The man entering had shoulders that touched both door jambs as he passed into the room. His face was the size of a catcher’s mitt, pitted and creased and polished dark at the cheekbones from taking punches, his tiny eyes like black seeds buried in flesh. They called him Roast Beef.

“Hey, Beef,” said a skinny guy with weak chin and an oiled pompadour.

The big man’s voice was surprisingly high pitched. “You seen Anthony?”

Pompadour gave a shrug and moved to one side as a slight figure wearing red canvas slides slipstreamed behind the big man, smiling, eyes swiveling around the room. A voice called out, “Switch! Over here!”

Switch made his way through the crowd. A hand reached out. Switch ignored it and sat down next to a squat man with thick arms who compensated for his thinning hair with an unconvincing combover.

There was a loud rap on a table at the front of the room. A swarthy man whose large knuckles showed signs of having been broken more than once rapped the table again and spoke loudly: “Welcome to Cell Block B’s nightly meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous. My name is Larry, and I’m an alcoholic.”

“Hello, Larry,” the room chorused without much enthusiasm.

“Please take your seats.” He called out to a man seated in the back, “Samuel, will you please read the open meeting statement?”

Samuel, nearing 80 and bent nearly double at the waist by arthritis, stood slowly, holding a sheet of paper in a plastic sleeve in his painfully crumpled right hand: “This is an open meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous. We are glad you are all here – especially newcomers. In keeping with our singleness of purpose and our Third Tradition which states that ‘The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking,’ we ask that all who participate confine their discussion to their problems with alcohol.”

“Beansie, will you give us the Serenity Prayer?”

The squat man with the combover stood as the entire room intoned the prayer’s words with him: “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.”

He sat down, glancing at the guard who stood in the corner checking names off a list on a clipboard. He reached the bottom and called out to the room, “Anybody seen Anthony?”

A voice in the back said, “He’s in the clinic. Fell down and broke his knee.”

Laughter rippled through the room.

The guard started for the door. “I’m going to be right outside. Any fucking around, and every one of you is in lockdown, got it?”

As he turned to leave, a guy in the back shot him the finger. The guard closed the door behind himself, and the room went silent.

Larry glanced down at a sheet of instructions on the table before him. “We’re going to pass on reading the steps and go straight to our speaker for today. Johnny, you want to come up here and take a seat?”

Johnny Machine, 35, beginning to go gray at the temples and skinny as a walking stick, stood and walked to the front of the room and sat down behind the table.

“Hello, my name is John and I’m an alcoholic,” he said with a barely suppressed smile.

“Hello, John!” someone called out from the back of the room. A guy with a crewcut sitting in the same row told him to zip it.

“I know most of youse need to be here if you want a chance at parole. That don’t matter. I know I said it before, but I’m gonna say it again anyway. AA ain’t just about the booze. It’s about life, right?”

A few guys nodded slowly. One guy let out a fart so loud, it got a laugh and a punch in the shoulder.

“I did some stupid shit when I was drinkin,” Johnny said. “I did even more stupid shit when I was flat-out drunk. But the stupidest thing I ever done, I was stone cold sober, right, Beansie?’

Towards the back of the room, Beansie acknowledged his friend with a nod.

“Dumb fucker that I am, it was my idea to rob a bar in the Village in the middle of a blizzard on Christmas Eve. Wearing Santa suits. That was my idea too. What wasn’t my idea was gettin’ caught.”

Johnny leaned against the back of the chair, which like every other chair in the room, was fixed to the concrete floor with a 3/8^th inch bolt, its nut filed smooth so it could not be removed except by drilling out the bolt.

“I gotta back up. We got caught twice that night, first by Vincent ‘The Chin’ Gigante, to whom I owed some money.”

“Tell ‘em how much you owed Chin, Johnny!” Beansie called out.

“It was two grand, but when you’re into the Chin, it coulda been a C-note. Doesn’t matter how much you owe, it’s gonna hurt, you don’t pay up. Anyway, Chin saw us walkin’ down the street, yanked us into his club, and he was about to turn loose Tony the Hammer on me when I told him we were on the way to take off the Roadhouse on Seventh Avenue. He asked me what the fuck we were doin’ in Santa suits, and I told him they was our disguises. You coulda heard him up on 14^th Street, he was laughin’ so hard. ‘This I gotta see,’ Chin says. He even drove us over to Grove Street. The Chin and Tony sat in the car on Bleecker and watched us cross Seventh Avenue and walk into the Roadhouse.”

