Democrat Albuquerque City Councilors Isaac Benton, Pat Davis, Diane Gibson, and Cynthia Borrego have introduced an ordinance called “the Albuquerque Clean & Green Retail Ordinance”.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1265484/abq-councilors-want-to-restrict-plastic-bags-straws.html

Sponsoring city councilors point to an “online” petition signed by a mere 750 people and public comments from a dozen or so people who spoke at the December 17, 2018 city council meeting as a “ground swell” of support for the ordinance.

https://www.abqreport.com/single-post/2019/01/08/000134277-Percent-of-ABQ-Residents-Sign-Petition-to-Ban-Plastic-Bags-and-Straws

According to the ordinance, it is intended to:

“protect and enhance the city’s unique and precious environment, wildlife and beauty through the reduction of single use non-compostable or non-recyclable bags, straws and containers and to encourage the use of reusable or sustainable options.”

The city ordinance would prohibit retailers from providing customers single-use plastic bags or foam containers for their purchases.

The ordinance if passed would prevent businesses from distributing single-use straws unless they are paper or biodegradable.

The proposed city ordinance would require businesses that give out “plastic straws” to have them available upon request in order “to provide accessibility options for persons with disabilities and medical requirements.”

The city council ordinance will make it illegal to distribute single use paper bags “and any single use carry out containers” such as used in restaurants, unless they meet the city’s recycling standards.

The ordinance will require businesses to issue notices to customers that the containers are recyclable.

The ordinance recommends that businesses encourage customers to bring their own reusable shopping bags.

Language in the city council’s proposed ordinance acknowledges that compliant bags or containers may be more expensive and therefore allows retailer businesses to charge customers up to 10 cents for each one they distribute.

Albuquerque City Councilor Cynthia Borrego, one of the ordinance sponsors, had this to say:

“Numerous major American companies including Starbucks, Hyatt, and McDonald’s have already announced plans to end such uses of single-use plastics and we want to support and encourage other businesses to do same”.

Democrat Mayor Tim Keller on January 8, 2019, signaled his support of the ordinance with the following tweet:

“Thanks to @PatDavisNM, @IkeBenton, @_Diane_Gibson, & @Cynthia4Council for introducing the bill to get rid of unnecessary plastic in our city! Looking forward to working together to make Albuquerque more sustainable. #OneAlbuquerque — Mayor Tim Keller (@MayorKeller) January 8, 2019”

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/lawmakers-propose-plastic-bag-straw-ban-for-albuquerque/5202486/

The proposed ordinance also would require a study in fiscal year 2022 to determine the impact of the legislation.

Violations of the ordinance would be criminal and classified as a misdemeanor.

A NATIONAL TREND

The Albuquerque City Council ordinance is a reflection of United States major cities to limit the use of single use plastic straws and containers to protect the environment.

Seattle, Washington became the first major United States city to ban plastic straws while the state of California bans restaurants from automatically giving customers plastic straws.

New York City’s controversial citywide ban on “polystyrene” containers began January 1, 2019 and the ban targets single use foam takeout containers, cups, plates, bowls and trays.

New York City now joins cities including San Francisco, Minneapolis, Oakland, Portland and Seattle in banning polystyrene foam containers.

https://www.timeout.com/newyork/news/nycs-styrofoam-ban-goes-into-effect-on-january-1

In 2014, Santa Fe became the first city in New Mexico to restrict the use of plastic bags, but the big difference is Santa Fe City councilors did not impose a ban but passed a resolution “encouraging” businesses not to provide plastic straws.

THE USUAL OPPOSING SUSPECTS

Not surprising, restaurant and food industry organizations, and business organization, including the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, are lining up to oppose the Albuquerque city ordnance.

The private sector is calling the ordinance as an “unnecessary, over regulation of businesses that would will hurt consumers in Albuquerque.”

According to New Mexico Restaurant Association CEO Carol Wight, similar laws around the country have strained the available supply of biodegradable takeout containers by saying “What they’re asking for is not always available.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

With four city councilors sponsoring the proposed “Clean & Green Retail Ordinance” it means only one more vote is needed to make it city law with Mayor Tim Keller already signaling his support that he will sign it upon passage.

Alas, 2019 is an election year and City Councilors Pat Davis and Isaac Benton are running to be elected again to the city council.

City Councilor Pat Davis courageously proclaimed “[With this ordinance] … you have the ability to charge for … [the more expensive packaging], and you can blame it on us [the city council!]”.

Let’s hope voters in his City Council District do just that come the Tuesday, October 8, 2019, municipal election day and blame him for the ordinance as well as the disaterouse ART Bus project that so many of his constituents opposed as he refused to put it to a public vote.

To Benton, Davis and Gibson, there is nothing like an environmental issue such as the banning of plastic straws and polystyrene plates and cups to ingratiate yourselves to the progressive base and Democrats in your district after supporting the disastrous ART Bus project that has destroyed Route 66.

Making a violation of the ordinance a misdemeanor crime is heavy handed and raises the prospect that our short handed police department will be chasing after “plastic straw and polystyrene cup and plate dealers” and providers.

Protecting the environment is a noble cause, but the city is facing far more serious problems that the city council and the mayor should be debating and finding solutions to especially when it comes to the city’s crime wave and its children.

The city council debating the banning of plastic straws and polystyrene cups and containers comes across as a city council who are either out of touch with what is important or just plain callous to what is truly important and what is going on in Albuquerque.

Albuquerque’s crime rates are going down, but the city is still way to violent.

In 2017, the city broke the all-time homicide rate of 70 with 72 murders.

In 2018, under Keller’s first year in office, there were 67 murders.

Two police officer deadly force shootings occurred in less than 24 hours in December, 2018.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/12/28/abqs-crime-rates-going-down-but-abq-still-a-violent-city/

Albuquerque’s kids are being killed, and you hear absolutely no expression of distress, anger or outrage from the Albuquerque City Council which makes things very surreal for many.

During the last 4 weeks, the city has seen a one-year old baby left to drown by his parents in a bathtub with the baby buried in a backyard, two teenage boys, ages 14 and 15, involved with a drug deal gone bad, beaten to death and buried in a shallow grave, and young juvenile girl who was killed by her 15 year old cousin who left her body in an arroyo, yet you hear absolutely nothing and no comment from City Councilors Benton, Davis, Gibson, and Borrego, nor anything from the other 5 city councillors on the crimes.

Mayor Keller and Chief Geier went out of their way to do a press conference to address the 4 murders.

Mayor Tim Keller had this to say:

“Our community has been shaken by the recent deaths of these children and teenagers. These tragedies have ripped through our city, hitting home just how vulnerable young people can be. At one year old, Anastazia Zuber was only just beginning her life. Our community also lost a young girl to violence at the hands of a family member. And the deaths of teenagers Ahmed Lateef and Collin Romero showed us the depths of the challenges that young people today are facing. It is simply wrong and we cannot allow it to become normal. . .In 2019, we are continuing to invest in public safety and create opportunities for kids, especially those at risk. We are joining with neighborhoods, churches and community organizations to work hand-in-hand to address these challenges, and pushing for more diversion and prevention programs in our city”

Police Chief Mike Geier had this to say:

“As first-responders, our officers are profoundly impacted any time they investigate the death of a child, no matter the circumstance. We have been challenged as a community with the deaths of several children in the past few weeks. As we grieve these losses, we want the community, and especially the families of these children, to know that officers are committed to pursuing justice on their behalf. … I ask the people of Albuquerque to join with us and redouble our efforts to protect children and support them when they need it most.”

