Tag Archives: United

CBS: ‘Tough’ Pennsylvania Immigration Law, Like ‘Controversial’ Arizona Law, Faces ‘Fierce Opposition’

On Saturday’s CBS Evening News, anchor Jeff Glor reported on an immigration protest in Boston: “…hundreds opposed to Arizona’s controversial immigration law protested the presence of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer at a meeting there.” One protestor held a sign that read: “Jan Brewer is a Bigot.” Glor then turned to a report on a similar immigration law proposed in Pennsylvania.   Correspondent Elaine Quijano explained how a CBS News poll showed 52% of Americans support the Arizona’s immigration law and that “other states are preparing to follow Arizona’s lead”: “In Pennsylvania, bipartisan measures to compel construction companies to check worker’s status are moving swiftly through the legislature.” She then warned: “Republican state representative Daryl Metcalfe wants to go further, introducing a tough measure modeled after Arizona’s law.” She went on to declare: “Metcalfe’s proposal is already facing fierce opposition.” Quijano described one source of that “fierce opposition,” the Democratic mayor of Philadelphia: “Michael Nutter says the solution lies with the federal government, not the states.” Nutter repeated Obama administration talking points on the issue: “We should not have a patchwork of immigration policies for every state in the United States of America. That’s insane.” Quijano added: “Nutter believes the law could create problems for law enforcement, making illegal immigrants afraid to report crimes to police.” In addition to highlighting Nutter’s objections to the proposal, Quijano began her report by describing the plight of one illegal immigrant from the state: “Every day 23 year-old Jose fears he could be deported. His parents brought him to America illegally from Mexico when he was two.” Quijano lamented: “He grew up in Pennsylvania, feeling every bit American, but it wasn’t until high school that he realized what it meant to be an illegal immigrant. That he could not pursue his dream of joining the Air Force.” While Quijano’s report featured five sound bites from Nutter and Jose, it only included two from state representative Metcalfe. She described how “Metcalfe argues illegal immigrants strain city and state budgets by siphoning off health and social services that Americans pay for.” In the clip that followed, Metcalfe argued: “For decades in the past the federal government has been AWOL in securing or borders and protecting American lives, liberty, and property, so we at the state level need to join together to do so.” Quijano concluded the segment by observing: “As politicians grapple with these issues, people like Jose wait and worry.” Jose remarked: “I don’t remember Mexico. To me this is my only home.” Quijano added: “A country that continues to struggle with this divisive issue.” Here is a full transcript of the July 10 report: 6:38PM JEFF GLOR: In Boston, hundreds opposed to Arizona’s controversial immigration law protested the presence of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer at a meeting there. The law’s facing legal challenges from the Justice Department. Arizona was the first, but likely will not be the last. Dozens of states right now are considering enacting similar immigration laws in the coming months. Elaine Quijano has this report from Pennsylvania. JOSE: We want to come out of the shadows. ELAINE QUIJANO: Every day 23 year-old Jose fears he could be deported. His parents brought him to America illegally from Mexico when he was two. He grew up in Pennsylvania, feeling every bit American, but it wasn’t until high school that he realized what it meant to be an illegal immigrant. That he could not pursue his dream of joining the Air Force. JOSE: I lost all hope. I said I can’t join the armed forces, I can’t get a good job. So basically I got pushed into the shadows like any other undocumented.      QUIJANO: Jose is one of the country’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, whose status is sparking heated debate. Debate and demonstrations have also interrupted over a new Arizona law allowing police to check the immigration of status of anyone suspected of being involved in crime. A recent CBS poll found a majority of Americans, 52%, support the law. Now other states are preparing to follow Arizona’s lead. In Pennsylvania, bipartisan measures to compel construction companies to check worker’s status are moving swiftly through the legislature. Republican state representative Daryl Metcalfe wants to go further, introducing a tough measure modeled after Arizona’s law. DARYL METCALFE: As a nation, we have to set a no amnesty policy and we have to be very black and white about that. That there’s no reward for violating our border. QUIJANO: Metcalfe’s proposal is already facing fierce opposition. Here in Philadelphia, where more than half of the immigrant population is illegal, Mayor Michael Nutter says the solution lies with the federal government, not the states. MICHAEL NUTTER: We should not have a patchwork of immigration policies for every state in the United States of America. That’s insane. QUIJANO: Nutter believes the law could create problems for law enforcement, making illegal immigrants afraid to report crimes to police. NUTTER: We do not want to send the wrong message to victims or witnesses. QUIJANO: But Representative Metcalfe argues illegal immigrants strain city and state budgets by siphoning off health and social services that Americans pay for. METCALFE: For decades in the past the federal government has been AWOL in securing or borders and protecting American lives, liberty, and property, so we at the state level need to join together to do so. QUIJANO: As politicians grapple with these issues, people like Jose wait and worry. JOSE: I don’t remember Mexico. To me this is my only home. QUIJANO: A country that continues to struggle with this divisive issue. Elaine Quijano, CBS News, Philadelphia.