“In our fuckin’ Santa suits,” called Beansie, waving a hand in the air.

“You got that right. Me and Beansie walk through the door, and it’s so crowded, we could barely move, music blasting from about six speakers, people dancin’ between the tables, partying like it was fuckin’ New Years Eve. We had a shotgun in this fuckin’ bag Beansie was carryin’ and reached in and took it out and waved it over my head and yelled, ‘This is a fuckin’ stick up! Everybody on the floor!’ Nobody could hear us over the music, so I shot out this big fuckin’ speaker near the bar, there was a couple of pops and the music stopped, and I racked the gun and shot out the back bar and yelled, ‘this is a stick up’ again and waved the gun around the room, and everybody dove for the floor.”

Most of the guys at the meeting were new and had never heard the Christmas Eve story before, and Johnny had their full attention now.

“Beansie was goin’ around grabbin’ wallets and purses and jewelry and watches and shoving them in the sack. I went up to the bar and pointed the shotgun at the bartender. I didn’t even have to say the words, and he was emptying the register and shovin’ bills across the bar. I turned around to grab Beansie and split when I feel this hard jab right in my crotch, and I hear a voice I recognized. ‘Hey, Machine. That’s my service revolver you’re feeling down there below your waist. How are they hanging?’ It was this cop who drank in bars around the Village, the Lion’s Head, the Corner Bistro, obviously the Roadhouse. He was the NYPD’s chief hostage negotiator. I froze.”

“‘Put the gun on the floor,’ he says, ‘Slowly. That fuckin’ thing goes off and I’ll shoot off your balls one at a time.’ I did what he said. I look at Beansie. He’s headin’ for the door. The cop yells at him, ‘I can see you behind that fake fuckin’ beard, Beansie. If I have to come after you, I’ll get the DA to tag a charge with five extra years on your indictment.’ Beansie stops. I’m standin’ there with my arms over my head, and for the life of me, Beansie looked like fuckin’ Santa Claus with that sack over his shoulder. The whole thing lasted, maybe, three minutes.”

Johnny looked around the low-ceilinged room. Two dozen or so rapt faces looked back at him. He smiled.

“It was at that very moment God gave me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,” Johnny said to uproarious laughter. “A .38 in the nuts will do that to you.”

Give a gift subscription

Leave a comment

Share

Cabo Verde is not a rich country. To have an idea, the minimum wage is €130 a month and a meal in a restaurant costs around €10. The IMF classifies Cabo Verde as a developing country.

Development has long ceased to be defined in exclusively economic terms. In 1990, a “human development index” was introduced, and other indicators have followed. Yet, there is one dimension still missing from all international comparisons: the moral development of a society. On this dimension, Cabo Verde seems to be among the most advanced. Here’s why.

First, when you lose money on the street, if there are people who pursue you to return the sum (which is worth, for them, three days’ work paid at the minimum wage) they are admirably honest people. Second, when the price of a good or service (such as transportation) is well known, people who offer it for free to others are rather generous. Third, public transport users and drivers who organize to leave a small package for someone on the other side of the mountain are particularly helpful.

These three social virtues – honesty, generosity and a helping heart – seem to indicate a high level of moral development. I had a similar feeling when I discovered, on arriving in France, that I could trust that I would be given the correct change at every purchase. But after 25 years in a “developed country”, I confess to being now astonished by individual generosity: is this possible between strangers and without recompense? Other Europeans living in Cabo Verde have told me that they were equally surprised at first (and wondered what the return should be). Perhaps, we don’t live in the most morally developed countries.

My proposal is then to integrate moral development amongst development indicators. At a time when populists claim that the people is innocent and the elite corrupt, why not measure which people is the most generous in the world? We could measure the perceived moral development, as is also done for the perceived corruption indicator (albeit by a combined indicator). Using a questionnaire, we could estimate the number and quality of acts of generosity that people have performed in a given country, and the ones they have benefited from, over the same period.

As generosity is contagious, this development would surely be the most “sustainable”.