It is idealistic and commendable that the Albuquerque City Council want to protect us from ourselves and our environment from our use of plastic straws and polystyrene cups and plates.

Some form of the ordinance probably does need to be enacted, but with input from affected businesses.

The ordinance should not provide for criminal penalties with civil citations and fines being in order.

With that said, the City Council need to spare us from feel good legislation such the “Albuquerque Clean & Green Retail Ordinance” and concentrate more on protecting our kids first and reducing our violent crime rates.

Frankly, the city can wait a while to be saved from the ABQ “Plastic Straw And Polystyrene Plate And Cup” Cartel as we deal with far more urgent problems.

During her January 1, 2019 inaugural address, Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham called for abolishing the annual $50 million cap on film rebate spending cap for the New Mexico film incentives. On the campaign trail, Michelle Lujan Grisham said she favored raising or eliminating the annual $50 million cap, but it was not until her inaugural address that she said to eliminate it. Her Republican opponent was not in favor of abolishing the cap but said “perhaps” he favored raising it.

Lujan Grisham said in her inaugural address that New Mexico’s film industry can be the most lucrative state media business in the entire country. Lujan Grisham specifically referred to Netflix’s recent agreement to purchase Albuquerque Studios for more than $30 million when she said:

“With Netflix in Albuquerque and moviemakers in California recognizing our world-class crew base and brilliantly talented homegrown writers, performers and filmmakers, we will take off the shackles and let it rip – and in the process we will put New Mexicans to work.”

In addition to eliminating the annual limit, Governor Lujan Grisham said she favors paying off the estimated backlog of $250 million of submitted claims that have yet to be paid out because of the cap. During her inaugural address Governor Lujan-Grisham said:

“We will send a clear signal that we are open for business and will double film and television production in coming years.”

Secretary-designate Olivia Jackson-Padilla of the Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) Department said lifting the cap could lead to between $100 million and $150 million in film credits requested annually. $100 to $150 million in film credits would translate into at least $400 million, or more, of annual in-state spending by film or TV productions. Currently, New Mexico offers a 25% tax rebate to film companies for direct in state expenditures. Long-running television programs are eligible for an additional 5% up to a 30% total in all.

In 2002, the New Mexico state film tax incentives were put in place and the spending on film incentives was unlimited. New Mexico was among the first states to enact a film incentive program.

In 2011, Republican Governor Susana Martinez, after her first legislative session after being elected, signed legislation that established the $50 million annual cap. Governor Susana Martinez placed the annual cap on the incentives when many at the time advocated a much higher cap or no cap at all. Martinez at the time argued that there was a need for a cap to ensure budget stability.

The state has hit the cap every year since it was put in place by Martinez in 2011 but she refused to increase the cap for 6 years.At the time of creation of the $50 million cap, film and production industry executives said the annual cap was insufficient to the point it prompted productions to go elsewhere. Under the current $50 million cap system, qualifying expenditures in excess of the annual limit are placed on hold to be distributed in future years after further review.

Attempts by the New Mexico legislature to eliminate the cap repeatedly failed with former Governor Martinez defending the cap as necessary. In 2017, Martinez vetoed a bill that would have extended tax credits to smaller film productions in the state. Notwithstanding the $50 million cap, New Mexico has become a top destination for film and television productions.

CALL TO ABOLISH CAP HAS LEGISLATURE SUPPORT

With the election of Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, some Democrat House and Senate leadership are saying they support doing away with the $50 million annual limit on film rebate spending.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1263995/plan-to-kill-film-rebate-cap-renews-debate.html

According to New Mexico Speaker of the House Brian Egolf, taking action on the film incentive cap will be a priority in the 60-day legislative session, which starts on January 15, 2019. Representative Egolf said other options being studied includes the possibility of leaving the annual spending cap in place for movies but eliminating it for television productions.

Critics of the film incentive program described it as “corporate welfare” for the film industry arguing the money would be better spent on other programs. House Minority Leader James Townsend, R-Artesia, who opposes eliminating the cap, said the film subsidy impact should be closely scrutinized before doing away with the spending cap, despite the projected $1.5 billion in additional revenues from oil and gas production.

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF FILM INDUSTRY

A 2014 state funded study concluded that movie and TV show film production generates an estimated 43 cents in tax revenue for every incentive dollar spent by the state. The same study also found that 15,848 full-time jobs were created by the film industry during a four-year period. In 2017, 74 different film production projects claimed every cent of the $50 million in incentives.

According to a 2017 report from the New Mexico Film Office, the state spent the entire $50 million allotted for film tax credits annually in 2014. Between 2010 and 2014 the film industry spent an estimated $513.9 million purchasing goods and services from local businesses

Sources:

https://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/news/2017/03/31/why-martinez-vetoed-film-credit-bill.html

https://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/news/2017/03/31/why-martinez-vetoed-film-credit-bill.html

Between 2014 and 2017, the amount of direct, in-state production spending increased from $162 million to $506 million.
New Mexico has received more than $234 million in direct spending into the economy from film projects in the 2017-2018 fiscal year.

In the fiscal year 2017, there was nearly $506 million in direct spending into the New Mexico economy.

https://www.kob.com/politics-news/vote-4-nm-tax-incentives-for-the-film-industry/5128621/

NETFLEX PURCHASE OF ABQ STUDIOS MAKES NEW MEXICO MAJOR CONTENDER

The New Mexico film industry has been growing steadily for more than 17 years. Albuquerque has regularly been ranked in the top 10 of the trade magazine Moviemaker’s best places to be a filmmaker.

In 2006, Albuquerque studios was a $74 million, 50-acre project featuring eight sound stages, production officers and support space. On July 24, 2006, the groundbreaking of Albuquerque Studios occurred and once completed, it was and still is a state-of-the-art movie-making facility. Albuquerque Studios is an enormous complex that includes 9 sound stages, a backlot and management offices. Notwithstanding the sophistication of the facility, Albuquerque Studios for the last 17 years has been a rental house to production companies. Albuquerque Studios has also been for sale for a number of years. The fact that Netflex is purchasing the Albuquerque Studios ensures the Albuquerque and New Mexico will be a real contender in the film industry nationally and globally.

The purchase deal also calls for $1 billion worth of production spent over 10 years which will have a dramatic effect on the City and State economies. The State contributed $10 million of Local Economic Development Act funds for the Netflex purchase. Albuquerque contributed another $4.5 million of Local Economic Development Funds for the Netflex purchase.

Albuquerque beat out other places such as Denver, Salt Lake City, Austin, New York, Georgia and Los Angeles to secure the Netflex hub. It is impressive that Albuquerque beat out other places such as New York and Los Angeles given the film industries dominant presence in both of those states. The Albuquerque site will be Netflix’s very first hub purchased in the United States.

