linked to “progress on issues of political liberalization.” Even his comment that “I don’t think it’s going to be happening overnight” seems tied to full normalization rather than to incremental reforms like non-tourist travel. I also note that “progress” is not the same as fulfillment and inherently lies in the eye of the beholder. For example “release of political prisoners” could be met at any time, either because a partial release could qualify or because mutual gestures could result in the freedom of all prisoners each side considers political.

Although it is not an obstacle to moving forward, I am not a fan of the President’s softer longer term conditionality. It does embody a-historical presumptuousness, so at variance with Obama’s world view. Moreover internal governance was certainly not a condition for U.S. normalization with China or Vietnam.

But that is an argument for the future. The issue now is to change the parameters of the debate by Presidential authorization of non-tourist travel and Congressional action to end all other restrictions. Let’s assume the reporter at least got the rumor right, and post messages of encouragement to the White House Office of Public Engagement web page.

(Texts below)

Transcript from President’s meeting with regional reporters posted on The Cuban Triangle

Q: Mr. President…you’ve made some changes in the Cuba policy, and I wanted to know if and when you’d be – there’s rumors about – that you’d be making announcement on changes in purposeful travel – academic, religious.

THE PRESIDENT: […] With respect to Cuba, we have already had government-to-government conversations around a narrow set of issues. Our hope is, is that if we’re seeing progress on those issues, then they can begin to broaden in the ways that you discussed. We’re not there yet, and as I’ve said before, we think it’s important to see progress on issues of political liberalization, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, release of political prisoners, in order for there to be the full possibility of normalization between our two countries. We’re taking it step by step seeing if, as we change some of the old approaches that we’ve been taking, we are seeing some movement on the Cuban government’s side. And I don’t think it’s going to be happening overnight. I think it’s something that will be a work in progress.

**************

Obama: More change in Cuba policy won’t come soon

By LESLEY CLARK

McClatchy Newspapers

Posted on Friday, 07.24.09

WASHINGTON –President Barack Obama said Friday that he’s open to more overtures to Cuba, such as lifting restrictions on academic travel to the island, but not without signs of changes from the government in Havana.

“We’re not there yet,” he said. “We think it’s important to see progress on issues of political liberalization, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, release of political prisoners in order for there to be the full possibility of normalization between our two countries.” […]

Several members of Congress and groups, including the leading association that promotes student travel to and from the U.S., have urged Obama to remove what they said are restrictive regulations on academic and other “purposeful” travel to Cuba imposed by President George W. Bush in 2004. The Association of International Educators said this week that study abroad to Cuba has “declined precipitously.”

In April, Obama lifted travel and gift restrictions for those with relatives in Cuba and eased restrictions on U.S. telecommunications firms to do business there. Last week, the administration resumed talks with Cuban officials on what Obama called a “narrow set of issues,” chiefly migration.

However, Obama said additional steps won’t come soon.

“We’re taking it step by step, seeing if, as we change some of the old approaches that we’ve been taking, we are seeing some movement on the Cuban government side,” he said. “I don’t think it’s going to be happening overnight. I think it’s going to be a work in progress.” […]

By Max J. Castro
majcastro@gmail.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Obama is nothing if not persistent, but does he have the audacity to show the Israelis that actions have real and not just symbolic consequences by conditioning diplomatic support and economic and military aid on Israel’s seriousness in regard to a peace plan?

It didn’t take long for Israel’s new Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to thumb his nose at the United States, Israel’s benefactor to the tune of tens of billions of dollars and dozens of UN Security Council vetoes since the 1948 foundation of the Jewish state.

Netanyahu announced Israel would go ahead with the construction of 20 apartments for Jewish settlers in Arab East Jerusalem contrary to the wishes of the Obama administration. Rhetoric aside, Netanyahu’s move once again shows that hardliners in Israel have a very clear policy: do everything in their power to make the creation of a viable Palestinian state impossible. Netanyahu says Jews have the right to build in an area annexed after the Six-Day War in 1967. In fact, construction and settlement on occupied land is illegal under international law. East Jerusalem is envisioned as the capital of the Palestinian state under various peace plans but Israeli hawks insist the city will remain undivided as Israel’s capital.

The Israeli experience is that they can ignore Washington’s wishes with impunity despite the utter dependence of the Jewish state on the United States. So far, the Obama administration has reacted with a mere slap on the wrist in the form of summoning the Israeli ambassador to Washington, Michael B. Oren, to the State Department.