Read more from the original source:
CBS: ‘Tough’ Pennsylvania Immigration Law, Like ‘Controversial’ Arizona Law, Faces ‘Fierce Opposition’

Roman Polanski wife Sharon Tate picture

Roman Polanski and his former wife, the late Sharon Tate As far I#39;m concerned, Switzerland can take their watches, chocolates, and secret bank accounts full of Nazi gold, and shove it up their ass. They#39;ve denied the United States#39; extradition request for famous child molester Roman Polanski and have made him a free man within their country. From AP: The Swiss government declared renowned film director Roman Polanski a free man on Monday after rejecting a U.S. request to extradite him

See the rest here:
Roman Polanski wife Sharon Tate picture

Roman Polanski Avoids Extradition to U.S.

Roman Polanski is a free man! Well, he has been for 30 years-plus now, despite facing a prison term in the United States for having sex with a 13-year-old girl. The Oscar-winning director will remain free, though, thanks to Switzerland’s Federal Department of Justice cited a recent flaw in the U.S. extradition request. The Swiss argue that Roman Polanski, who maintains a home in Switzerland, could reliably expect not to be arrested and deported to face sentencing in America. Basically, since the U.S. knew of his frequent presence there over the last few years but never acted on it, the government is refusing to send him packing . Roman Polanski remains free and in Europe . Polanski, who was recently apprehended and also accused of sexually abusing Charlotte Lewis , has already been released from house arrest, authorities said. The announcement was a dramatic development in a case that has lasted more than 30 years and appeared to be drawing to a conclusion earlier this year. In 1978, Polanski, a French citizen, fled the U.S. hours before he was to be sentenced for having unlawful sex with a minor. He has not set foot in the U.S. since.

See more here:
Roman Polanski Avoids Extradition to U.S.