New Mexico’s other 4 production studios are I-25 Studios, Garson Studios, Santa Fe Studios and Las Cruces Studios as other productions seek studio space for their projects. The Netflix purchase will no doubt benefits all the other major studios in the State that will likely be asked to provide additional overflow work. The jobs that will be created by Netflex run the gamut of film and TV production work, most of which is project-based contract labor. It is estimated that at least 1,000 well-paying jobs per year will be created. Many of the jobs are expected to pay $70,000 or more a year.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Governor Michelle Lujan’s called to abolish the annual $50 million cap on film rebate spending cap for the New Mexico film incentives should be heard loud and clear by the New Mexico legislature and they should make it a reality. The one industry that represents the future of New Mexico and a major hope for expanding New Mexico’s economy is the film industry. Simply put, the film industry creates jobs for New Mexicans.

The New Mexico film industry expands each year in large part because of the tax credits. Increasing the cap or eliminating the tax subsidies cap for film and television production will most assuredly help the industry expand even further. With the incentive subsidies, the State economy will continue to benefit from continued millions in direct spending that will improve the economy. Jobs will also be created in ancillary or supportive industries such as food catering, cleaning and maintenance and security. Experience has already shown that placing the cap on subsidies stymied the growth of the industry with projects going elsewhere.

With the Nextflex purchase, the State now has a major production and distribution company hub that will produce projects on a consistent time line for at least 10 years and probably more. Last year alone, the film and TV production industry brought in over $180 million of direct spending to the city and state. Far more important, the $70,000 a year jobs that will be provided are a far cry from the hourly wage jobs provided by the “call centers” that the state and city have become accustomed to being announced.

The City and the State need to continue with efforts that will insure that our education institutions such as the New Mexico Community College continue to offer a trained work force for the film industry. Both the City and the State need to create more incentives to build and guarantee that the industry continues to prosper in New Mexico.

The film industry with the purchase of Albuquerque Studios by Netflix is clearly in the future of Albuquerque and New Mexico and the best hope at this point in diversifying our economy and wean the state off of federal government reliance. Albuquerque and New Mexico need to pursue with a vengeance the real growth industries like healthcare, transportation and manufacturing, and the film industry to diversify our economy.

Public-private partnerships in the growth industries where ever possible should be encouraged and developed. Special emphasis and support should be given to the film industry which is developing, expanding and proving to be very successful in providing well-paying jobs.

Investing In Ourselves To Achieve Economic Development

Defendant Jessica Kelly has plead “no contest” to the charges of child abuse resulting in death, aggravated assault, conspiracy and three tampering with evidence charges for the August 24, 2016 brutal murder of 9-year-old Victoria Martins.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1265428/jessica-kelley-pleads-no-contest-to-child-abuse-in-martens-case.html

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/jessica-kelley-pleads-no-contest-to-child-abuse-in-victoria-martens-case/1690355059

On August 24, 2016, the dead body of ten-year-old Victoria Martens was found in a west side apartment building.

After responding to a 911 emergency call regarding a domestic dispute, APD police officers discovered the 10-year-old child’s dismembered remains partially wrapped in a burning blanket.

The child’s body had been dismembered and then burned in the apartment bathtub in an apparent attempt to dispose of her body.

Initially, Jessica Kelly and Michelle Martens, Victoria’s mother, and Michell’s boyfriend Fabian Gonzales, were arrested and charged for the rape, murder and dismemberment of 10-year-old Victoria.

JESSICA KELLY’S PLEA AGREEMENT

Under the plea agreement, Kelly could be sentenced up to 50 years in prison for the crimes she plead no contest to, but with good behavior and with credit for the two years she has been in jail pending trial, she could cut her time in prison down to 20 to 23 years total.

Kelly has two prior felony convictions meaning she will be sentenced as a habitual offender, which will add 20 years in prison to her sentence.

The plea agreement is essentially the identical agreement to one Judge Charles Brown rejected on September 14, 2018, except for the fact that it is a “no contest plea” as opposed to a “guilty plea”.

On September 14, 2018 Judge Charles Brown rejected the original “guilty plea” of Jessica Kelly, saying he was not presented with enough evidence that Kelley committed the crimes she was admitting to under the plea.

During the September 14, 2018 “guilty plea” hearing, Jessica Kelley testified that an unidentified man had showed up to the apartment on the day of the killing, she had no indication the man intended to hurt anyone and thought the man might have been Victoria’s father or a “friend of the family … He did not look like a bad person, he was dressed well and he walked in like he knew the home.”

In rejecting Jessica Kelly’s guilty plea agreement, Judge Brown said:

“There is no indication [nor evidence] she knew or should have known that the person intended to commit intentional murder. … You’re asking [or suggesting] … Ms. Kelley is somehow a mind reader … . ”

With the January 7, 2019 “no contest” plea, the judge could run the sentences concurrent or consecutive on each count plead to and the habitual offender charge which would increase the actual jail time served.

A “pre-sentence report” will now be prepared and Jessica Kelly will be sentenced at a later date by Judge Charles Brown.

Kelly also must cooperate and testify against Fabian Gonzalez and the unidentified indicted “John Doe” mystery defendant if ever that person is in fact apprehended.

“NO CONTEST PLEA” VERSUS “GUILTY PLEA”

A “no contest plea” is where the defendant does not dispute and acknowledges the facts and evidence outlined by the state to be presented at trial and that there is sufficient evidence to convict.

A “guilty” plea requires a defendant to recite facts of the crime and admit to the guilt of committing the crime with the necessary intent.

A “no contest” plea is not a “guilty plea” but under the law it is a conviction of a crime.

The three major benefits to Jessica Kelly with the “no contest plea” are:

1. The trial is avoided.
2. The disturbing facts and evidence of the brutal killing will not be aired in public.
3. The plea cannot be used against her in civil court like a “guilty” plea can.

The downside of the “no contest” plea for Jessica Kelly is that she has agreed to cooperate and testify against Fabian Gonzales, meaning she will be subject to cross examination by the defense and if she commits perjury she could be charged with further crimes.

MICHELLE MARTINS PLEA AGREEMENT

On June 29, 2018 District Attorney Raul Torrez announced a plea agreement where Michelle Martens, Victoria’s mother, plead guilty to child abuse of her daughter Victoria Martens.

Torrez also announced several charges against Fabian Gonzales were dismissed.

The plea agreement negotiated was to one count of child abuse, recklessly caused, resulting in the death of a child under 12.

The plea agreement guaranteed a 12 to 15-year prison sentence and dropped the most egregious charges of murder and rape.

With the plea deal, Michelle Martens faces a possible sentence of 12-15 years, and with good time she could be out of jail within 6 to 7 years.

A BOTCHED INVESTIGATION

Originally Jessica Kelly had been charged along with Michelle Martens, Victoria’s mother, and Fabian Gonzales, the boyfriend of Michelle Martens, for the rape, murder and dismemberment of 10-year-old Victoria.

On June 29, 2018 District Attorney Raul Torrez announced the negotiated plea agreement where Michelle Martens plead guilty to child abuse of her daughter Victoria Martens.

