State District Court Judge Alan Malott has tossed a challenge to Albuquerque’s minimum wage ordinance filed by defendant business owners against minimum wage workers who were forced to file a class action lawsuit to enforce Albuquerque’s minimum wage ordinance without any assistance from the city.

(See June 2, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, Section B, “Challenge to ABQ minimum wage law tossed; Judge says litigant filed complaint late)

The Defendants in the case are the former restaurant owners of Kelley’s Brew Pub who sold the restaurant to another firm and Kelly’s is now under new management.

The Defendants alleged the minimum wage ordinance enacted in 2012 by voters “was presented to voters in an unlawful, misleading and deceptive manner” and was “therefore void and unenforceable as a matter of law”.

Judge Mallot did the right thing by dismissing the claim.

This is a major court victory for Albuquerque’s working class with no thanks to Mayor Berry and the Albuquerque City Council.

The City of Albuquerque and the City Attorney’s Office should be aggressively defending the minimum wage ordinance and should enforce it, but they never have done it.

In 2012, by a two-to-one ratio, voters in the City of Albuquerque decided to raise the City’s minimum wage from $7.50 per hour to $8.50 per hour.

Albuquerque’s minimum wage is now $8.80 an hour.

In 2012, Republican Mayor Richard Berry, the Republican Albuquerque City Councilors and the business community opposed and campaigned against the minimum wage voter initiative.

After enactment of the City’s minimum wage ordinance, Mayor Berry did not object to, albeit instructed, his appointed City Attorney saying the City did not have the resources to enforce the law against all businesses who violated the minimum wage law.

The current attitude of City Hall is that workers need to go to court on their own at their own expense to enforce the minimum wage ordinance and that is why the class action lawsuit was filed by waitresses and waiters.

The existing minimum wage ordinance is a city ordinance that needs to be enforced by the city and the city attorney’s office and not leave workers hanging out to dry and to fend for themselves at their own expense.

Not many minimum wage workers can afford to hire an attorney to go to court and enforce the provisions of the city’s minimum wage ordinance.

Since enactment of the city’s minimum wage ordinance, where have all our Democratic City Counselors gone?

Not a single city councilor who call themselves Democrats, including City Councilors Pat Davis, Diane Gibson, Ken Sanchez, Klarissa Pena and Isaac Benton haver ever demanded the Mayor or the City Attorney’s Office to enforce Albuquerque’s minimum wage ordinance.

All five (5) of our Democratic City Councilors have acted more like Republicans than Democrats when it comes to Albuquerque’s minimum wage.

Our Democratic City Counselor’s support of Albuquerque’s minimum wage is blowing in the wind.

Every single business in Albuquerque is required to register and have a license to do business and must agree to adhere to all enacted city ordinances and laws.

Businesses cannot pick and choose what laws and City Ordinances they want to follow.

The City Attorney’s office and Planning Department have the authority to enforce existing ordinances.

The Planning Department issues licenses to do business in Albuquerque and has code enforcement responsibility.

Businesses licensed by the City can be ordered to follow the minimum wage law or the City will take court action to have their business licenses revoked and secure Court Orders to shut down the businesses for violating the law.

The Mayor and the City Attorney’s Office needs to do the right thing and enforce the existing minimum wage and not force worker’s to fend for themselves.

All candidates for Mayor need to articulate not only where they stand on Albuquerque’s minimum wage but if they intend to order the Planning Department and the City Attorney’s Office to enforce it.

All candidates for City Council need to articulate where they stand on Albuquerque’s minimum wage and if they support funding for the Planning Department and the City Attorney’s Office to enforce it.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1010733/complaint-against-apd-investigated.htm

A complaint has been filed with the City’s Police Oversight Agency against APD’s public information officers Celina Espinoza and Fred Duran for providing false information to the news media and to the public about APD’s contact with nine (9) year old Victoria Martin and her family prior to the child’s brutal murder.

