Lou

Sex trafficking is more present on the North Shore than most locals might think, especially along the Route 1 corridor. But two bills proposed on Beacon Hill with support from area state legislators aim to protect victims and stop traffickers.

State Rep. Sally Kerans, D-Danvers, and state Sen. Joan Lovely, D-Salem, are petitioning for the approval of The Sex Trade Survivors Act, a bill that would partially decriminalize the sex trade by protecting sex trafficking victims from being charged with prostitution.

The bill would force more criminal accountability on buyers and traffickers, provide survivors with more access to support services, and make it easier to expunge criminal records related to trafficking.

“We go after the seller as if they aren’t a victim, when they are a victim,” Kerans said.

The bill was created with support from My Life, My Choice, a Boston-based organization that supports survivors of sex trafficking.

“A lot of times, what ends up happening when you have a criminal record is you have no other choice but to return back to the life,” survivor and Co-Executive Director Audrey Morrissey said.

“You find a path out, but all of the doors are being slammed in your face, sometimes even after the exploiter is gone,” she said.

State Rep. Tom Walsh, D-Peabody, has also filed a bill with support from Kerans and Lovely that would require trainings for hotel workers in the state for identifying signs of sex trafficking, like high traffic in and out of a hotel room and certain ways victims and traffickers may speak in public.

These trainings would be approved by the Attorney General’s office and overseen by local police departments.

Under the bill, hotels and motels would also be required to post information in multiple languages about sex trafficking help hotlines and other services for victims.

Nine other states have similar legislation already in place to what Walsh is proposing. With it, they hope to stem the tide of human trafficking.

“It’s a national crisis,” Walsh said. “It’s an issue that runs from Florida right up to the Canadian border.”

Both bills remain in committee, but lawmakers are hopeful the bills will move before the House and Senate for a vote.

A New York jury on Friday ordered former President Donald Trump to pay a total of $83.3 million to E. Jean Carroll for ruining her credibility as an advice columnist when he called her a liar after she accused him of sexual assault.

The jury awarded Carroll $65 million in punitive damages, $11 million for the damage to her reputation and another $7.3 million. Trump is almost certain to appeal the verdict.

Despite the size of the penalty, the verdict was not unexpected. Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled even before the trial that Trump had in fact defamed Carroll. The jury only had to decide how much Trump owed her — not if he was liable. This is the second time Trump has been ordered pay Carroll; last year he was mandated by a jury to pay $5 million for a separate instance of defamation.

The award responded to the question: How much will it take to make Trump stop defaming E. Jean Carroll?

At least in this instance, the teflon Don was NOT above the law. Naturally, he plays the martyr but no reasonable person cold not believe that he would sexually assault a woman and his constant defamation is well documented.

We now look forward to the judgement regarding the Trump Company fraud case due this month.

On January 9, Donald Trump and his legal team addressed the US Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia appealing the lower court ruling that the President is not above the law.  In court, Trump’s attorney said with a straight face and in all seriousness that a President could not be prosecuted for any crime unless he is first impeached by the House and convicted in the Senate.

When Trump’s attorney was asked ““Could a president order SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival?”, his response was “If he were impeached and convicted first,” the “political process” of impeachment “would have to occur” before any prosecution could be initiated.

Thus, a President could order a murder and if his party has a majority in the House or Senate and they choose either to not impeach or not convict, he could order additional murders.  If Congress eventually tired of the murders and chose to impeach, the president could murder the senators who would vote for impeachment. If it looked like, he might still be convicted, he could resign before he is convicted and he would not be prosecuted.

Donald Trump who has stated that he is running for retribution against his enemies, that he will be a dictator on day one and idolizes Putin, Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping should never be allowed close to the Oval Office.

Oh my God, how did we become this!

Former President Donald Trump on Monday won the Iowa caucuses, solidifying his place as the front-runner for the 2024 Republican nomination as he attempts a historic political comeback nearly three years after leaving the White House in disgrace.

Trump got 56,240 votes (51%). DeSantis finished a distant second with 23,420 votes (21.2%, ahead of Haley who with 21,085 votes (19.1%). Vivek Ramaswamy, who was in fourth place (7.7%), ended his campaign Monday night and endorsed Trump.

Neither DeSantis nor Haley emerged as a viable candidate. They probably had enough votes to carry on but neither has much of a chance. DeSantis lost in a very red state where he visited every county and spent all his energy and money. Haley’s support seemed to come from independents and not Republicans. This hopefully plays out well in New Hampshire but she has an uphill battle in other red states including her home state.