Olbermann Mangles Another Fact, Claims Abe Lincoln Only Lost One Election

In today’s “What Fact Did Keith Olbermann Mangle Now” segment, the host of MSNBC’s “Countdown” on Tuesday hysterically mocked Arizona senatorial candidate Sharron Angle for claiming Abraham Lincoln lost “quite a few” elections. “Just for the record, do you know how many elections Abraham Lincoln lost in his lifetime?” Olbermann arrogantly asked. “Seven of eight he won,” answered MSNBC’s hottest property. Just for the record, Olbermann wasn’t even close to being right (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t The Corner ): KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: It`s Tea Time. If I asked you which Tea Partier was likeliest to compare themselves to Abraham Lincoln, could you guess? Yes, it`s Sharon obtuse Angle from Nevada, in the middle of a fawning interview with a supporter who confessed to once predicting she would not win the nomination. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BILL MANDERS, SHARRON ANGLE SUPPORTER: I said you`ve lost; how are you going to win this? I don`t possibly think that you`re going to win it. SHARRON ANGLE (R), TEA PARTY CANDIDATE FOR SENATE: That`s right. MANDERS: And then you surprised everybody and won this nomination. ANGLE: That`s right. MANDERS: This opportunity to run against the beast, Harry Reid. ANGLE: Well, you know, it`s just like Abraham Lincoln. He lost quite a few. But he won the big one. He won the one that mattered for this country. And really that`s what we`re in. MANDERS: Do you think you`re too — (END VIDEO CLIP) OLBERMANN: Oh, now you`re Abraham Lincoln? I`m beginning to doubt you`re even Sue Lowden. Just for the record, do you know how many elections Abraham Lincoln lost in his lifetime? The Illinois state assembly in 1832. He prevailed in four elections for state assembly, one for Congress, two for president. Seven of eight he won. Sharron Angle, I knew Abraham Lincoln`s won-loss record, and you`re no Abraham Lincoln. For those that didn’t catch it, Olbermann was spoofing that infamous moment in the 1988 vice presidential debate between Lloyd Bentsen and Dan Quayle. Deliciously, it is the “Countdown” host that was no Jack Kennedy in this instance, for as Jeffrey Lord reported at the American Spectator Friday, Olbermann was 100 percent wrong: Here’s Abraham Lincoln’s actual score with elections. He did indeed win four state assembly elections, and lose in 1832, just as Olbermann says. In fact, Abe ran 8th in a field of 13 candidates back there in 1832. Here’s Lincoln’s record with voters, per [Pulitzer Prize winning Lincoln biographer Carl] Sandburg: 1832 — Lost his first race for the state assembly 1834 — Won a seat in the state assembly 1836 — Won re-election 1838 — Won re-election 1840 — Won re-election 1842 — Lost a race for Congress to John Hardin (per biographer Sandburg. Lincoln actually came in behind a friend, Edward D. Baker — losing his own Sangamon County delegates to Baker. Later, he would name one of his sons for Baker). Lincoln structures deal that Hardin, Baker and finally himself would each serve back-to-back single terms in Congress. 1846 — Wins congressional seat, succeeding his friend Baker, who had succeeded Hardin. As per the Lincoln deal. 1854 — Elected again to the Illinois legislature, but loses a race for the United States Senate to Lyman Trumbull. Writes to a friend: “I regret my defeat moderately, but I am not nervous about it.” Mary Lincoln was so enraged at this loss that she never again spoke to Trumbull’s wife Julia — who had been a bridesmaid at Mary and Abe’s wedding. 1856 — Loses the vice-presidential nomination of the new Republican Party to William L. Dayton, a former U.S. Senator from New Jersey. Dayton received 259 votes to Lincoln’s 115, becoming the running mate of John Charles Fremont. Hearing of his defeat, Lincoln laughs and says, “It must be some other Lincoln.” 1858 — Lincoln loses a race for the United States Senate to legendary rival Senator Stephen A. Douglas. In the course of the campaign, the two travel Illinois in what are known to history as the “Lincoln-Douglas” debates. The debates help make Lincoln — and his pro-union, anti-slavery argument — famous. 1860 and 1864 — Elected and re-elected president. In other words, Keith Olbermann was not only wrong but so wide of the truth and the facts as to give Bill Clinton on Monica a good reputation. Sharron Angle, on the other hand, was right. Making her remark 100 percent factually correct. Lincoln ran 13 times, according to biographer Sandburg, not eight as Olbermann said with such assured smugness. Lincoln lost not once, as Mr. Drama Queen asserted, but, again according to the Pulitzer winning biographer, five times. Once for the state assembly, once for Congress, once for vice-president and twice for U.S. Senator. The latter Senate race famous to this day.  So, on Tuesday evening, Olbermann selectively edited and cherry picked from a Rush Limbaugh radio transcript to make the conservative talk show host look like a racist AND completely misrepresented history to smear a Republican senatorial candidate. All in a day’s work for a liberal shill at MSNBC I guess.  Adding insult to injury, the “Countdown” host Wednesday called former Alaska governor Sarah Palin an idiot. You were saying, Keith? 

Go here to see the original:
Olbermann Mangles Another Fact, Claims Abe Lincoln Only Lost One Election

Bartiromo: Stimulus Likely Didn’t Save Economy –- Fed Did; Warns Obamanomics Stunting Job Growth