(See May 31, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, page A-1 “Oversight board investigating complaint against APD; Incorrect info in Matens case at issue)

Victoria Martens is the nine (9) year old child that was drugged, raped, murdered, mutilated, dismembered and burned allegedly by her mother, her mother’s boyfriend and his cousin.

The murder is one of the most heinous crimes in Albuquerque history of an innocent child, and the three (3) defendants are in custody pending a trial on multiple felony charges.

The complaint with the Police Oversight Board was filed by Jim Larson, a former law enforcement officer with the Dallas Police Department and the US Secret Service and someone who I know and worked with some years ago and who I respect.

Five months before the child was killed, the Children Youth and Families Department (CYFD) received a complaint that one of the mother’s boyfriends tried to kiss the child which at the very least merited consideration and looking into for possible assault on a child or even child abuse.

CYFD said it did not investigate the allegation because the boyfriend was not a relative and did not live in the child’s home but CYFD reported the complaint to APD and turned it over to APD.

Months before the murder, APD had a referral from the New Mexico Human Services Department alleging that the boyfriend of the mother was trying to kiss the 9-year-old child.

When you review the complaint filed by Jim Larson and listen to the audio clips between the Journal reporter and the two APD public information officers, you can glean six (6) major inconsistencies that some people would consider downright lies created out of whole cloth by the two APD public information officers.

(The audio clips are on the Journal online website at ABQJournal.com along with the story.)

FIRST: Public Information Officer (PIO) Celina Espinoza told the Albuquerque Journal reporter that APD had investigated the CYFD report which was not true and appears to be a total fabrication.

SECOND: Public Information Officer Fred Duran told the Journal reporter that APD detectives interviewed the child and her mother about the CYFD complaint. Specifically, Fred Duran said “Detectives went and talked to the family and that’s where we got the information that the mother had taken care of the situation by telling the boyfriend to leave and not come back.” Duran on the audio taped interview with the Journal reporter specifically says he was confident APD went out to the home, says he actually talked to the detectives and no reports were filed because no probable cause was found of a crime. The truth is APD detectives never went to the child’s home, never interviewed the child and never interviewed the mother because a written report would have been required if that happened and any statements given would have to be transcribed and attached to the written report as per APD standard operating procedures.

THIRD: When Fred Duran was asked specifically why APD Detectives made no police offense report about the investigation and interviews, which is required standard operating procedure policy on investigations, Duran said no report was made because making such a report would violate the child victim’s rights and amount to “police surveillance”. This is absolute nonsense. Interviews of potential victims and witnesses in a case by police is standard operating procedure in any criminal investigation and are not surveillance.

FOURTH: PIO Celina Espinoza contradicted PIO Fred Duran on her audio interview with the Journal by saying that no APD detectives went to the home and that they did not follow up on the CYFD complaint because APD policy dictates that APD officers only follow up on criminal allegations and that “a kiss in not a crime”. Espinoza also said there were no reports filed because there was no evidence of a crime. How would APD know if no crime was committed if APD Detectives never had contact or interviewed the child or the mother in the first place? At the very least an unwanted forced kiss by an adult of a child is and assault or battery.

FIFTH: When the Journal asked about the contradicting information, a conference call was set up with Espinoza, Duran and the Journal reporter. The Journal was told APD detectives did interview the family, the detective dealt with the reported kiss, but that they did not make any reports because there was no evidence of a crime. The Journal was told that the names of the detectives could not be released because they work on FBI high profile cases and releasing the detective’s names would jeopardize pending cases. In the audio recording, Espinoza opines that “attempted kissing” is not a crime and there was no evidence of criminal sexual penetration. Espinoza states that because there was no probable cause of a crime, no reports were required to be written by the detectives. Really? The arguments made smacks of a cover up in that police offense reports are public record, they contain the names of investigating officers, and the CYFD complaint had nothing to do with any federal charges.

SIXTH: PIO Espinoza says in the conference call “Everybody did everything they were suppose to” even though previously Espinoza had said APD detectives had not followed up on the complaint from CYFD.