São Pedro International Airport Cesaria Evora

Power to the customers and multi-media artists of Beauty Salons! We here at TWMDBS appreciate the spirit of a sweet little salon in Portlandia. Thank you for sharing your pointed pink message with Juanita Jean. Can we all agree on this? Hate is Ugly.

HUD Nominee Appears to Oppose the Core Mission of Helping the Disadvantaged

With most confirmation attention focused on the Donald Trump’s appointees under review for sexual assault complaints, focus on pursuing “enemies,” or outlandish health claims, we tend to overlook those who simply detest the agencies they are being asked to lead.

Thanks to ProPublica, we’re getting a look at Scott Turner, Trump’s designated Housing and Urban Development secretary, whose record over time is one that opposes efforts to aid the poor — which is the point of the agency.

It’s good that Trump has appointed someone, because to date, his sole solution to housing issues is his specious, blanket promise to deport migrants — apparently suggesting that will free up housing.

So he chose Turner, former NFL football player turned politician. As a Texas state legislator, Turner has repeatedly voted against protections for poor tenants and has called government assistance “one of the most destructive things for the family.” What he has done was to work as the head of a White House council during Trump’s first term to promote  “opportunity zones” to spur investments in low-income neighborhoods by offering generous tax breaks.

In office, Turner supported a bill ensuring landlords could refuse apartments to applicants because they received federal housing assistance, opposed a bill to expand affordable rental housing, voted against funding public-private partnerships to support the homeless and against two bills that called merely to study homelessness among young people and veterans. He repeatedly has called welfare “dangerous, harmful” and “one of the most destructive things for the family.”

HUD’s Job

The core work of HUD, a $72-billion agency that serves as a backstop against homelessness for the nation’s poor, elderly and disabled, is to provide rental assistance to 2 million families, oversee 800,000 public housing units, fight housing discrimination, and promote more housing alternatives.

Much like those nominated to run health services, education, even the national security agencies to some extent, this is a Trump appointment of someone who seems opposed to the very mission of the agency getting a new leader.  Unlike some of his brasher Cabinet appointees, Turner has been quiet about his intentions for change. So, ProPublica reviewed his legislative record, speeches, podcast appearances and sermons at the Plano, Texas, megachurch where he is a pastor.

Vox.com is among the news agencies with recent articles about the state of housing, writing about experiments to redefine who can qualify by income for public housing assistance.  From many sources, there seems widespread agreement that housing costs generally are driving inflation complaints, that rents are rising faster than most other costs, that there is not enough housing available generally and in particular for those with limited income. Racial discrimination continues to hamper development, along with economic factors.

In short, availability of what we generally would include as affordable housing is a recognized problem that defies political party control and administrations. As we wrestle over appropriate public-private investment strategies, homelessness has boomed and anger is rising over the dissipation of The American Dream of home ownership for all.

Enter the Trump Agenda

So, here comes the Trump administration, which generally dislikes both regulation of the marketplace and more public spending for things like housing.

Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s outline for the Trump administration, suggests cutting public money for affordable housing, repealing regulations that fight housing discrimination, increasing work requirements and adding time limits for rental assistance and eliminating anti-homelessness policies. That section was written by Ben Carson, Trump’s first HUD secretary and a mentor to Turner; Carson pushed to end an anti-segregation rule, add work requirements for housing assistance and make it harder to prove housing discrimination.

Turner grew up poor in Texas, and he has reflected darkly about family reliance on public assistance programs. After a football career, Turner worked as an intern for California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter and was elected to the Texas House in 2012. While there, he voted against bills supporting foreclosure prevention programs, or pushing public housing authorities to rehabilitate property, and require drug testing for poor families applying for government assistance. He supported some modest housing assistance measures, such as bills helping housing developments for seniors and in rural areas seek low-income housing tax credits.

Turner is an associate pastor at Prestonwood Baptist Church, where he has sermonized against the “perverse incentives created by the government and the welfare system, which in turn creates an epidemic of fatherlessness in our country.” He has been active in promoting Christian influence in public policy.

In promoting opportunity zones, Turner has praised the program as a way to improve neighborhoods with high poverty and unemployment rates. Reporting by ProPublica and others have found those zones drew congressional scrutiny for exploitation by wealthy, politically connected investors, including a one Christian group with which Turner has been associated.