While some on the left side of the aisle in Congress are getting all starry-eyed about prospects of more federal stimulus spending, the first round of stimulus under President Barack Obama may have done even less to help the ailing economy than supporters claim. On MSNBC’s July 9 broadcast of “The Daily Rundown,” co-hosts Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie interviewed CNBC “Closing Bell” anchor Maria Bartiromo from the Aspen Ideas Festival in Aspen, Colo. And Bartiromo offered her views why the economy didn’t spiral out of control any more than it did. She said according to some on Wall Street, it wasn’t Obama’s $787-billion “stimulus” that included a huge bulk of state government bailout spending, but instead action by the Federal Reserve to put more liquidity in the economy. “Look, there’s no doubt about it – we were close to going off a cliff the weekend at Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy, Merrill [Lynch] was sold and AIG acquired by government,” Bartiromo said. “You know, I mean I think we were very close and the economy needed stimulus in a big way. It’s arguable whether that stimulus that helped the economy was really because of the stimulus plan or really because of the Federal Reserve. I think most people on Wall Street will believe and will tell you that it was really the Fed action in terms of giving greater access to the banks to overnight lending that really, really got us out.” “But you know – it doesn’t matter,” she continued. “I mean, here we are and we are still in a very weak situation in the U.S. economy and the recovery is quite fragile and I think at this moment in time, many people are worried that in fact it may not necessarily officially be a double-dip recession that we’re headed toward but we are looking at another leg down.” Guthrie asked why that if corporate earnings look strong, as they’re expected to, aren’t these corporations doing more to hire and lower the overall unemployment rate in the United States. According to the “Closing Bell” host, business is looking overseas because of the uncertainty the Obama administration has put into the economy with taxes and health care. “I think right now you have hit on the one very bullish part of the economy and that is the corporate sector,” Bartiromo said. “We’re heading into a new quarter where we will get  quarterly earnings and probably will be a better than expected. And the reason is because corporations have cut to the bone. They have cut employees. They have cut R&D spending. They’ve cut anything they can. They cut all the fat out so we are talking about enormous cash levels. What they’re doing with the cash is another question. They’re sitting on it. They’re not investing in the U.S. economy. They’re actually following the growth overseas. PepsiCo [is] building 13 plants in China. GE building more places, businesses in India. You are seeing businesses follow the growth outside of the United States. But absolutely – that is the positive. The reason that they’re not hiring right now is because there is a tremendous amount of uncertainty. And that has everything to do with the policies coming out of this administration. Higher taxes in 2011, higher expenses as a result of health care costs. That’s why they’re not hiring. ” So what can be done to encourage more hiring with all this cash on the books by major businesses? According to the “Closing Bell” host, business needs more incentives to hire and she rattled off some for MSNBC viewers. “One they could do soon is not allow the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2011,” she said. “Giving some – the end of the 2010, giving some confidence that they won’t have that added expense. A lot of people are worried about that. Now, Tim Geithner had an important interview with Larry Kudlow last week and Geithner said that he is prepared to keep capital gains and dividends taxes at 20 percent. This was very, very positive and I think that is part of the reason the market has been rallying the last three days because there was an expectation that capital gains taxes would go all the way up to 39.6 percent. If, in fact, the administration keeps it at 20 percent, I think that’s very positive.”

Excerpt from:
Bartiromo: Stimulus Likely Didn’t Save Economy –- Fed Did; Warns Obamanomics Stunting Job Growth

CBS’s Couric to Netanyahu: ‘Should You Be More Strongly Advocating’ on Obama’s Behalf?