So what is the truth and what are the lies coming from APD when it comes to Victoria Martens and the investigation of the CYFD complaint?

I agree 100% with Jim Larson when he says in his complaint “the public must be able to trust the police department to provide truthful and accurate information regarding actions taken or not taken by officers. … That trust was violated when the department provided false statements to the public regarding the actions or inactions of detectives”.

When you listen to the audio tapes from the APD Public Information Officers, you quickly understand why so many people do not trust APD and why it has a serious credibility problems with the community.

My hope is that the APD Police Oversight Board takes the Larson complaint serious and thoroughly instigates and acts.

Given the serious nature of the allegations that APD failed to provide accurate information, you would think our Mayor and our Chief of Police would hold someone accountable, but that would go against their own standard operating procedure and how they have conducted themselves during their entire tenure in office.

Both Berry and Eden just look the other way and say everything is just fine with APD and we are complying with the DOJ reforms.

What is tragic is that a child had to suffer and her life was taken in such a brutal manner when she possibly could have been saved had the CYFD Department and APD been a little more vigilant and dedicated to doing their jobs.

http://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-police-officer-involved-shootings-down/8174317

Channel 7 reported that the number of officer-involved shootings within the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) is the lowest it has been in years.

APD data shows there were only five incidents in 2016 where officers opened fire at suspects during incidents.

This is a sharp decline from previous years, where in 2010 the number was 13.

The high number in 2010 was the main reason the Department of Justice (DOJ) did its investigation and found a “culture of aggression” within APD.

In May, 2014, the City of Albuquerque entered into a Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) with the DOJ which mandated the implantation of major reforms, including more training to deal with the mentally ill, and the appointment of a Federal Monitor.

Chief Gorden Eden says that nearly two years into the process, the new rules under the consent decree appear to be working because police shootings are down.

Not so fast Gordo.

Chief Eden is essentially arguing there is substantial compliance with the settlement agreement because shootings and excessive use of force cases are down.

Shootings may be down, but that does not mean compliance with the court order nor the mandated reforms.

The DOJ has not said the “culture of aggression” within APD has been eliminated.

What has been said by the Federal Monitor is that the APD command staff has engaged in deliberate “non-compliance” with the DOJ mandated reforms.

The May 5, 2017 Federal Monitors report says that APD is going in the wrong direction when it comes to the reforms and an out-of-control department that desperately needs new leadership.

The May 1, 2017 fifth report is the most damning and critical report to date when the monitor found that APD “subverted” the reform process by issuing “covert special orders,” denying the existence of the orders, and APD exhibiting a “near total failure” to accept civilian oversight.

During the May 10, 2017 report presentation by the monitor, many in the courtroom were shocked when the US Attorney went out of his way to complement APD for making “tremendous progress”.

On May 11, 2017, I attended a 3-hour private meeting in the United States Attorney office with approximately 15 other private citizens to meet with Assistant United State Attorney Luis Saucedo with the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division in Washington to discuss APDs progress on the settlement and the May 10 hearing.

No press was invited to May 10th meeting.

The overwhelming majority of those in attendance at the May 11 meeting objected to the US Attorney praising APD’s progress given the Monitor’s past and recent report that APD has deliberately undermined the reform process and engaged in questionable tactics, resistance to the reforms and noncompliance.

One attendee said their jaw dropped at Mr. Salcedo’s courtroom comments while another felt that his presentation was a setback and that the reform progress had been seriously undermined by Mr. Saucedo and that Saucedo did a disservice to many who have demanded action by the DOJ.

Another made the observation they felt Saucedo was making arguments for the City and APD and not the Department of Justice in what is supposed to be an adversarial proceeding.

Many felt the DOJ was no longer committed to the reform process and that it was time for the appointment of a Special Master to take over APD.

During the May 11 meeting, I went over past monitors reports and requested the US Attorney file a Motion for Contempt of Court and seek sanctions against the City and APD command staff for intentional violation of the settlement agreement.

I also suggested that given the recent monitors report of noncompliance by APD, the Department of Justice should seek the appointment of a Special Master to take over APD with both requests declined.

