Saturday, February 11, 2017


Too much is on the table this weekend and no time to write a cohesive blog about either the Trump presidency or locally the Democrats.

Briefly again Trump and his cohorts have indicated that they are above the law. Not only did his excellency skirt ethics laws by blasting Nordstrom for dropping Invokana’s Ivanka's clothing line, but Kellyanne Conway openly recommended on TV that people buy her clothes.

Today Immigration has conducted massive raids arresting for deportation thousands of “illegal aliens” many who have been here for years with established families and good tax paying citizens with no criminal records. Solid families will be split without any moral justification or hearing for exemption.

Three of his Cabinet nominations with very clouded histories have received approval just along party lines ignoring items that should have been in normal times disqualifying.

Today we have learned that National Security Adviser Flynn not only contacted the Russian Ambassador before Trump was sworn in and advised him that the sanctions would be ignored but not only lied about it and changed his story several times. Sadly Administrations has also tried to cover it up.

“The wealth of the country, its capital, its credit, must be saved from the predatory poor as well as the predatory rich, but above all from the predatory politician”. (James J. Hill)

Locally Monday night the Council will be asked to approve $395.750 for legal fees to be voted upon; all awarded as professional contracts without requiring bids. Included is R84-17 for 65,000 to Rainone Coughlin Minchello LLC as Litigation Counsel.

Not accounted for is Minchello’s stipend as Corporation Counsel. Nor already approved fees to other attorneys for various legal services to the city, Court and other commissions or agencies.

I would hope that a full accounting of legal costs for professional services and judgements be made available before Council rubber stamps.

Bernice in her last two blogs has pointed out that we have had all talk and no facts about the plans or the Muhlenberg Campus. Too much secrecy may mean that a deal will be made before the people can have a chance to study it. This Administration has a weird concept of transparency.

“The chance to be seen as a warm, witty guy is too good an opportunity for a politician to miss”. (Robert Orben)

The Mayor’s plan of education for all has as much substance as that of Sanders’ free college for all. This is feel me good talk that is economically impractical. I hate to say it but reality is similar to many of Trump’s promises.

10:00 AM: There is a ordinance that will be passed that will repeal the ignored restrictive pay for play ordinance and make them feel legit and honest!


  1. re The 10AM addendum

    More than likely the pay-to-play ordinance will be scuttled in favor of the much looser state P2P law. The greed factor is palpable, and so is the hypocrisy, now that putting a limit on the opposition no longer works in your favor. So much for the Council President's now-forgotten pledge to support the strongest possible P2P legislation. At least Councilman Storch stood fast when it came around for a vote on first reading. Kudos to him. (As an aside, wouldn't he make a good mayor?) Our ordinance, as poorly written as it was, worked by limiting the contributions from all sorts of vendors, including those who receive contracts through the vague "Fair and Open" process. It is somewhat inconsistent with state law, and could use a rewrite, but it leveled the playing field for candidates while keeping Plainfield politics from becoming an ever-deepening swamp of campaign cash. With the lack of enforcement , violations come and violations go, so the imperative was always on the public to call out abuses, as it will be still if we go back to the state law. The NJ Election Law Enforcement Commission is a joke. There will be no help there and we should all be on our toes to prevent our municipal contractors from flooding the arena by recycling hard-earned tax dollars into the coffers of ambitious politicians whose interest in fueling a political machine often runs counter to the public interest. Maybe tomorrow a fourth vote for the integrity of the process can be found.

    1. Given that the intent of the “pay to play” laws was to make local politics free from national or state even county politics by letting the candidates to be beholden to nobody other than their local constituency. If, as according to today’s Ledger quoting Williams, the large PACs which are not bound by these laws have made a mockery of them; why not just pass an Ordinance forbidding the use of PAC money in local elections?