Washington nearly exploded on Thursday morning. Not literally, of course. But when James Comey, the now-ubiquitous former FBI Director, testified in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, the capital was transfixed.

For an hour or so, it seemed like much of the country was fairly united–CNN dubbed the event “Washington’s Superbowl.”

But while all eyes were on Comey, all ears were certainly not. Some heard Comey all but indict Trump. Others heard him liberate the president, and take aim at the New York Times and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

The hearing centered around the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign’s possible communications with Russia, and its meddling in the election, which Comey was overseeing before he was fired by the president last month.

Comey’s firing, coupled with a leaked memo Comey wrote (which he revealed in the hearing he had a hand in leaking) that detailed a questionable conversation with Trump, ignited claims that Trump could be guilty of obstruction of justice.

Among other things, here is what Comey revealed in his testimony to the committee: he firmly believes he was fired because he was leading an investigation into Trump’s campaign operatives and Russia; he kept detailed memos of every private conversation he had with Trump because he was afraid the president would later lie about their interactions; Comey believes Trump, in a February 14 conversation, asked him to scrap the FBI’s investigation into Michael Flynn, the former head of the NSA.

To everyone’s surprise, Trump did not tweet during the hearing. But his personal lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, released a statement soon after the proceedings ended. It reads:

Contrary to numerous false press accounts leading up to today’s hearing, Mr. Comey has now finally confirmed publicly what he repeatedly told the President privately: The President was not under investigation as part of any probe into Russian interference.

The statement denied that Trump ever demanded loyalty from Comey, as the former director said he did, or that the president ever, “in form or substance,” instructed Comey to drop the Flynn investigation.

Kasowitz also called out “those in government who are actively attempting to undermine this administration with selective and illegal leaks of classified information and privileged communications.” He added, “Mr. Comey has now admitted that he is one of these leakers.”

During the hearing, Comey said Lynch, the attorney general at the time, requested he publicly refer to the probe into Hillary Clinton’s private email server as a “matter,” rather than an “investigation.” This, he said, along with Lynch’s infamous tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton, partially informed his decision to publicly announce Clinton was under investigation.

Some observers pounced on this small nugget, raising questions as to whether or not Lynch would be charged with obstruction of justice.

Will fmr AG Lynch be charged w/ obstruction of justice after Comey revelations of demands she made? Will Dems demand it?

— Gov. Mike Huckabee (@GovMikeHuckabee) June 8, 2017

The RNC and the DNC released two completely irreconcilable statements following the hearing.

The RNC statement read, “Today’s testimony proved what we have known all along: President Trump is not under investigation, there’s still no evidence of collusion, and he did not hinder the investigation in any way.”

In contrast, the DNC statement said Comey’s testimony “gave us the clearest and most damning evidence yet that President Trump lied to the American people and is likely under investigation for obstruction of justice–a serious and disturbing charge.”

While millions of Americas may have been united in watching Comey’s testimony, both statements illustrate the potentially unbridgeable divide in American politics.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Reactions to Comey Hearing Illustrate America’s Political Divide appeared first on Law Street.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel unwittingly prompted a public battle with President Donald Trump on Monday, when he criticized Trump for focusing on the crowd size at his inauguration. On Tuesday evening, coinciding with an “O’Reilly Factor” segment on violence in Chicago, Trump tweeted a veiled threat aimed at Emanuel. 

“If Chicago doesn’t fix the horrible ‘carnage’ going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24 percent from 2016), I will send in the Feds!” Trump tweeted, citing figures that aired on Bill O’Reilly’s show. Official statistics from the Chicago Police Department (CPD) put the numbers a bit lower, at 234 people shot, and 38 killed. In 2016, a department spokesman said, 227 were shot, with 33 deaths. The spokesman said the department’s figures do not factor in “justified” shootings (those in self-defense) or officer-involved shootings.