Mr. Saucedo asserted the DOJ was committed to the reform process and would work with any new APD Chief if one is appointed after the October 2 election of a new Mayor.

The number one worry that many people have is that the current command staff, including the current chief, will tell the monitor and the federal judge that so much progress has been made that it would be ill-advised to replace them and that they need to stay and complete the work that they started.

Another worry is that the City will seek dismissal of the CASA before the October 2, 2017 municipal election arguing that there has been substantial compliance with the settlement and that shootings and excessive use of force cases are way down.

This is unacceptable given APD’s history of noncompliance and resistance to the reforms.

No doubt Mayor Berry would love to say before he leaves office “Mission Accomplished” and when he runs for Governor and when it comes to reforming the very police department he and his appointed Chief’s have destroyed.

There are eight (8) candidates running for Mayor of Albuquerque that have been qualified by the Albuquerque City Clerk and who will appear on the Tuesday, October 3, 2017 ballot:

1. Republican Ricardo Chaves, founder of Parking Company of America
2. Democrat Brian Colon, Former Democratic Party Chair and private attorney
3. Independent Michelle Garcia Holmes, retired APD Detective
4. Republican Wayne Johnson, Bernalillo County Commissioner
5. Democrat Timothy Keller, first term State Auditor
6. Republican Dan Lewis, Albuquerque City Councilor
7. Democrat Gus Pedrotty, UNM College Graduate and community activist
8. Democrat Susan Wheeler-Deichel, founder of civic group Urban ABQ

NOTE: Former Bernalillo County Commissioner Deanna Archuleta qualified to be on the ballot but on May 27, 2017 withdrew from the race and is no longer a candidate.

There are seventeen (17) candidates running for five (5) Albuquerque City Council seats who are still in the process of gathering signatures to qualify to get the ballot.

Following is a listing of the Albuquerque City Council candidates:

City Council District 1
1. Three term Incumbent Democratic City Councilor Ken Sanchez
2. Progressive Democrat Javier Benavidez, co-director of Southwest Organizing Project
3. Independent Sandra Mills, Albuquerque native and retired IBM employee
4. Independent Johnny F. Luevano, retired Marine Captain and Presbyterian Health plan employee

City Council District 3

1. First term Incumbent Democrat City Councilor Klarissa Pena
2. Christopher Sedillo, retired US Navy after 26 years

City Council District 5

1. Republican Robert Aragon, private attorney, NM Board of Finance member
2. Democrat Cynthia Borrego, retired City Planner
3. Republican Jose Orozco, owner of business management and consulting firm
4. Independent Catherine Trujillo, provider of workforce placement
5. Phillip Ramirez, party affiliation unknown, construction company project manager
6. Robert Watson (no information available)

City Council District 7

1. First term Democrat incumbent Diane Gibson, retired Sandia National Laboratories employee
2. Independent Timothy Carlton McQueen, December UNM graduate, legislative analyst
3. Republican Eric L. Lucero, retired New Mexico Army National Guard and Air Force

City Council District 9

1. Three term Republican Incumbent Don Harris, private attorney
2. Libertarian Paul Ryan McKenny, Air Force veteran, college student
3. Democrat Byron K. Powdrell, general manager of radio station and Albuquerque native

If no candidate gets 50% or more of the vote in the Mayor’s race or in any City Council race, a runoff will be held one month later between the two top vote getters.

Any successful candidate will need money to finance their campaigns both in the first election and then for the run-off if they make it to the run off.

No doubt those candidates in the runoff will seek and accept help from Measured Finance Committees.

BALLOT INITIATIVES

It is anticipated that the Healthy Workforce initiative that requires the payment of sick leave by employers to their employees will be on the October 3, 2017 municipal ballot.

Increasing public financing for Mayor candidates from $380,000 to $640,000 will also be on the October 2, 2017 ballot for voter approval.