Torrez also announced several charges against Fabian Gonzales were dismissed.

District Attorney Raul Torrez said that much of the initial facts of the case were “simply not true”.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1191031/michelle-martens-pleads-guilty-to-child-abuse-faces-12-to-15-years.html

The initial APD police investigation and reports alleged that it was Jessica Kelley that stabbed 9-year-old Victoria Martens and that Fabian Gonzales strangled her while Michelle Martens watched the murder.

During his press conference, Torrez stated that his office’s investigation found Michelle Martens falsely admitted to committing the crimes when forensic evidence revealed she and her boyfriend Fabian Gonzales were not even in the apartment at the time of the murder and did not participate in the murder.

Cell phone data proved that Michelle Martens and Fabian Gonzales were not home at the time of Victoria’s murder.

During the June 29, 2018 press conference, Torrez made the stunning announcement that DNA and forensic evidence test results revealed a fourth and unidentified individual.

District Attorney’s office has said an unidentified man was retaliating against Fabian Gonzales when he went to Martens’ apartment and killed Victoria Martens.

According to reports, the unidentified man’s partial DNA sample was left on the little girl’s body and he has been indicted as a “John Doe” in order to toll the statute of limitations until the person is found and arrested for prosecution.

Part of the pretrial publicity that inflamed matters was the accusations that Victoria Martens had been raped, sexually assaulted and that the child had a communicable disease, all accusations that were proven false by further forensic investigation, the DNA evidence and the autopsy of the child.

Mark Earnest, Jessica Kelley’s defense attorney, announced that over the past two months experts determined that contrary to the findings in the initial autopsy report, there was no evidence that Victoria was raped the night she was killed and said:

“In totality … three experts [who have] … over 100 years [of experience] … determined that no sexual assault took place. Despite that, early on, the autopsy report in this case indicated that there was sexual assault.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

During his January 7, 2019 press conference to outline and answer questions regarding the Jessica Kelly’s “no contest” plea agreement, District Attorney Raul Torrez said the case illustrated that all the major players in the criminal justice system “can do a much better job” and said:

“We do our very best to be professionals. … To examine the evidence, to look at every angle of the case, to work with law enforcement partners, our partners at the Office of the Medical Investigator and to examine specific cases, but also to learn important lessons for the future.”

Torrez made no mention of what lessons he himself has learned.

One important lesson for the future that District Attorney Raul Torrez should have learned is that he needs to stop it with his propensity to seek media coverage and to discuss pending cases with the news media.

Another lesson Torrez should have learned is that with his media attention seeking ways in pending cases and what he says, he could be easily making himself a witness in a case where a defendant seeks sanctions for unethical conduct.

Raul Torrez has held a press conference after press conference in this case, including private meeting with the Journal Editors and reporters at the Journal Center, he has had more than three front page Journal stories on the case and was interviewed by Chanel 4 on the “Eye on Albuquerque” Sunday program on plea agreements he has negotiated in the case.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/07/09/da-torrez-political-damage-control-mission-accomplished/

District Attorney Raul Torrez in his various media interviews has shared extensive details of the case and prosecution strategy on the pending criminal prosecution against two other defendants, two identified and one yet to be found.

During a January 4, 2019 pretrial motion hearing, District Judge Charles Brown determined District Attorney Raúl Torrez had been “reckless” in his December 10, 2018 statement he made to the media about defendant Jessica Kelley’s absence of cooperation before her no contest plea.

Confidential sources have said that Raul Torrez resisted being called as a witness at the January 4, 2019 hearing before Judge Brown, which was the reason for his public information officer testifying instead.

Further, confidential sources are saying the defense counsel for Fabian Gonzalez intend to call Raul Torrez to the stand to testify regarding his public statements.

On January 4, 2018, District Judge Brown said that Torrez should not have issued the December 10, 2018 statement at all.

Judge Brown admonished Raul Torrez for the statement by stating from the bench in open court:

“I don’t know if it was [intentionally done] to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, or if the goal was to shift the light away from the District Attorney’s Office or to move light to the Albuquerque Police Department … I find it to be woefully inaccurate in its ambiguity. It could be interpreted in many ways – all of them positive to the District Attorney’s office, some to the detriment of others. The District Attorney also has an obligation to protect the due process right of the defendant. … [The District Attorney] … represents the state, which is everyone including the defendant and the defendant’s families … The District Attorney’s obligation is to the system.”

Notwithstanding the harsh words, Judge Charles Brown opted not to sanction Torrez at the time and deferred the imposition of sanctions to a later date.

The fact that the Jessica Kelly plea agreement has now been approved by Judge Brown probably renders moot the need to impose sanctions and fines.

No one can fault District Attorney Raul Torrez for wanting to do what he can to secure a conviction in the case, but it must be done in a court of law and not in the court of public opinion and the media.

What is very problematic is that District Attorney Raul Torrez never has had a problem with holding press conferences and being interviewed by reporters.

Torrez sharing details and prosecution strategy in the case that were later reported upon by the media may have resulted in a “clear and present danger of prejudicing the proceeding” which would be an ethical violation of the code of professional conduct for lawyers.

The New Mexico Code of Professional Responsibility has a very specific rule that governs attorneys conduct and pretrial publicity, Rule 16-306 Trial Publicity, that Torrez and his entire office of attorneys need to read and understand it fully.

The extended media interviews that Torrez has done on the case no doubt ingratiated Torrez with the media but Torrez did not help his cause in seeking justice for 10-year-old Victoria Martens.

The publicity Raul Torrez generated himself in the case may have tainted the jury pool, but we will never know.

Another problem posed is that Torrez discussed with the media in his many interview’s conclusions based on the evidence that should be decided by a jury, not the prosecutor in the case.

Despite the plea agreements, District Court Judge Charles Brown could just as easily refer Raul Torrez to the New Mexico Disciplinary Board for violations of the Code of Professional Conduct relating to pretrial publicity.

Raul Torrez needs to take to heart the words of Judge Brown when he said:

“[DA Torrez] … represents the state, which is everyone including the defendant and the defendant’s families … The District Attorney’s obligation is to the system”.

Judge Brown essentially told District Attorney Raul Torrez his obligation is not just to inform the media that results in generating intense media coverage.

Judge Brown made it clear to Torrez that his ethical obligation is to the entire criminal justice system and not just to the media and his own political image and future.

Another obligation of any prosecutor is to have faith in the jury system and do the best you can to prove your case with the evidence you have in a court of law and if there is not enough evidence then the investigating agency needs to be held accountable.

It is likely that Bernalillo County District Attorney Raul Torrez will seek to be elected to a second term in 2020.

In 2020, voters will decide if Torrez has in fact secured justice for 9 year old Victoria Martens especially against the child’s mother Michelle Martens who may serve as little as 6 years.

On Monday, January 7, 2019 Joe Monahan on his blog “New Mexico Politics With Joe Monahan” posted an article on Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller and Bernalillo County District Attorney and the affects Albuquerque Crime rates are having on their careers.

As usual, Joe Monahan makes insightful political observations that goes beyond reporting facts and ties a few things together.