Since 2020, Turner started a nonprofit that promotes “Christ-centered reading enhancement programs” for children and helps people get driver’s licenses. He also became “chief visionary officer” at the multifamily housing developer JPI.

Turner probably will be considered confirmable to lead HUD, since there are no scandals in his background. But it is another example of Trump turning to someone to undercut the basic mission of the agency meant to help.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO THE NONPROFIT MISSION OF DCREPORT

The post Where’s the Housing Solution? HUD Nominee Another Headscratcher appeared first on DCReport.org.

Dealing with insurance companies after a car accident requires caution. Report the incident promptly, providing accurate details without admitting fault. Document damages, injuries, and expenses thoroughly. Avoid accepting quick settlements or giving recorded statements without legal advice. Consulting a car accident lawyer ensures your rights are protected and helps negotiate fair compensation for your losses effectively.

The aftermath of a car crash can feel like a lot to handle all at once. It’s important to engage with insurance companies during this time to navigate the situation smoothly, even though it can add pressure to a tough situation. Knowing how to talk to insurers in a way that gets your point across can make things easier and might help you get a favorable result in the end. 

Exploring the Intricacies of Insurance Coverage

Before reaching out to any insurance provider, it is advisable to acquaint oneself with the policy particulars in advance to understand and clarify coverage limits, deductibles, and the steps involved in making claims. This understanding empowers individuals to engage in discussions with insurers effectively and confidently.

Collecting Crucial Details 

Gathering details after an accident is essential for the record-keeping process. It’s crucial to note down information like the date and time of the incident, the location where it occurred, weather conditions at that time, and contact details of everyone involved. Taking pictures of any damage to vehicles. The scene itself can provide visual evidence. Having this information on hand can help support any claims effectively. 

Reaching Out to Insurance Firms

Notifying the insurance companies about the accident as soon as possible to prevent any issues down the line is important. This is often stipulated in most policies to prevent any complications later on. When reaching out to insurance providers regarding the accident situation, it is recommended to offer a succinct description of what happened without taking responsibility away. This method guarantees that all essential details are communicated without unintentionally affecting the claim process. 

Connecting Well with Adjusters 

Insurance adjusters have a task in evaluating claims, and efficiently communicating with them clearly and consistently is key. Honesty and direct responses build trust and facilitate a seamless claims process. Documenting all conversations with adjusters, including timestamps, helps for future reference if disagreements occur later on. 

Getting to Grips with Settlement Proposals 

Insurers typically make settlement offers after reviewing claims to ensure they fairly cover damages and medical costs before accepting them. It is crucial for policyholders seeking advice or consulting financial experts to offer guidance if any concerns arise. 

Discussing a Reasonable Payment Package

If the initial settlement doesn’t seem fair in some cases, you can still consider negotiating further for a better outcome by staying composed and sticking to the facts while presenting additional evidence or expert viewpoints to support your argument for higher compensation. It’s important to be persistent yet polite, throughout this process as it typically leads to improved results. 

Looking for Help From a Lawyer

In situations where things get complicated or disagreements arise, it might be an idea to get help from a lawyer. Lawyers who focus on insurance claims have the knowledge and skills to ensure your rights are looked after every step. It’s especially crucial to talk to an expert if your claims are rejected or if you’re given settlement deals that don’t seem fair. Legal experts can handle the ins and outs of insurance policies. Speak up for yourself effectively when dealing with insurance companies. 

Steering Clear of Mistakes

Knowing the errors people tend to make when interacting with insurance firms can help avoid problems. For example, reporting accidents, offering accounts too slowly, or hastily agreeing to the settlement proposal without examination can have adverse effects on claims. Staying aware and careful during the procedure reduces these dangers and results in results. 

Staying Organized Throughout the Process

It’s beneficial to stay organized when handling claims tasks. By keeping all paperwork, emails, and important details in order, you can avoid missing anything. Setting up a folder, either physically or digitally, to store these items makes it easier to find them when necessary. Being organized like this helps stress levels and improves productivity. 