DEFINITION OF A MEASURE FINANCE COMMITTEE

Under the City of Albuquerque’s campaign finance laws, a Measure Finance Committee is a political action committee (PAC), person or group that supports or opposes a candidate or ballot measure within the City of Albuquerque.

All Measure Finance Committees must register with the Albuquerque City Clerk, regardless of the group’s registration as a political action committee (PAC) with another governmental entity, county, state or federal.

Measure finance committees must also file financial statements at the same time the candidates running for office report.

There has been only one (1) financial statement disclosure required thus far of the candidates with the next reports due in July.

REGISTRATION REQUIRED

Measure Finance Committees are required to register with the City Clerk within five (5) days once they have raised or spent more than $250 towards their purpose.

Registration includes receiving the mandatory training for the online campaign finance reporting database which is then made available to the public.

Measure Finance Committee representatives must also identify a chairperson and treasurer at the time of registration.

The Chairperson or Treasurer of the committee are the only individuals authorized to sign the registration forms required by the City Charter.

NO CONTRIBUTION OR EXPENDITURES LIMITS FOR MEASURE FINANCE

Measure finance committees are not bound by the individual contribution limits and business bans like candidates.

However, a Measure Finance Committee that receives aggregate contributions more than 30 percent of the Mayor’s salary from one individual or entity, must incorporate the donor’s name into the name of the committee.

For 2016 measure finance committees, that threshold number was $31,156.32 and will be likely be the same in 2017 because the Mayor’s salary has not changed.

No Measure Finance Committee is supposed to coordinate their activities with the individual candidates running for office, but this is a gray area as to what constitutes coordination of activities.

2017 MEASURED FIANCE COMMITTEES THUS FAR

To date, there are three Measure Finance Committees that have registered for the 2017 municipal election:

1. ABQFIREPAC

Purpose listed for Measure Finance Committee: “2017 Municipal Candidates & Public Safety”

Chairperson: Diego Rincon (President of local Firefighter’s Union)
Treasurer: John Roump
Alternate Contact: Kelly Silvis

2. ABQ Forward Together

On May 10, 2017, a “Measure Finance Committee Contact Sheet” was filed with the Albuquerque City Clerk for “ABQ Forward Together” listing as the Committee Chairman a person by the name of Macon Mc Crossen.

The City Clerks web site says that ABQ Forward Together has not registered on the city’s campaign finance system and that information will be updated and the link updated when registration is completed.

The big question is which Mayor or City Council candidate or what ballot initiative is ABQ Forward Together being set up for?

A HIDEOUS THREAT TO 2017 MUNICIPAL ELECTION

The fact that Measure Finance Committees are not bound by the individual contribution limits and business bans like candidates is what makes them a major threat to warping and influencing our municipal elections and the outcome.

Any Measure Finance Committee can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money and can produce negative ads to destroy any candidate’s reputation and candidacy.

Governor Susana Martinez’s PAC headed up by Jay Mc Clusky is the best example of a PAC or Measure Finance Committee influencing an election when it went after former Majority Leader Senator Michael Sanchez in the 2016 state election with a series of negative and sensational ads and spent upwards of $1 million dollars to defeat Senator Michael Sanchez.

Jay Mc Clusky was also the campaign manager and political consultant for Mayor Richard Berry in both of his runs for Mayor and handling his media.

When you review Berry’s final financial reports for his 2013 re-election taken from the City Clerks web site it’s an eye opener regarding the extent of influence Jay Mc Cluskey and the Republican Party had over Richard Berry.

According to the City Clerks records, Berry raised $904,623.00 in cash and in-kind contributions of $5,176 for a total of $909,799 and of that Berry paid Mc Cleskey Media Stategies $590,811 and Jay Mc Cleskeys’ wife Nicole’s company Public Opinion Strategies $40,255.

Privately financed candidates and campaigns can also solicit and collect unlimited amounts of campaign donations throughout the election cycle including any run-off and can spend as much as they want with no spending limits.