Following is Joe Monahan’s article followed by the link to the full blog and followed by further commentary and analysis:

“Monday, January 07, 2019

Fortysomething Angst: Crime Wave Testing Mettle Of Mayor Keller And DA Torrez; Murder And Drugs Continue Their Relentless March Into New Year: Keller Struggles With APD; Torrez Shifts Blame And Gets Taken Down

“The ABQ metros two young political hotshots continue to get tripped up by the ongoing ABQ crime wave, a reminder that advancing in statewide politics from the big city looks easy but really isn’t.

First, ABQ Mayor Tim Keller, 41, fresh off a high in announcing a decline in a number of crime categories, including auto theft, is now haunted by yet another misstep by his APD that has prompted yet another internal affairs investigation. This one is over the drowning death of a one year old baby girl whose parents are now charged with child abuse resulting in death:

. . .Family asked police to check on the baby on Dec. 18 and an officer did a welfare check on the baby at a Northeast Albuquerque apartment, but Romero told the officer the baby was with her sister, according to a criminal complaint filed Friday. At that point, the baby was still missing, and it’s unclear why police did not seek the public’s help in finding the family sooner. “That’s under internal affairs investigation, that’s what we’re looking into,” a police spokesman said.

The problem is that back in May the same APD failed to fully investigate the abuse of a 7 year old girl whose drug-addled parents turned her into a child prostitute. The girl’s blood-stained underwear was collected by an APS teacher but APD rejected it as evidence and had it thrown away. A shocked city saw Keller order an internal affairs investigation and be forced to make a public mea culpa over his initial support of his department’s actions.

But here we are again. And that raises the question of whether Keller and his police chief Michael Geier have command and control over the department, which operates under the purview of the Department of Justice because of its checkered past.

It also again raises the question of APD’s culture and whether Keller and Geier are making enough progress with needed reforms. It also raises the more disturbing question of whether Keller and/or Geier have become part of the defensive/rogue culture that got the city in such a law enforcement mess in the first place.

And all of that raises questions about Keller’s decision early in his term to reject choosing a new police chief from out of state to reform the rotted culture. Is it now time? Or is the Mayor going to continue to absorb the slings and arrows from an agency that seems largely unresponsive (or impervious) to his will for major reform?

Meantime, Dr. James Ginger, the highly compensated overseer of the DOJ decree governing APD, pronounces himself pleased as punch because, in part, unlike the Mayor Berry administration at least Keller and the chief talk with him. But that’s not reform, Doc. That’s ego stroking. And pretty darn expensive stroking at that.

UNRELENTING MACABRE VIOLENCE

The late ’18 and early 2019 city violence has been unrelenting. We don’t know if the parents of that one year old boy left to drown and then callously buried in a backyard forever to be forgotten were doped up, but isn’t that usually the case in these twisted sagas?

And then there’s the two teenaged boys–14 and 15–who were slain and buried in shallow graves near Rio Rancho over an apparent drug deal gone awry. The crime began in the ABQ foothills then went to the West Mesa where the boys were beaten to death, with the horror inexplicably being shown on Snapchat.

Then there was the killing of a young girl on the west side last week identified only as a “juvenile” whose 15 year old cousin went berserk, killed her and left the body in an arroyo. Drugs? No word yet.

The cops can’t necessarily stop deranged cousins, but it’s highly important to note that in the span of a couple of weeks we have a one year old dead and the parents charged; two teens in the grave because of drug abuse and a little girl aged unknown murdered and lying in an arroyo.

Those are the children of this city and state and this is not new. It is a continuation of the wickedness that began creeping up on us with the economic decline and increase in drug usage and trafficking.

ABQ has made some progress in reducing auto and property crime, but the fact remains that violence continues at historic and unacceptable levels–and it is the city’s youth who seem to be in its crosshairs.

Keller doesn’t try to spin that. But after 13 months in office difficult and potentially painful decisions about this city’s policing and its rampant drug dealing have yet to be made. Hiring more cops is not the sole solution, if the culture is not revamped. That’s like putting more salt in an already over salted sauce. The more the decisions are delayed by the 11th Floor the more pain it will bring to victims and to the future of the city.

The mayor has hired several old hands as consultants but we need fresh perspectives–from out of this region and state.

TORREZ TAKE DOWN

Now over to Bernalillo County District Attorney Raul Torrez, 42, whose political future appears to be getting swallowed up by perhaps the most horrific child murder in city history–the 2016 killing and dismemberment of 10 year old Victoria Martens.

Democrat Torrez has worked furiously during his tenure to shift blame for the crime wave to the judges. But his blame shifting has caught up with him in the Martens slaying which threatens to go unpunished under his watch and has the DA facing possible court sanctions over his public statements regarding the case. As is his custom, those statements worked to blame others for shortcomings in the case. (Has a DA ever been sanctioned here?)

This week Jessica Kelly’s trial for Victoria’s murder begins but Torrez has already alarmed the public by saying there could be “an unidentified” man who may have committed the killing and is still on the loose. And the DA has now had to drop the rape charges against her. And Kelley is being prosecuted against that backdrop? Truly this is bizarro world.

Late Monday morning Kelly copped a plea, perhaps lessening a bit of the political pressure on the DA:

One day before the first trial in the Victoria Martens case was scheduled to begin, the defendant, 34-year-old Jessica Kelley pleaded no contest to child abuse recklessly caused, resulting in death, tampering with evidence and aggravated assault.

There is already talk that Torrez could face a Dem primary challenge in 2020 when he is up for re-election. The sanctions threat and the bungling of the Victoria Martens case make him all the more vulnerable–even if he plans on running against the judges for the rest of his career.

They often say the 40’s are the “worry free years,” usually blessed with good health and career climbing. But for fortysomethings Tim Keller and Raul Torrez they are years when their mettle is being tested like never before. For them their 40’s is when your hair starts to turn gray.”

Following is the link to Joe Monahans blog:

http://joemonahansnewmexico.blogspot.com/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Mayor Tim Keller (41) and Bernalillo County District Attorney Raul Torrez (42) have so much in common other than their age to the point they should be referred to as “BURQUE’S TWO AMIGOS”.

Both Keller and Torrez thus far have high positive name identity and strong support within the progressive wing of the Democratic party who got them elected to the positions they now hold.

Both Keller and Torrez were able to raise significant amounts of money to get elected, Torrez $500,000 and Keller $1.3 million with help from measured finance committees.

In 2016, Raul Torrez campaigned on a platform of reducing crime arguing that crime rates were too high, our criminal justice system was broken and that he was the guy to fix it.

Torrez during his first year in office blamed judges for our high crime rates because of reduced sentences given to violent criminals and dismissal of cases until it was revealed that his office voluntarily dismissed cases at much higher rates than the courts.

Notwithstanding, thus far Torrez is perceived by the public as doing a very good job and likely will get elected again in 2020 if he runs because of the extensive media coverage he gets, unless of course the news coverage becomes negative as with what is happening in the Victoria Martens murder case prosecution.

In 2017, the State Auditor Tim Keller campaigned for Mayor on a platform of reducing crime, police reform and community-based policing.