Emanuel’s verbal spat with Trump stemmed from a bit of criticism he lodged at the president on Monday: “You didn’t get elected to debate the crowd size at your inaugural,” the mayor said, referring to Trump’s insistence that his inauguration ceremony was the most-watched ever. “You got elected to make sure that people have a job, that the economy continues to grow, people have security as it relates to their kids’ education. It wasn’t about your crowd size. It was about their lives and their jobs.”

On Wednesday, Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said his department was “more than willing” to work with the federal government to combat Chicago’s persistent violence. Chicago had a bloody 2016. The death toll was the highest in nearly two decades, at 762 people killed, largely the result of gang violence.

Days before U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch left office, her department released its findings that the CPD “engages in a pattern or practice of using force, including deadly force, in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.” The Justice Department also found a pattern of racial discrimination practiced by Chicago officers.

On Wednesday, a Chicago Democrat, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, came to Emanuel’s defense. “The president wants publicity and to be seen beating up on Democratic elected officials and appearing hostile to a big city like Chicago in the eyes of his suburban and rural voters,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Threatens to “Send the Feds” to Chicago to Deal with “Horrible Carnage” appeared first on Law Street.

On Thursday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch–a week or so before she leaves her post–announced reforms for the Baltimore Police Department, agreed to by the city and the DOJ. The reforms include increased community oversight, and improved recruitment and training policies. In a statement, Lynch said the reforms will help “ensure effective and constitutional policing, restore the community’s trust in law enforcement, and advance public and officer safety.”

The consent decree follows a Department of Justice report on policing in Baltimore that was released last August, the culmination of a year-long investigation spurred by the death of Freddie Gray in 2015. The report, which was based on data from 2010 to 2016, found that the Baltimore Police Department has “systemic deficiencies” in training, and policies that “failed to equip officers with the tools they need to police effectively.” There was widespread racial bias in the department, the report found; police officers were also found to have used excessive force.

Lynch also said that a pending investigation into the Chicago Police Department will be released shortly, perhaps as early as Friday. According to a Chicago Tribune report, the Justice Department found that Chicago police violated the U.S. Constitution with some of their practices. The Chicago investigation began in December 2015, after a video was released that showed a Chicago police officer shooting and killing a black teenager, Laquan McDonald.

“Change is painful. Growth is painful. But nothing is as painful as being stuck in a place that we do not belong,” Baltimore Police Commissioner Kevin Davis said at the time of the DOJ report. Under President Barack Obama, the Justice Department has investigated 25 law enforcement agencies across the country; 14 ended in consent decrees. 

These reforms come during a transitional period for the Justice Department. President-elect Donald Trump’s attorney general nominee, Jeff Sessions, has raised concerns that the Justice Department will shield police departments rather than investigate possible reforms. During his two-day confirmation hearing that concluded on Wednesday, Sessions was prodded about how he would enforce consent decrees, and if he would pursue the issue of police reform as attorney general.

“I think there is concern that good police officers and good departments can be sued by the Department of Justice when you just have individuals within a department that have done wrong,” Sessions said. “These lawsuits undermine the respect for police officers and create an impression that the entire department is not doing their work consistent with fidelity to law and fairness, and we need to be careful before we do that.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post DOJ Announces Reforms for Baltimore Police Department appeared first on Law Street.

U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch will likely face more questions in regards to her “secret meeting” with former president Bill Clinton, thanks to a new lawsuit filed Wednesday by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) against the Department of Justice (DOJ).

The meeting between Lynch and Clinton took place aboard her plane on June 27 in Phoenix, Arizona, and lasted about 30 minutes. It was deemed controversial, given that it came a week before Lynch announced that her department had closed its federal probe into Hillary Clinton’s emails without filing any criminal charges.

At the time Lynch claimed that the pair’s conversation was “primarily social” and that they had spoken a great deal about grandchildren, traveling, and golf. But even Lynch agreed that the meeting had “cast a shadow” over the investigation.