Stopping settlements is the first step toward a peace plan; Netanyahu has served notice that he is not serious about making peace with the Palestinians and instead will rely on Israel’s overwhelming power and the virtually unconditional support of the American superpower.

Obama is nothing if not persistent, but does he have the audacity to show the Israelis that actions have real and not just symbolic consequences by conditioning diplomatic support and economic and military aid on Israel’s seriousness in regard to a peace plan?

The notion is almost unthinkable within the reality of American politics. On the other hand, a fair and lasting peace is unthinkable absent U.S. political will vis-à-vis Israel.

With a tremendous assistance from Palestinian radicals, Israel has been able to equate, in the minds of many, the legitimate Palestinian aspirations for a viable state with terrorism. But what would happen if Palestinians adopted the practices of radical non-violent protest and eschewed the armed struggle which is militarily unwinnable, counterproductive politically and immoral when it is directed at civilians? Although they kill many fewer than do the Israelis, the killing of innocent civilians is the only thing preventing the Palestinians from attaining the moral high ground.

By Bill Moyers and Michael Winship

Push finally came to shove in Washington this week as the battle for health care escalated from scattered sniper fire into all-out combat. If it all seems to be getting more and more confusing, join the club. It’s hard to see what’s happening through all the gun smoke.

The Republicans have more than health care reform in their bombsights — they want a loss for Obama so crushing it will bring the administration to its knees and restore GOP control of Congress after next year’s elections. In the words of Republican Senator Jim DeMint, “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.”

The “Waterloo” of DeMint’s metaphor, of course, is not the 1974 Abba hit but the battle in 1815 that ended Napoleon Bonaparte’s rule as Emperor of France — a humiliating defeat and a turning point in European history. Right-wingers like Glenn Beck see Obama as Napoleon incarnate, a popular emperor who must be stopped.

Here’s what Beck said on his television show Monday, July 20: “I’m telling you, this guy is dangerous. He’s never lost before. He won’t understand … like, ‘Who are you to question me?’ I mean, this guy is practically an imperial President now. When he starts to lose and people start to question him and push him back against the wall, he’s not gonna know how to react.”

The Republican strategy is almost identical to the way they turned health care into Waterloo for Bill and Hillary Clinton in 1993. Back then, one of their chief propagandists, William Kristol, urged his party to block any health care plan for fear that Democrats would be seen as “the generous protector of middle class interests.” Now he’s telling the GOP to “go for the kill … throw the kitchen sink … drive a stake through its heart … We need to start over.”

So in lockstep are the Republicans that when strategist Alex Castellanos issued a memo outlining their battle plan, party chairman Michael Steele parroted large sections of it word for word in a speech at Washington’s National Press Club. Asked a health care-related question that took him off script, Steele replied, “I don’t do policy.”

As the Republicans fired away, big business stepped up the attack too, their lobbying and advertising guns blazing. The Chamber of Commerce, for one, announced a major campaign of rallies and print and Internet ads to crush the White House plan for a competitive public option allowing consumers to choose between a government plan and private health insurance. In key states where members of Congress remain on the fence, the airwaves are vibrating with television commercials aimed at shifting hearts and minds away from any change that might threaten profits.

President Obama rejected the Republicans’ Waterloo metaphor and mounted a massive media counteroffensive of his own. But the President has already run into booby traps of his own making and minefields laid by members of his own party, exacerbated when the Congressional Budget Office reported that reform plans, instead of controlling costs, would send the national debt further into the stratosphere.

Meanwhile, supporters who want to scrap the present system for fundamental change are staring glumly though the fog of war at a battlefield in total disarray. They fear that in the White House’s desire to get a bill — any bill — passed by Congress, it will have been so compromised, so bent to favor the big interests, that it will be less Waterloo than watered down, a steady diluting of the change they had hoped for and that America needs.

The big drug companies are already so pleased with what they’ve been promised that they’ve brought back Harry and Louise — the make-believe couple who starred in TV ads that helped torpedo the Clinton health care plan — but this time they’re in favor of reform.

According to The Associated Press, the drug industry’s trade group PhRMA (the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America) and the drug company Pfizer “reported spending more money than other health care organizations on lobbying in the second quarter of this year” — $6.2 million from PhRMA, $5.6 million from Pfizer.

“Including its latest report, PhRMA has now spent $13.1 million lobbying so far this year. Pfizer has reported $11.7 million in lobbying expenses for 2009.”