Keller has taken public relations to all new levels, but he has not shaken the perception that the city is way too violent, that he has not done enough with the city’s struggling economy and APD.

With Keller replacing the Chief and the command staff, APD is now fully his and yet APD still is plagued with problems involving high profile cases.

It has been reported that Albuquerque crime rates for the first time in nine years are now on the decline and both Mayor Tim Keller and Bernalillo County District Attorney Raul Torrez are taking credit for it.

According to political insiders and observers, both men have a burning ambition for higher office that motivates them and a lot of what they do in their jobs.

Both have mentioned they are interested in higher office, including United States Congress, United States Senate or Governor.

Now that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, Congresswoman Debra Haaland have been elected and Senator Tom Udall is saying it is a sure bet he will be running for US Senate for another term, both Keller and Torrez’s options have now been reduced to running for another term, if they want it.

One thing both men have in common is that their leadership is clearly being tested and both will be defined by how much progress they make in reducing crime over the next few years.

Both Keller and Torrez in all probability will be facing each other for higher office one day, unless of course they stumble tremendously and are voted out of office after serving only one term.

On August 24, 2016, the dead body of ten-year-old Victoria Martens was found in a west side apartment building.

After responding to a 911 emergency call regarding a domestic dispute, APD police officers discovered the 10-year-old child’s dismembered remains partially wrapped in a burning blanket.

The child’s body had been dismembered and then burned in the apartment bathtub in an apparent attempt to dispose of her body.

Initially, Michelle Martens, Victoria’s mother, was arrested and charged along with her boyfriend Fabian Gonzales and her friend Jessica Kelly for the rape, murder and dismemberment of 10-year-old Victoria.

AN UNRAVELING CASE RESULTS IN A LENIENT PLEA

On June 29, 2018 District Attorney Raul Torrez announced during a press conference that he negotiated a plea agreement where Michelle Martens plead guilty to child abuse of her daughter Victoria Martens.

The plea agreement contained no murder charge.

Torrez also announced several charges against Fabian Gonzales were dismissed.

The plea agreement District Attorney Torrez negotiated was to one count of child abuse, recklessly caused, resulting in the death of a child under 12.

The plea agreement guaranteed a 12 to 15-year prison sentence and dropped the most egregious charges of murder and rape.

With the plea deal, Michelle Martens faces a possible sentence of 12-15 years, and with good time she could be out of jail within 6 to 7 years.

During the press conference, District Attorney Torrez said that much of the initial facts of the case were “simply not true”.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1191031/michelle-martens-pleads-guilty-to-child-abuse-faces-12-to-15-years.html

The initial APD police investigation and reports alleged that it was Jessica Kelley that stabbed 9-year-old Victoria Martens and that Fabian Gonzales strangled her while Michelle Martens watched the murder.

During his press conference, Torrez stated that his office’s investigation found Michelle Martens falsely admitted to committing the crimes when forensic evidence revealed she and her boyfriend Fabian Gonzales were not even in the apartment at the time of the murder and did not participate in the murder.

Cell phone data proved that Michelle Martens and Fabian Gonzales were not home at the time of Victoria’s murder.

During the June 29, 2018 press conference, Torrez made the stunning announcement that DNA and forensic evidence test results revealed a fourth and unidentified individual.

MEDIA POLITICAL DAMAGE CONTROL

There was tremendous public outcry over the leniency shown to Michelle Martens who many feel contributed and who was the most responsible for committing the most heinous crimes against her own child by putting her in harm’s way.

Within a 10-day time span, Raul Torrez held a press conference covered by all local media news organizations, followed by a meeting with the Journal Editors and reporters 6 days later, had three front page Journal stories and was interviewed by Chanel 4 on the “Eye on Albuquerque” Sunday program on the plea agreement he negotiated.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/07/09/da-torrez-political-damage-control-mission-accomplished/

District Attorney Raul Torrez in his various media interviews shared extensive details of the case and prosecution strategy on the pending criminal prosecution against two other defendants, two identified and one yet to be found.

The full story can be read here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/1193335/details-emerge-in-search-for-4th-martens-suspect.html

REJECTED JESSICA KELLY PLEA AGREEMENT

On September 14, 2018, Jessica Kelley agreed to plead guilty to multiple charges under a plea agreement that required her to testify at related trials and to offer statements to authorities.

The plea deal was that Jessica Kelly would plead guilty to six felony charges, including child abuse resulting in death

A sentence of up to 49 years could have been imposed under the plea agreement.

There was no charge of murder that was to be plead to by Jessica Kelly.

District Attorney Raúl Torrez told the media that Kelly’s cooperation was “critically important to the state’s investigation” into the well-dressed stranger that Jessica Kelley says killed the 10-year-old girl.

On September 14, 2018 Judge Charles Brown rejected the Jessica Kelly plea agreement, saying he was not presented with enough evidence that Kelley committed the crimes she was admitting to under the plea.

District Judge Brown asked one very simple question of defendant Jessica Kelley during the plea hearing:

“What happened that makes you guilty of recklessly causing or permitting something that resulted in the death of a child?”

In response to the Judges question, Defendant Jessica Kelley testified she “let an unknown male come in, not knowing he was going to kill Victoria Martens”.

Jessica Kelley testified she had no indication the man intended to hurt anyone and thought the man might have been Victoria’s father or a “friend of the family … He did not look like a bad person, he was dressed well and he walked in like he knew the home.”

In rejecting Jessica Kellys plea agreement, Judge Brown said:

“There is no indication [nor evidence] she knew or should have known that the person intended to commit intentional murder. … You’re asking [or suggesting] … Ms. Kelley is somehow a mind reader … . ”

SEARCH FOR 4TH SUSPECT ESSENTIALLY SUSPENDED

Since the June 29, 2018 press conference, APD has been attempting to identify the fourth suspect in the Victoria Martens murder.

On December 10, 2018, District Attorney Raul Torrez announced that the two detectives assigned full time to the Victoria Martens homicide case would no longer work on the case exclusively and would work on unrelated investigations after attempts to identify an elusive fourth suspect stalled.

The DA’s statement read:

“In the absence of Jessica Kelley’s continued cooperation following the District Court’s rejection of her plea agreement, the investigation into the unidentified male has stalled. … Detectives will continue to work any new leads that are developed, but it is our understanding that they will also support other investigations.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/1256083/investigation-into-fourth-martens-suspect-has-stalled.html

Fabian Gonzales is also charged with child abuse resulting in death and tampering with evidence.

The trial of Fabian Gonzales has been delayed indefinitely pending an appeal.

The trial of Jessica Kelly is scheduled to begin on Tuesday, January 8, 2019.

A MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DISTRICT ATTORNEY

On January 4, 2019, 4 days before her trial on murder charges is to begin, a hearing was held in the Jessica Kelly case where the District Attorney Raul Torrez dismissed the rape charges against Kelly.

The District Attorney’s Office voluntarily dismissed the rape charges, stating “after detailed forensic analysis by expert pathologists there is not sufficient evidence to connect Jessica Kelley to the charge of criminal sexual penetration.”