For a supposedly nonpartisan race, Mayor Berry’s 2013 contributors list is top heavy with prominent Republican donors and players including the Republican National Committee, Brewer Oil Company, Western Refining Company, Pete Domenici, Harvey Yates, Micky Barnett, Ed Lujan, Bill Sego, Don Chalmbers, Jon Barela, John Sanchez, Margaret and Turner Branch, Nadine Bicknel, Larry Laranaga , Nate Gentry, Herb Hughes, Sherman McCorkle, Trudy Jones, Michael Brasher, John Ackerman, Bob Stamm, Jack Stahl, Gerry Geist, Justin Fox Young, and Doug Turner just to mention a few.

After his elections, Berry hired Republican operatives Darren White as Chief Public Safety Officer, Rob Perry as City Attorney and then Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Gordon Eden, City Attorney Jessica Hernandez, just to mention three.

It is a possibility that the Governor’s PAC will get involved with this year’s Mayor’s race to assist any one of the three Republican candidates for Mayor who are Dan Lewis, Wayne Johnson or Ricardo Chavez because of the political appointments that are at stake.

It is a possibility that the Governor’s PAC will get involved with this year’s City Council races, especially in City Council District 5 where Republican Robert Aragon, a private attorney and Governor appointed New Mexico Board of Finance member is running.

It was wishful thinking that there would be no Measure Finance Committees in our 2017 municipal election when two (2) have already been set up.

A coalition of 27 businesses and business organizations has also been formed to oppose the Healthy Work Force ordinance in court and at the ballot.

It is more likely than not that the anti-Healthy Workforce coalition will create a Measure Finance Committee, if they have not already, to raise money to oppose the ordinance as well as to promote those candidates for Mayor who oppose the Healthy Workforce ordinance.

Both Republican Dan Lewis and Republican Wayne Johnson oppose the Healthy Workforce ordinance and stand to benefit by their opposition and seek campaign donations from the business coalition opposing the mandatory sick leave ordinance.

SPENDING CAPS ON PUBLIC FINANCE CAMPAIGNS

A public finance candidate seeking help from a Measured Finance Committees reminds me of the scene in the Godfather where a grieving father goes to the Godfather on the day of his daughter’s wedding and asks for vengeance, and says “Be my friend, Godfather?”

The Godfather agrees to the favor only after his ring is kissed, but makes sure the grieving father knows he is indebted to him and that he may be called upon one day, and that day may never come, to do a service for him.

The federal courts have struck down the matching funds provision for run offs in the city’s campaign finance ordinance.

Notwithstanding, qualifying public financed candidates for Mayor and City Council are given a single lump sum of money from the city they can use to run their initial campaign and if they make it into a run off election, they are given a significantly reduced lump sum amount in public financing for the runoff election.

According to the Albuquerque City Charter for the first election, qualifying public financed candidates for Mayor are given $1.00 per registered voter in the city or approximately $360,000 and if the Mayoral candidate makes it into the runoff, they are given and additional 33 cents per registered voter or approximately $118,000 for the run off.

The city charter provides that for the first election, qualifying public fiance candidates for City Council are given $1.00 per registered voter in their City Council Districts or approximately $35,000 to $40,000, and if the city council candidate makes it into the runoff, they are given and additional 33 cents per registered voter in their district or approximately $12,000 to $14,000 for the run off election.

All public finance campaigns and public finance candidates have to agree to the spending caps in writing and are prohibited from soliciting and asking for donations.

Public finance candidates are at a distinct disadvantage to privately financed candidates and could easily get desperate for money and seek help from a Measure Finance Committees.

It is naive to think that any candidate for Mayor or City Council will refuse or denounce any help from a Measure Finance Committee set up to campaign for them and to help get them elected or help them in a runoff election.

Measure Finance Committees can do all the dirty work for a candidate just like the Governor’s PAC and Jay Mc Clusky did to defeat Senator Sanchez especially in any runoff when the public finance candidate has spent all the campaign money they had to get into the runoff.

