Tag: NEMS360

Patsy Brumfield steps in deep doo-doo alleging Hatch Act violations by Public Safety Commissioner – Sun Herald covers for the “homeboy” with “everybody does it” story

First, Brumfield’s story from NEMS360.com: Simpson says he’s ‘not a candidate,’ so no Hatch Act Violation:

Stephen Simpson, who is running for attorney general, says he is not a candidate yet and therefore can’t be in violation of a federal law prohibiting state or local appointed executives from political party campaigns, if they administer federally funded programs.

Simpson, a Republican, is the appointed commissioner of the Mississippi Department of Public Safety. On Jan. 14, he launched a statewide tour to announce his intention to be a candidate for attorney general…

The Daily Journal’s questions about Simpson’s candidacy began with the appearance of anti-drunk driving TV ads prominently featuring Simpson and his voice several days after he launched his campaign Jan. 14.

Next, the deep doo-doo shoveled up by and reported on Y’all Politics in Anatomy of a press hit: Continue reading “Patsy Brumfield steps in deep doo-doo alleging Hatch Act violations by Public Safety Commissioner – Sun Herald covers for the “homeboy” with “everybody does it” story”

“The Case of the Misplaced Modifiers” – FBI Agent Hal Neilson a victim of “selective punctuation” and his “trial by grammar”could result in “run-on sentence”!

Hencefore, USA v Neilson shall be known as the “Case of the Misplaced Modifiers” by decree of Nowdoucit.

A misplaced modifier is just that: a phrase, clause, or word placed too far from the noun or pronoun it describes. As a result, the sentence fails to convey your exact meaning. But misplaced modifiers usually carry a double wallop: They often create confusion or imply something unintentionally funny.

There’s nothing funny in Patsy Brumfield’s story on NEMS360. She reports the jury hearing USA v Neilson has decided one of the five counts of the Indictment and deadlocked on four.  She also reports the jury asked Judge Aycock to define “substantial”.   A form of the word “substantial” appears in counts one and two – and likely those are two of the four counts the jury has deadlocked on deciding.  Unintentional or not, Neilson faces a “run-on sentence” of 25 years and the lost of his pension for 21 years of service to a Government that with the use of “selective punctuation” and misplaced modifiers has subjected him to “trial by grammar”

Little wonder there’s a deadlock!  Take a look at the first count, one of the two similarly written counts using a form of the word “substantial”.

while employed by the FBI, did willfully participate personally and substantially as such FBI employee, through recommendation, the rendering of advice, and otherwise, in a particular matter in which, to his knowledge, he had a financial interest, in that Neilson recommended and advised that the FBI lease additional space in the Oxford FBI Building.

Now, take a look at this comment from the blogging lawyer of North Mississippi:

I’m being told that “substantial” crops up in two counts in the indictment– that Neilson had to be a “substantial” investor in the business.

Given that he was one of three and had enough in it to take out $50K at one point in some form, I’m puzzled that the jury would stick on that point.

The indictment doesn’t charge Neilson with being a substantial investor!  It charges him with being a substantial participant!

I saw it! Now, do you see it?