A defense Motion to Dismiss all charges against Jessica Kelly, including murder, and for sanctions against the District Attorney was also heard by the court.

The defense motion sought sanctions against District Attorney Raul Torrez for his accusation that there had been “an absence of cooperation from Kelly.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/1264630/da-dismisses-rape-charges-against-jessica-kelley.html

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/prosecution-files-to-dismiss-rape-charges-against-jessica-kelley/1687198439

Normally, prosecutors and defense attorneys do whatever they can to keep pretrial publicity to a minimum so as not to influence any potential jury pool.

https://www.koat.com/article/new-documents-filed-in-case-against-jessica-kelley-could-affect-what-lawyers-say-in-public/25598475

Defense attorneys argued that the December 10, 2018 statement by the District Attorney cast Kelley in a bad light for not “cooperating”.

The defense correctly argued the law that as a defendant, Jessica Kelly has the constitutional right to remain silent and does not even have to take the stand to testify during her trial.

District Attorney spokesman testified that Torrez had drafted the statement in response to requests for comment from the Journal about the departure of the detectives who had been working with prosecutors on the case.

Jessica Kelley’s defense counsel argued that the DA’s statement was unnecessary and prejudicial and “yet another example of a pattern of behavior [of media contacts] by the District Attorney’s Office in this case.”

The prosecutors argued that Torrez’s statement referencing Kelley’s was factual and denied that there was any attempt to prejudice the public against Jessica Kelly.

DA TORREZ FOUND TO BE RECKLESS

During the January 4, 2019 hearing District Judge Charles Brown determined District Attorney Raúl Torrez had been “reckless” in his December 10, 2018 statement he made to the media about defendant Jessica Kelley’s absence of cooperation.

District Judge Brown said that Torrez should not have issued the December 10, 2018 statement at all.

Judge Brown admonished Raul Torrez for the statement by stating from the bench in open court:

“I don’t know if it was [intentionally done] to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, or if the goal was to shift the light away from the District Attorney’s Office or to move light to the Albuquerque Police Department … I find it to be woefully inaccurate in its ambiguity. It could be interpreted in many ways – all of them positive to the District Attorney’s office, some to the detriment of others. The District Attorney also has an obligation to protect the due process right of the defendant. … [The District Attorney] … represents the state, which is everyone including the defendant and the defendant’s families … The District Attorney’s obligation is to the system.”

Notwithstanding the harsh words, Judge Charles Brown opted not to sanction Torrez until he determines if the DA’s statement influenced potential jurors during jury selection before penalizing the state by imposing sanctions.

NEW MEXICO CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

Raul Torrez is not just another elected official, but is a licensed New Mexico Attorney, the Chief Law Enforcement official for Bernalillo County and a former federal Assistant United States Attorney and he should understand that contacts with the media have clear “rules of engagement” of the Code of Professional Conduct for attorneys.

As a licensed attorney and prosecutor, Torrez is held to strict standards of professional conduct, including being required to swear to and adhere to the Code of Professional Conduct.

The New Mexico Code of Professional Responsibility has a very specific rule that governs attorneys conduct and pretrial publicity:

“Rule 16-306 Trial Publicity

A. Extrajudicial Statements.

A lawyer shall not make any extrajudicial or out-of-forum [out of court] statement in a criminal proceeding that may be tried to a jury that the lawyer know or reasonably should know:

(1) is false; or
(2) creates a clear and present danger of prejudicing the proceeding.

B. Attorney’s Obligations With Respect to Other Persons.

A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to insure compliance with this rule by associated attorneys, employees and members of law enforcement and investigative agencies.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The drugging, raping, murder, dismemberment and the burning of the body of 9-year-old Victoria Martens will go down as one of the most heinous crimes in Albuquerque history.

Even life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is not enough for crimes committed against this innocent child.

Whoever did kill Victoria Martens in such a brutal manner represents pure evil.

Notwithstanding the brutality of the killing, our criminal justice system and constitution presumes innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and demands due process of law, even for the most heinous of crimes such as the murder of Victoria Martens.

No one can fault District Attorney Raul Torrez for wanting to do what he can to secure a conviction in the case, but it must be done in a court of law and not in the court of public opinion and the media.

It is surprising that it took so long for the defense to raise the issue of pretrial publicity and the District Attorney’s comments and repeated contact with the media.

What is very problematic is that District Attorney Raul Torrez never has had a problem with holding press conferences and being interviewed by reporters sharing details and prosecution strategy in the case that may result in a “clear and present danger of prejudicing the proceeding”.

The extended media interviews that Torrez has done on the case no doubt ingratiated Torrez with the media but Torrez did not help his cause in seeking justice for 10-year-old Victoria Martens.

Another problem posed is that Torrez discussed with the media in his many interview’s conclusions based on the evidence that should be decided by a jury, not the prosecutor in the case.

Judge Charles Brown imposing sanctions against District Attorney Raul Torrez for his accusation that there had been an absence of cooperation from Kelly is the least thing Torrez needs to worry about.

District Court Judge Charles Brown could just as easily refer Raul Torrez to the New Mexico Disciplinary Board for violations of the Code of Professional Conduct relating to pretrial publicity.

Raul Torrez needs to take to heart the words of Judge Brown when he said:

“[DA Torrez] … represents the state, which is everyone including the defendant and the defendant’s families … The District Attorney’s obligation is to the system”.

Judge Brown essentially told District Attorney Raul Torrez his obligation is not just to inform the media that results in generating intense media coverage.

Judge Brown made it clear to Torrez that his ethical obligation is to the entire criminal justice system and not just to the media and his own political image and future.

Another obligation of any prosecutor is to have faith in the jury system and do the best you can to prove your case with the evidence you have and if there is not enough evidence then the investigating agency needs to be held accountable.

For a related blog articles see:

Martens Case Failures May End DA Torrez Political Career

DA Torrez Spreads Blame To APD In Martens Case

On January 1, 2019, the Washington Post published a lengthy editorial essay written by Republican Utah United State Senator Mitt Romney.

Romney was the Republican party’s 2012 nominee for President who lost to President Barack Obama.

Following is the editorial essay with the link at the end followed by reactions and commentary:

“The Trump presidency made a deep descent in December. The departures of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, the appointment of senior persons of lesser experience, the abandonment of allies who fight beside us, and the president’s thoughtless claim that America has long been a “sucker” in world affairs all defined his presidency down.

It is well known that Donald Trump was not my choice for the Republican presidential nomination. After he became the nominee, I hoped his campaign would refrain from resentment and name-calling. It did not. When he won the election, I hoped he would rise to the occasion. His early appointments of Rex Tillerson, Jeff Sessions, Nikki Haley, Gary Cohn, H.R. McMaster, Kelly and Mattis were encouraging. But, on balance, his conduct over the past two years, particularly his actions last month, is evidence that the president has not risen to the mantle of the office.

It is not that all of the president’s policies have been misguided. He was right to align U.S. corporate taxes with those of global competitors, to strip out excessive regulations, to crack down on China’s unfair trade practices, to reform criminal justice and to appoint conservative judges. These are policies mainstream Republicans have promoted for years. But policies and appointments are only a part of a presidency.