In Summary 

Navigating the aftermath of a car accident and interacting with insurance providers requires a series of actions to be taken seriously. It’s crucial to grasp the specifics of your policy coverage while collecting details and communicating clearly to ensure a process. Staying well-informed and keeping things orderly and persistent can often result in resolutions that enable individuals affected by the incident to concentrate on healing and progress. 

CLICK HERE TO DONATE IN SUPPORT OF DCREPORT’S NONPROFIT NEWSROOM

The post How to Deal with Insurance Companies After a Car Accident appeared first on DCReport.org.

“Defaming” Donald Trump – With the Truth
But Then “Apologizing” – With a $16 Million Settlement

As we all know – we learned this in grade school – one of our country’s great principles and prides is freedom of expression (speech AND press). It was only relatively recently, however, that the inherent conflict between those First Amendment freedoms, and lawsuits for defamation, was recognized in the seminal case of New York Times v. Sullivan (1964). 

Donald Trump has apparently found a different lesson in American law: In his words and actions he has constructed a governing counter-principle: that the mainstream press he hates is “the enemy of the people!” And that any publications he does not like or agree with are: “fake news!” 

Donald Trump is not yet President. But he is already dominating the news. And succeeding in sucking the oxygen out of vast stretches of our American public discourse. 

Unfortunately, the recent $16 million ABC News libel settlement with Donald Trump (see below) goes a giant step in the direction of ceding back yet more truth-free territory to the incoming President.

Trump’s view of the modern (post-Sullivan) law of defamation is consistent with his attitude toward the “mainstream” media. As he announced early in his first Presidential campaign at a Ft. Worth, Texas rally, in February of 2016. 

Trump predicted that when he’s President “dishonest” newspapers (his stated examples: The New York Times and The Washington Post) are going to “have problems.” He continued: “I’m going to ‘open up our libel laws’ so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money … instead of having no chance of winning because they’re totally protected.” 

And then for emphasis he repeated: “We’re going to open up libel laws, and we’re going to have people sue you like you’ve never got sued before.”

It’s not that Trump really needed an excuse to see the world in this fashion. Dating back to well before his first Term in office, he had already succumbed to the siren song of hyper-aggressive litigation. You might say he was it’s godfather – at least after Roy Cohn had passed – and at least with respect to the media!

And now, almost certainly emboldened by the recent ABC settlement, Trump – and many of his picks for appointments during his second Term – are presumably already gearing up for litigation – from the highly-aggressive proposed FBI Director and on up and down Trump’s list.  

The ABC Settlement 

ABC’s $16 million settlement with the President-elect has been the source of much controversy and disagreement in part over the legal distinction between rape and sexual assault. It includes $15 million paid to Donald Trump’s presidential library and $1 million paid to cover Trump legal fees.

Last year a jury specifically found the former President liable for “sexual assault” but not for “rape”. However, presiding Judge Lewis Kaplan actually had occasion to state on the record that – as the term “rape” is generally understood – the jury actually did find that Trump had “raped” Jean Carroll – forgive the detail – because, according to the Judge, they found that Trump had digitally penetrated her vagina. 

Nonetheless, ABC – or at least someone at its parent, Disney – decided to ignore that important distinction and, on that basis, not to continue to defend a clearly defensible case. 

Leaving the overriding question at hand: was Disney wise to abandon its seemingly strong defense, to concede liability, and to pay a very substantial, multimillion dollar sum to the President-elect? And would such a settlement buy peace? Or yet more contention and risk? 

Here’s my opinion: When it comes to claims of defamation, we should NOT give the President-elect an inch. He’s already taken miles. And he will take more if we let him!

Every day, in every way, it becomes clearer that the incoming President intends to lay claim to every inch of territory, on every possible front, in advancing his radical vision for a 2nd Term – notwithstanding the traditionally-recognized limitations of the American Presidency – against which he instinctively labors. 

Overreaching defamation claims are a case in point. As to which Trump has a long and inglorious track record.