This is part of the reason, as Alicia Mundy and Laura Meckler recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal, that “the pharmaceuticals industry, which President Barack Obama promised to ‘take on’ during his campaign, is winning most of what it wants in the health-care overhaul.”

Their story describes “a string of victories” plucked from the Senate Finance Committee by drug company lobbyists, including no cost-cutting steps, no cheaper drugs to be allowed across the border from Canada, and no direct Federal government negotiations with the pharmaceutical companies to lower Medicare drug prices.

And that’s not all. The Senate Health Committee is giving the biotech industry monopoly protection against competition from generic drugs for 12 years after they go on the market.

No wonder the cost of reform keeps going up and up and up. Could it be that Harry and Louise are happier because, this time, they’re in on the deal?

Bill Moyers is managing editor and Michael Winship is senior writer of the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal, which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or comment at The Moyers Blog at www.pbs.org/moyers. Research provided by editorial producer Rebecca Wharton.

By Saul Landau

During mid July, the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s qualifications for the Supreme Court. The Solon’s oratory focused on themes of some fictional world, not one threatened by global warming and diving economies. Scientists regularly predict dire consequences if current production and consumption practices continue, but southern Republicans emphasized the country’s “fundamental” issues: the rights to own guns and numchuks, plus the sins of abortion, affirmative action and liberal-activist judges who allow “foreign law” to stain our judicial system.

Simultaneously, news of record June foreclosures and higher unemployment competed with stories of three self-righteous, high-level, elected Christians who practiced the very sins against which they had preached.

Why was this news — again? Marital infidelity — the usual sexual hanky panky — led reporters to “discover” dozens of Members of both Houses belonged to or lived inside a “Christian” cult house on Capitol Hill. South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, Nevada Senator John Ensign and former Mississippi Congressman Chip Pickering partook of the spiritual guidance of fellow legislative residents and dramatic preachers at this religious prayer center. The emerging details should cause the public to question the sanity — or inanity — of part of its governing class.

The sexual sinners fell from their self-constructed state of grace into the garbage or gossip pile. Their actions and words symbolized the banality of politics in the era of imperial denial. They dallied with “other” women; then engaged in burlesque cover ups of their indiscretions. Having given hypocrisy a bad name — again — the sinners then implicated The Fellowship, the secret sect that housed these A-type religious narcissists.

Before getting elected governor, Sanford had served three terms in the House (1995 to 2001) and linked himself to the C Street Bible study group. A mysterious foundation, The Fellowship, runs the place and also sponsors the yearly National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, formally owned by Youth With A Mission and valued at $1.8 million. (WORLD Magazine June 26, 2009)

The legislators followed the unusual Christian doctrine of Pastor Doug Coe, whose son David guided John Ensign through the cover-up of his affair. Doug told reporter Jeff Sharlet the meaning of being “chosen for leadership like King David was — or Mark Sanford.” For example: “Let’s say I hear you raped three little girls.” This question would be asked of a young man who’d put himself, body and soul, under the Family’s authority. “What would I think of you?”

Like most people, the man guessed Coe would think he was a monster. “No,” answered Coe, “Because,” wrote Sharlet, “as a member of the Family, he’s among what Family leaders refer to as the ‘new chosen’.” Pastor Doug, David’s father, leaked an even more important secret. The Supreme One had revealed to him in the 1960s, that He had chosen selected individuals to live in the C Street house. Doug Coe led The Family fellowship going back to the mid ‘60s. “I knew Coe when I was part of The Family. He explained what it means to be a chosen politician. (Salon.com, July 22, 2009. In 2002, Jeff Sharlet lived in The Family’s house.)

These chosen ones, albeit mere mortals – for those haven’t slept with them — might not have discerned their Divine mission, based on their higher spiritual values. So, Coe and his preacher sons, having determined their elite status in private conversations with God, began to coach the powerful in the proper methods of running the country — and maybe the world. At any given time, eight members of the Senate and House have resided at the C Street Center where they sleep, pray, and eat for a mere $600 a month. (Does this indicate that the residents are also cheapskates?) Other Members visited regularly to pray and seek spiritual guidance.

Coe’s — a modern Elmer Gantry? — mysterious Bible study residence had Christian politicians praying, extolling fundamental principles and the Ten Commandments and then screwing around; after which they discussed their extramarital affairs.