In an interview with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric noted President Obama’s unpopularity in Israel and pressed Netanyahu to remedy that fact: “To change public opinion in your country, should you be more strongly advocating on his behalf?” Couric preceded that question by citing a recent poll of Israelis, which she seemed perplexed by: “Can you explain this to me, then? In a poll conducted a month ago – just a month ago – 71 percent of the Jews in Israel surveyed said they dislike President Obama; 47 percent expressed a strong dislike.” Earlier in the interview, Couric tried to gauge Netanyahu’s feelings toward Obama: “Do you trust Barack Obama?…surely there have been disappointments with the Obama administration. Can you just be candid with me and tell me how the administration has disappointed you?” While Couric asked about Israeli “disappointments” with Obama, she never cited any specific Obama administration policies or actions as the cause of those disappointments. On Wednesday’s Good Morning America on ABC, co-host George Stephanopoulos repeatedly badgered Netanyahu on ways to improve the U.S.-Israel relationship, placing no responsibility on President Obama to repair the alliance: “One analyst said, this is a false calm. Suggesting that you can’t or won’t deliver what President Obama is calling for in the peace process. So, what concrete steps are you prepared to take?” Here is a transcript of the first part of Couric’s July 7 interview with Netanyahu: 6:39PM ET KATIE COURIC: In other news, it appeared yesterday that President Obama had accepted an invitation from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to visit Israel. But today the White House said the trip, is, quote, ‘not on the books for this year.’ So have the two leaders really patched up their differences? That was part of the conversation when I interviewed the Prime Minister this afternoon here in New York. Do you trust Barack Obama? NETANYAHU: I trust Barack Obama, the President of the United States, to carry out with me the policies that have joined Israel and the United States in what Barack Obama has called the ‘unbreakable bond.’ We have common goals, common interests, and we now have a job to do to get on with our common goal of achieving peace with security. I trust we’ll be able to do that together. COURIC: While you want to accentuate the positive, clearly – that’s part of your mission here in the United States – surely there have been disappointments with the Obama administration. Can you just be candid with me and tell me how the administration has disappointed you? NETANYAHU: You know, you remind me of the Israeli press. They say ‘how come you had a good meeting with President Obama?’ Well, because I did. Because we actually see eye to eye on some central issues. The quest for peace, the danger of Iran, the need to bolster security for Israel and the region. That’s the truth. We do see it. Have we had differences? Of course we had. But I think some differences- COURIC: Some awkward moments? NETANYAHU: Yes, of course we had. So what? Even they are magnified and distorted. I think the President has a fine mind, and I can relate to it. COURIC: Can you explain this to me, then? In a poll conducted a month ago – just a month ago – 71 percent of the Jews in Israel surveyed said they dislike President Obama; 47 percent expressed a strong dislike. NETANYAHU: Well, maybe they don’t have the opportunity to have the kind of conversations that I had. And maybe they’re not aware, also, of the ongoing cooperation between Israel and the United States in the fields of security, intelligence. The fact that the Iron Dome program to protect against missiles is something that has been bolstered by this administration and by this president. We have a common goal to achieve a secure peace. I’m looking forward to working with him to achieve it. COURIC: Well, to change public opinion in your country, should you be more strongly advocating on his behalf? NETANYAHU: You know, I invited the President to Israel. I hope that he finds an appropriate time to come. I think that when people get to know him, and first lady Michelle Obama was very kind to my wife, they gave us a very warm reception. I hope I’ll be able to – we’ll be able to reciprocate in Israel.      COURIC: And later in this broadcast, what Prime Minister Netanyahu thinks the U.S. and Israel can do to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

The rest is here:
CBS’s Couric to Netanyahu: ‘Should You Be More Strongly Advocating’ on Obama’s Behalf?

The Secret Code Hidden In the United States Cyber Command’s Seal

Can you see it? It's inside the gold ring between the United States Cyber Command and the American bald eagle. A secret hexadecimal code. The key to all America's secrets. Or their favorite Lynyrd Skynyrd's song. This is the code: 9ec4c12949a4f31474f299058ce2b22a Any ideas??? http://gizmodo.com/5581373/united-states-cyber-commands-shield-has-a-secret-code added by: pjacobs51

Zimbabweans wash dirty US dollars with soap, water

HARARE, Zimbabwe — The washing machine cycle takes about 45 minutes — and George Washington comes out much cleaner in the Zimbabwe-style laundering of dirty money. Low-denomination U.S bank notes change hands until they fall apart here in Africa, and the bills are routinely carried in underwear and shoes through crime-ridden slums. Some have become almost too smelly to handle, so Zimbabweans have taken to putting their $1 bills through the spin cycle and hanging them up to dry with clothes pins alongside sheets and items of clothing. It's the best solution — apart from rubber gloves or disinfectant wipes — in a continent where the U.S. dollar has long been the currency of choice and where the lifespan of a dollar far exceeds what the U.S. Federal Reserve intends. Zimbabwe's coalition government officially declared the U.S. dollar legal tender last year to eradicate world record inflation of billions of percent in the local Zimbabwe dollar as the economy collapsed. The U.S. Federal Reserve destroys about 7,000 tons of worn-out money every year. It says the average $1 bill circulates in the United States for about 20 months — nowhere near its African life span of many years. Larger denominations coming in through banks and formal import and export trade are less soiled. But among Africa's poor, the $1, $2, $5 and $10 bills are the most sought after. Dirty $1 bills can remain in circulation at rural markets, bus parks and beer halls almost indefinitely, or at least until they finally disintegrate. Still, banks and most businesses in Zimbabwe do not accept torn, Scotch-taped, scorched, defaced, exceptionally dirty or otherwise damaged U.S. notes. Zimbabweans say the U.S. notes do best with gentle hand-washing in warm water. But at a laundry and dry cleaner in eastern Harare, a machine cycle does little harm either to the cotton-weave type of paper. Locals say chemical “dry cleaning” is not recommended — it fades the color of the famed greenback. Laundry worker Alex Mupondi said customers asked him to try machine-washing a selection of bills and the result impressed him. But storekeeper Jackie Dube hasn't yet taken up advice of friends to cleanse the often damp and stinking U.S. dollars she receives for the garments and cheap Chinese consumer goods she sells in Harare. It's time-consuming, she says, adding that stinky, unhygienic bills are a problem. “I get rid of the worst of the notes as soon as I can in change,” she said. added by: im1mjrpain