Just A Sampling of Trump’s Extensive – Most Often Losing – Record as a Litigant Against the “Free” Press and Related Claims:

• Trump v. TrumpNation, Timothy O’Brien and Warner Books (2006-11): The book estimated that Trump’s net worth was only $150-$250 Million at a time when Trump was claiming multi-billions! Trump’s self-aggrandizing claim that he had been defamed by the underestimate was dismissed at the summary judgment stage and affirmed on appeal.
• Trump v. Trump University student for defamation ancillary to NYS Attorney General investigation of Trump University. Allegedly defamatory statements had been published by the student on social media. Case dismissed and Trump ordered to pay the student and her attorney just under $800,000 in legal fees and costs. (2015)
• Trump Campaign v. The New York Times for defamation in opinion pieces published commenting on the Times’s (and Post’s) in-depth investigation into Trump finances. The series won a Pulitzer Prize. Case dismissed in the NY Times’s favor “as a matter of constitutional law.” Trump ordered to pay the NY Times’s legal expenses and costs. 
• Trump v. Washington Post (2019-20). Florida defamation action against the Post based on two opinion articles published in 2019 suggesting that the Trump campaign had benefited from Russian assistance during the 2016 election. This Florida action was dismissed on legal grounds.
• Trump v. Hillary Clinton and certain FBI officials for “racketeering” (2023). Case dismissed and just under $1,000,000 in sanctions assessed against Trump and his attorneys based on “a continuing pattern of misuse of the courts by Mr. Trump …” The judge characterized the now President-elect as “a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries.”
• Trump v. Orbis Business Intelligence (and Christopher Steele) in connection with damages alleged to have resulted from the so-called “Steele dossier.” Case filed in the U.K. (2023) This March Trump’s case was thrown out and he was ordered to pay at least $382,000 in costs (costs that may ultimately increase to double that amount.)
• Trump v. the Pulitzer Prize Board in relation to the Board’s refusal to withdraw the Times’s/Posts Pulitzer prizes. Most recently (July 2024) a senior circuit judge in Florida denied Pulitzer’s motion to dismiss. So the case will move into a discovery phase.  
• Trump v. CNN (2023): $475 million defamation action in 2020 by Trump based on CNN’s use of the term “big lie” and its alleged association of that terminology with Hitler. Trial Judge grants CNN motion to dismiss based on constitutional protection for “opinion.” 
• Trump v. CBS and 60 Minutes (2024): Trump claimed that CBS had favorably edited its national campaign interview with Presidential-candidate Kamala Harris. Among other things, Trump said that CBS should lose its broadcast license over the incident. No further action taken to date.  
• Trump v. ABC (2024): This is the case now at hand. Trump sued ABC for defamation based on broadcast statements claiming that Trump had been found guilty of “rape” in the E. Jean Carroll criminal case, when the jury’s verdict appeared to find Trump to be guilty only of “sexual assault.” Case settled by ABC for a payment to Trump of $15 Million plus $1 Million for attorneys’ fees. (And see further discussion and critique of the case, passim.) 
• Trump v. Des Moines Register (2024): perhaps inspired by the lucrative settlement in the ABC case, just last week Donald Trump commenced legal action under Iowa’s consumer fraud law and for “brazen” election interference. This all based on one erroneous pre-election poll – by a highly-respected local pollster – predicting a Trump loss in Iowa. Of course, Trump won Iowa! And he won the 2024 Presidential election!

We have a limited Presidency if we can keep it. Our term-limited President was never supposed to be a King!

But based on Donald Trump’s repeated history, defamation is not a front on which the press – Trump’s “fake” media/ and “enem(ies) of the people” – should be quick to voluntarily retreat. 

Whatever else happens over the next four years – years that it’s fair to envision may be challenging for the mainstream media, to say the least – my point is to urge that those who can afford to resist should seriously and systematically carve out a space in the area of defamation that the 47th president will be unable to occupy and command. 

And that includes any attempt by the incoming President to change the legal landscape when it comes to First Amendment protections, especially in relation to defamation and similar suits, meant to suppress free speech critical of the President-elect and his allies, and to generally intimidate all speakers with opposing views. 

So please. Please do not further aid or abet the carving out of a defamation-free-zone for Donald Trump and his litigious bullying. 

And in this, you will not inherently become an “enemy of the people”. Or a purveyor of “fake news”. But rather, at least in this observer’s humble opinion, quite the opposite!

CLICK HERE TO DONATE IN SUPPORT OF DCREPORT’S NONPROFIT FREE PRESS

The post Understanding the Trump Libel Settlement Against ABC News appeared first on DCReport.org.