To a great degree, a presidency shapes the public character of the nation. A president should unite us and inspire us to follow “our better angels.” A president should demonstrate the essential qualities of honesty and integrity, and elevate the national discourse with comity and mutual respect. As a nation, we have been blessed with presidents who have called on the greatness of the American spirit. With the nation so divided, resentful and angry, presidential leadership in qualities of character is indispensable. And it is in this province where the incumbent’s shortfall has been most glaring.

The world is also watching. America has long been looked to for leadership. Our economic and military strength was part of that, of course, but our enduring commitment to principled conduct in foreign relations, and to the rights of all people to freedom and equal justice, was even more esteemed. Trump’s words and actions have caused dismay around the world. In a 2016 Pew Research Center poll, 84 percent of people in Germany, Britain, France, Canada and Sweden believed the American president would “do the right thing in world affairs.” One year later, that number had fallen to 16 percent.

This comes at a very unfortunate time. Several allies in Europe are experiencing political upheaval. Several former Soviet satellite states are rethinking their commitment to democracy. Some Asian nations, such as the Philippines, lean increasingly toward China, which advances to rival our economy and our military. The alternative to U.S. world leadership offered by China and Russia is autocratic, corrupt and brutal.

The world needs American leadership, and it is in America’s interest to provide it. A world led by authoritarian regimes is a world — and an America — with less prosperity, less freedom, less peace.

To reassume our leadership in world politics, we must repair failings in our politics at home. That project begins, of course, with the highest office once again acting to inspire and unite us. It includes political parties promoting policies that strengthen us rather than promote tribalism by exploiting fear and resentment. Our leaders must defend our vital institutions despite their inevitable failings: a free press, the rule of law, strong churches, and responsible corporations and unions.

We must repair our fiscal foundation, setting a course to a balanced budget. We must attract the best talent to America’s service and the best innovators to America’s economy.

America is strongest when our arms are linked with other nations. We want a unified and strong Europe, not a disintegrating union. We want stable relationships with the nations of Asia that strengthen our mutual security and prosperity.

I look forward to working on these priorities with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and other senators.

Furthermore, I will act as I would with any president, in or out of my party: I will support policies that I believe are in the best interest of the country and my state, and oppose those that are not. I do not intend to comment on every tweet or fault. But I will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions.

I remain optimistic about our future. In an innovation age, Americans excel. More importantly, noble instincts live in the hearts of Americans. The people of this great land will eschew the politics of anger and fear if they are summoned to the responsibility by leaders in homes, in churches, in schools, in businesses, in government — who raise our sights and respect the dignity of every child of God — the ideal that is the essence of America.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-the-president-shapes-the-public-character-of-the-nation-trumps-character-falls-short/2019/01/01/37a3c8c2-0d1a-11e9-8938-5898adc28fa2_story.html?utm_term=.12201fa02c04

PRESIDENT TRUMP RESPONDS

On January 2, 2019, within hours after Romney’s attack on him for his lack of character and leadership, Trump dismissed the criticism in a characteristic tweet by saying:

“Here we go with Mitt Romney, but so fast! Question will be, is he a Flake? I hope not. Would much prefer that Mitt focus on Border Security and so many other things where he can be helpful. I won big, and he didn’t. He should be happy for all Republicans. Be a TEAM player & WIN!”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-mitt-romney-twitter_us_5c2cb4e1e4b0407e9086b334

https://people.com/politics/mitt-romney-donald-trump-presidency-column-response/

Trump’s “Flake” remark was a reference to former Republican United States Senator Jeff Flake who had become a critic of Trump.

Trump’s claim he “won big” claim is laughable and a lie seeing as he lost the national popular vote to Hillary Clinton by 4 million votes.

Trump actually secured a smaller percentage of the national vote in the 2016 election than Romney did in the 2012 election against Barack Obama.

NOTHING LIKE FAMILY NOT BACKING YOU UP

Ronna McDaniel is Mitt Romney’s niece and she is also chairwoman of the Republican National Committee.

McDaniel unloaded on her uncle’s editorial essay as “disappointing and unproductive” in a tweet of her own by saying:

“POTUS is attacked and obstructed by the MSM media and Democrats 24/7. For an incoming Republican freshman senator to attack @realdonaldtrump as their first act feeds into what the Democrats and media want and is disappointing and unproductive.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Mitt Romney’s Washington Post essay was extremely mild compared to what he said about Trump two years ago during the Republican Presidential primary.

During the 2016 Presidential election, after Trump became the decisive Republican primary leader taking seven states in Super Tuesday, Romney in a speech called Trump a “con man” and “a fake” and had this to say about Trump:

“If we Republicans chose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished. … Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. … We will only really know if he is the real deal and not a phony if he releases his tax returns and his interview with the New York Times.”

In the speech two years ago, Romney took issue with Trump’s “personal qualities,” including “the bullying, the greed, the showing off, the misogyny and the absurd third-grade antics.”

Romney included references to a number of Trump’s headline-making incidents including comments he made about members of the media.

Romney brought up Trump’s vulgar remarks about Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly, saying Trump “attributed a reporter’s questions to her menstrual cycle.”

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/mitt-romney-donald-trump-is-872472

Romney’s written essay is so watered down so as to be ineffective to the point that Trump and Romney’s own niece were able to dismiss it with two simple, short tweets.

Romney has vacillated in his support of Trump as was made clear when he wanted to be appointed Secretary of State by Trump and met with him over dinner.

Romney said:

“I do not intend to comment on every tweet or fault [of Trump’s] … But I will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions.”

But Romney’s essay now as a United States Senator shows he intends to stand up against Trump during his Senate tenure.

Not at all surprising is that Trump supporters and the Republican party quickly dismissed Romney’s Washington Post essay as a prelude to Romney running for President again and challenge Trump in the 2020 primaries.

Romney has already said he will not be running for President again.

What the essay letter should be taken as is a signal that United States Senator Mitt Romney will not hesitate to do what he feels is right and in the best interests of our country and vote to convict Trump in a Senate trial upon impeachment by the House.

A simple majority in the United States Representatives is all that is required to pass Articles of Impeachment charging Trump with “treason, high crimes and misdemeanors”.

After the midterms, the Democrats have a comfortable majority in the United States House, with a total of 435 house members consisting of 235 Democrats, 199 Republicans and 1 vacancy on a race yet to be called.

A two thirds vote in the United States Senate is required to convict and remove a president after a trial presided over by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

Currently there are 100 Senators consisting of 53 Republican Senators, 45 Democratic Senator’s and 2 Independents and 67 Senators must vote to convict to remove.

With 45 US Senate Democrats, 21 Republican Senators will need to vote to convict Trump, which is why so many political pundits say it is unlikely Trump will ever be removed unless the Mueller Russian Investigation clearly shows criminal activity and acts of treason by Trump and his family.

It will be interesting to see how many Republican United Senators will actually put country before party and do the right thing and convict to remove Trump.

The one thing President Trump and Ronna McDaniel will not be able to dismiss with simple tweets is when United State Senator Mitt Romney votes to convict and find Trump guilty of articles of impeachment and remove him from office.