The disgraced pols lied and covered up their affairs while continuing to preach traditional family values for everyone else; especially Bill Clinton. “I did not have sex with that woman,” Clinton swore, referring to Monica Lewinsky. He didn’t finish the thought. “All I did was stick my dick in her mouth.”

Sanford and Ensign weren’t only “playing around.” They had sex with “those women,” or else they might have repeated Clinton’s quaint denial. Indeed, months before the affairs became news, they confessed infidelity to C Street House buddies. The devout comrades tried to help the lusty hypocrites to “resolve their extramarital relationships.” In group counseling, following proper Christian ways, the sinners could repent in biblical fashion: lying, bribing and finessing. Some would say the dalliers thought they had gotten “lucky,” but instead got hoisted — not literally, unfortunately — on their own petards.

Ensign boinked his aide, Cynthia Hampton, until it reached the point where lust got out of hand — or wherever — and cult members interceded. Doug Hampton, Cynthia’s husband and also an Ensign aide, confronted the Christians at the C Street House. Given the possibility of major scandal — which God strongly disapproves of, but cannot for some reason control as He does the weather — Fellowship leader Coe’s sons, David and Tim, joined C Street roommate Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) to confront Ensign. They “resolved” the affair by convincing him to send a Dear Jane letter to Cynthia.

Tim Coe drove Ensign to FedEx with the letter, which also promised Ensign’s wealthy parents would pay $96,000 in “shut your mouth honey” money to the Hampton family — anything to keep a family together. After sending the letter, Ensign clearly felt horny, called his sweetheart and told her to disregard the content of the letter she would receive.

Sanford’s middle age lust also led him to the woman of his hot dreams. An Argentine siren lured him south to engage his libido. As he trysted with the dark-eyed señorita, he also tried to cover up his dangerous liaison with an Appalachian-trail hike lie.

Until the “news” broke, he and Ensign were reputedly Republican front-runners for the 2012 presidential race. What a tragedy for the Nation and disappointment for the Supreme Being that they blew their chances for gaining the highest office, just because the public learned they failed to practice what they preached. What disgrace for The Fellowship to have its members burned by the light of sensational publicity.

Another powerful C House resident for seven years, Senator Jim DeMint, Sanford’s fellow South Carolinian, quoted God: “‘We are salt and light.’” DeMint meant “there are people of faith who have been sprinkled in Washington, D.C.” Among these scattered flakes DeMint counts the Health Insurance lobby that contributed $3+ million to his campaign coffers over the past four years. For DeMint, this kind of private sector influence represents God’s will. Obama, on the other hand, by offering government-backed health care, has engaged in socialistic sin, the Devil’s domain. C Street House members know the secret eleventh commandment in which God blessed private enterprise and outlawed sinful government run programs.

Faith — and millions of dollars — drove pious Solons to deliver God’s message at the Sotomayor hearings: own guns and numchucks, deny global warming, rail against abortion, affirmative action, foreign law and (liberal) activist judges. Group members Coburn and Rep. Zach Wamp (R-TN) shared not only values but millions of dollars contributed to their coffers by gun lobbyists and anti-regulators from other industries: God’s agents.

In a time of economic and environmental crises, the fundamentalist hold on some of the powerful appears as dark comedy. Right wing preachers Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell once explained how God punished New Orleans — modern Sodom — with Hurricane Katrina for allowing homosexuals to practice immoral behavior.

Some Democrats also belong to this cult. Coincidentally, powerful lobbies have also purchased their allegiance (or faith), making it difficult to pass the health bill. One surprise Democrat also flirted with The Family. Hillary Clinton called Coe, “a genuinely loving spiritual mentor . . . a source of strength and friendship.” In her autobiography, Clinton was in the midst of fighting off right wing Republicans’ demands for Whitewater investigations and impeachment hearings. She nevertheless prayed with members of that “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

Doug Coe accompanied Mrs. Clinton as a member of the U.S. delegation that attended Mother Theresa’s state funeral in Calcutta in 1997. Mother Theresa spoke to Coe’s National Prayer Breakfast meeting in Washington in 1994.

Thus far, no leading Democrat has demanded that some fellow legislators remove their heads from their nether crevices, forget numchuk ownership and face the imminent dangers to the country and planet. Or must we wait for Him — or Her?

Saul Landau is an Institute for Policy Studies fellow whose films are on DVD ( roundworldproductions@gmail.com

courtesy from progreso-weekly.com