Washington Post: Independence Day an Atheist Holiday

Someone get Lee Greenwood on the phone; he’s going to want to know about this. In a front-page Style section report July 5, The Washington Post breathed a sigh of relief that Independence Day gives Americans a break from those God-heavy holidays like Christmas, Easter and Thanksgiving. “The trouble with most major holidays in the United States, if you’re an atheist, is that it’s difficult to ignore the ‘holy day’ etymology,” Monica Hesse reported. “But not the Fourth of July. The Fourth is a little deity-free celebration stationed in the middle of summer for believers and non-believers alike.” Finally, a break from those religious zealots Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Thank God. Hesse highlighted an annual gathering of atheists in Lorton, Va., a suburb of Washington, D.C. With tongues presumably in cheeks, the organizers promoted the event as “Ungodly Leaders to Gather at Potomac Picnic.” She defended atheists as misunderstood. “The most common misapprehension they encounter is that they must be immoral – that, lacking the promise or threat of an afterlife, they have no incentive to be good,” she said. “They atheists here find this particularly offensive, as they say they believe in kindness for the sake of kindness, making the most of the brief existence they believe humans are allowed.” Hesse illustrated the loving tolerance of atheists, and their acceptance for differing opinions and views. “‘I’m opposed to the illusion that there are really many difference between atheists at all,'” attendee Don Wharton was quoted as saying. “After all,” Hesse added, “they are here to celebrate the things that bind them together rather than the things that separate them.” What binds them together? Victimhood, according to Hesse. “Most of them have been told, at one point or another, that they are going to hell,” Hesse noted, “which, when you think about it, is a fairly pointless threat to an atheist, like warning someone that you’re sending them to Narnia.” Like this article? Sign up for “Culture Links,” CMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter, by   clicking  here.

Read more from the original source:
Washington Post: Independence Day an Atheist Holiday

Spiritually Bankrupt: Catholic Church hiding assets from Abuse Victims

This is written with a sense of sadness and some mixed feelings. While not a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I have great respect for the church and its followers. The church has done and continues to do much good in the world. I've seen it among the poor, the downtrodden, and the ill all around the globe. But with a team of other investigative reporters, we uncovered some things that should be brought to light and pondered. Earlier this month, Pope Benedict XVI issued the first apology to priest abuse victims from St. Peter's Square – a gesture intended to show that church leadership is finally ready to confront this growing scandal. But in reporting a recent story, we found that behind the scenes – and in court – the church has taken a much less contrite and more confrontational position. Our investigation found that in various dioceses across the United States, church leaders were going great lengths to avoid making amends with the same victims of abuse they claimed to be trying to make peace with. Facing waves of lawsuits by now-adult victims, we found the church has reacted more like a big business than a sacred institution: Wealthy dioceses have claimed to be broke and taken the drastic act of filing for bankruptcy. Only when forced to open their ledgers in bankruptcy proceedings does it become clear that several of these dioceses were actually flush with assets – cash, real estate, parishes – that it could have made available to victims seeking restitution. Take the Diocese of San Diego: In 2007, just before several abuse cases were scheduled to begin, it filed for bankruptcy. It sought this protection despite owning hundreds of millions of dollars worth of real estate – everything from commercial buildings, to open land, to parking lots. Only after it became clear that the bankruptcy judge was ready to dismiss the diocese's bankruptcy filing did the church seek to settle with victims. At the end of the bankruptcy proceedings, the judge, a Catholic, scolded the church for being “disingenuous.” Story Continues – with DAN RATHER video report http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-rather/spiritually-bankrupt_b_629424.html added by: Stoneyroad