Only about 100,000 voters attended the caucus which is about 85,000 less than the 2016 caucus but it is unknown how each candidate was affected by the low turnout but likely that it would hav changed the results much. It is amazing to me that a low turnout in a state like Iowa, which many would have trouble picking out on a map, has so much impact on the nomination but it does. Democrats realized this and did not caucus last night.

I think the entrance polls were interesting and a bit scary if you are not a MAGA Republican.

(1628 respondents)

Party Identification: 82 % Republicans , 16% independents, 2% Democrats

Haley got 15% of the Republican vote and 34% of the independents. Trump got 52% and 42% respectively. So, Haley’s support is not from Republicans which kind of makes sense to me and does not bode well for her after NH.

Gender: 56% men, 44% women

There was really no difference in support for any of them between men and women which indicates to me that abortion is not an issue. Would think Haley might get an advantage but no. She got 21% men and 22% women.

Age

41% of the voters were 65 years old or older. This is probably not representative of Iowa unless unless 4 of 10 people in the state are old which I doubt but it surely is true that older folks vote more than younger people and Trump carried them with 58%

Evangelical: Yes 55%, No 45%

Trump dominated got 53% of Evangelicals and 49% of non Evangelicals.. Haley did better with non Evangelicals 27%. I think we knew this. I am actually surprised Trump wasn’t higher seeing that they have seemed to thrown their religious beliefs aside for Trump.

Education:

Trump dominated no college degree with 67% and 37% of college graduates. Again, Haley did best with college grads 28%.

Race. white 98%, black 0%, Latino 1%

Pretty funny that this was included in the survey.

Ideology: Conservative 89%, Moderate 9% liberal 1%

Trump dominated conservative with 55% and Haley dominated moderates with 63% (unfortunately not many moderates for her and us)

Do You Think Trump Legitimately Won in 2020? Yes 29%, No 65%

This is a little scary by itself that 65% of the Republicans in Iowa still believe that Trump won. Trump got 69% of the No and Haley 53% of the Yes.

Is Trump Fit for the Presidency, if convicted of a crime? Yes 65%, No 31%

This one may be even more scary than the previous question. Trump got 72% of the yes and Haley 49% of the No.

Most Important Issue: Economy 38%, Immigration 34%, Foreign Policy 12%, Abortion 11%

Trump dominated Immigration (64%) and Economy (52%). Haley led foreign policy (45%) and DeSantis Abortion (46%)

Which Candidate Quality Mattered The Most?

Trump led in Fights For People Like Me (82%), Shares My Values (43%) and Can Defeat Biden (40%). Haley led in Has The Right Temperament (66%). This says that Iowan Republicans will support Trump though they don’t think he can beat Biden.

Are You Part of The MAGA Movement? Yes 46%, No 50%

MAGAs went 78% for Trump (unsure what the other 22% are thinking) and non-MAGA went 35% for Haley.

My view is Republicans have bought the Big Lie. They are white, conservative and immigration and the economy are their issues. They are supporting Trump because he fights for them even if they think he will not win. DeSantis just seems to be there with around 20%. He didn’t show any area of strong support within any grouping that separated him from Trump just a lot less support. Maybe if they had a book burner question, he would have done well in that group. Haley would have done well in the Republican Party of Reagan, Bush and McCain or if more college educated, moderate independents who believed in elections voted. Unfortunately for her, she’s in this Republican Party.

Former President Donald Trump is facing a new challenge to keep him off the Super Tuesday primary ballot in Massachusetts over his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riots.

A legal challenge, filed by lawyer Shannon Liss-Riordan on behalf of several Massachusetts voters, argues that a rarely used clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevents Trump from being elected to a second term, due to his involvement in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

“Today’s legal action is not about partisan politics but about upholding our Constitution, and that is why Massachusetts voters across the political spectrum have joined together to challenge Donald Trump’s wrongful placement on the Massachusetts ballot,” Liss-Riordan said in a statement. “As two other states have already recognized, Donald Trump’s instigation of and participation in the insurrection three years ago provide overwhelming cause for his disqualification from holding office in the United States.”

The challengers are a mix of Republican, Independent, and Democratic voters, according to a statement released on Thursday night. They include former interim Boston Mayor Kim Janey and “two leading law professors.” They ask the Massachusetts Ballot Law Commission to remove Trump’s name from the ballot.

Galvin told reporters he had no intention of keeping Trump off the ballot unless he was ordered to do so from a legal challenge.

The effort is backed by the Newton-based non-partisan group Free Speech for People, which has filed similar ballot challenges in other states across the country over the past several months.