It is more likely than not that candidates who are publicly financed will seek from behind the scenes and want the help of a Measure Finance Committee because of the cap on what the public finance candidate agreed to and can spend for the entire election cycle including any runoff.

It is disingenuous and deliberate “political fraud” to voters for any public finance candidate to secure taxpayer money first to run their campaigns, agree in writing to a spending cap, and then have their political operatives solicit or create a Measure Finance Committee to help them get elected and spend massive amounts of money to give them an unfair advantage in the first election and then the runoff.

What service will a Measured Finance Committee demand or expect from the candidate in exchange for their support?

Voters need to follow the money and demand to know where the outside money known as “dark money” is coming from for any Measure Finance Committee and find out exactly who is trying to influence the election for the candidates and who will be pulling the strings of their political puppet, like the Godfather, once elected.

Voters need to beware of the candidates and especially their political consultants who say to Measured Finance Committees “be my friend?”

CONCLUSION

The influence of big money in elections allowed by the US Supreme Court Decision Citizens United is destroying our democracy.

Political campaign fundraising and big money influence are warping our election process.

Money spent becomes equated with the final vote.

Money drives the message, affects voter turnout and ultimately the outcome.

All too often, good, decent and qualified candidates do not run because they cannot raise the money.

Albuquerque municipal elections need campaign finance reform and enforcement, but I doubt we will ever get it in the age of Citizen’s United.

On this Memorial Day, I am compelled to pay tribute to members of my family who have given so much and sacrificed so much to protect our freedoms and to protect this great country of ours.

My father Paul Dinelli and my Uncle Pete Dinelli, for whom I was named after, both served in the US Army during World War II when the United States went to war with Italy, Germany and Japan.

My father and uncle were first generation born Americans and the sons of Italian immigrants who settled in Albuquerque in the year 1900.

My Uncle Pete Dinelli was killed in action and my father Paul Dinelli was a disabled American Veteran.

My uncles Fred Fresques and Alex Fresques, my mother’s two brothers, also saw extensive combat in World War II and saw action they refused to talk about to anyone after the war.

My father in law, George W. Case, who passed away just two years ago at age 93, served in the US Navy during World War II, saw action, and was so proud of his service that he wore a WW II Veterans cap every day the last few years of his life.

My nephew Dante Dinelli served 20 + years in the US Navy and retired as a Chief Petty Officer.

My two nephews, Matthew Barnes and Brandon Barnes are both currently Captains in the United States Marine Corps.

My nephew Captain Brandon Barnes is a graduate of the US Naval Academy.

My nephew Captain Matthew Barnes graduated from UNM with honors and served a tour in Afghanistan.

To all the wonderful and courageous men and women who have served and continue to serve our country to protect and secure the promise of freedom and the ideals upon which the United States was founded upon, and to those who made the ultimate sacrifice, I thank you for your service to our Country.

Your service and sacrifices will never be forgotten.

God bless you all and God Bless this great country of ours!

I watched “Meet the Press” this morning, May 28, 2017, as I have done for decades.

The top story was President Trump’s son in law and White House Presidential adviser and employee Jared Kushner trying to set up “back channel” communications and use Russian classified government communications systems to avoid United States government detection and monitoring.

For the first time, I heard the word “treason” and “espionage” used more than once, not only on the attempted backdoor channel set up but as well as the leaking and release of classified information to the Russians and other enemies of our country.

The Russian intervention with our elections was also discussed.

The big question is did President Trump instruct his son-in-law, his presidential or campaign staff to commit treason against his own country to get elected and promote his own financial self interests?

As someone who has read and studied our US Constitution, I always thought it was peculiar that our Founding Fathers would put “treason” as grounds for impeachment of a President, thinking that no duly elected President of the United States would ever commit treason against his own country, now I understand and know why it was put there.

I cannot help but feel that what is beginning to unfold in this country is the impeachment of a sitting President of the United States for treason for the first time in its history.

What also hit home is the fact that tomorrow is Memorial Day when we remember so many who made the ultimate sacrifice for this country and our freedoms we cherish.

These are very difficult times for our country.