The ACLJ previously sent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the DOJ and the FBI demanding an explanation as to why the meeting was allowed to transpire, calling for her resignation.

Then last week, in a letter to Congress,  FBI Director James Comey announced a new investigation into Clinton’s emails–this time focusing on emails found on devices belonging to Huma Abedin, Clinton’s longtime aide, and her former husband Anthony Weiner.

In the complaint, the conservative Christian organization is demanding specific information regarding communications sent between Lynch and the former president, as well as the names of any officials or staff members present during the exchange.

The organization has repeatedly condemned President Obama and his appointees  in the past. In fact, this marks the fourth major federal lawsuit the ACLJ has filed against the Obama administration for what it considers to be “corruption and failure to comply with FOIA.” It has also launched a petition demanding a full, thorough, and unbiased FBI investigation into Secretary Clinton’s email server.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ACLJ Sues Loretta Lynch Over “Secret Meeting” With Bill Clinton appeared first on Law Street.

On Thursday the Justice Department announced new guidelines for collecting nationwide data on law enforcement officials’ use of force in encounters with civilians. According to the New York Times, this is the biggest effort of its kind that the federal government has ever made to account for use of force.

“Accurate and comprehensive data on the use of force by law enforcement is essential to an informed and productive discussion about community-police relations,” said Attorney General Loretta Lynch in a statement. She said that the purpose of these new steps is increased transparency and a better understanding between law enforcement officials and the communities that they serve.

The FBI is currently developing a national database as part of the Department of Justice’s efforts to gather… https://t.co/9LE1tzKQ7m

— QkTip (@QkTipcom) October 13, 2016

The Death in Custody Reporting Act (DCRA) that was passed in 2014 requires officials to record and report all deaths of civilians that occur either in custody or during interaction with officers. But they are not required to report non-fatal cases. With the new initiative, officers must collect, maintain and report data on all shootings or violent encounters involving an officer, whether fatal or not, and the same goes for people already in custody.

Last year, the FBI started working on developing a National Use of Force Data Collection, an online portal for reporting use-of-force data from all over the country, in collaboration with local law enforcement. Bigger city police departments and the FBI will start reporting data early next year.

The past year has been dramatic and traumatic and seen several fatal encounters between police and civilians, with casualties on both sides and violent protests as a result. If these new procedures could help to resolve the societal tensions, it is a good start.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The DOJ Will Start Collecting More Info on Police Officers’ Use of Force appeared first on Law Street.

The Great American Debate: Jorts

The invention of jorts might be one of the most American things out there. It is almost guaranteed that idiots will be wearing jorts this Fourth of July weekend. But people are still trying to decide what true jorts really. There’s what I call “cut-off jeans” and then there are jeans that have been fashioned into shorts. In my opinion, they are gross and should not exist. Will we ever reach a consensus on the jorts issue?

Every time I see someone wearing jorts I give them a head nod so they know what’s up. Jorts gotta stick together you know

— vasilios poulos (@poulos3317) June 20, 2016

i wear jorts. proudly. i don’t give a fuck what you think. #cutoffs

— marc maron (@marcmaron) June 28, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: Independence Day Edition appeared first on Law Street.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced Wednesday it is charging hundreds of individuals across the country with committing health care fraud worth hundreds of millions of dollars, in what is being hailed the largest health care fraud bust in U.S. history. Here are the five fast facts you need to know.

1. 301 People Charged in Health Care Fraud Bust

The bust resulted in the takedown of 301 individuals, including 61 licensed medical professionals, 28 of whom were doctors. The charges include various health care fraud-related crimes, including conspiracy to commit health care fraud, violations of the anti-kickback statutes, money laundering, aggravated identity theft, and Medicare Part D pharmacy fraud.

Attorney General Lynch called out the alleged perpetrators in the release saying,

They target real people – many of them in need of significant medical care.  They promise effective cures and therapies, but they provide none.  Above all, they abuse basic bonds of trust – between doctor and patient; between pharmacist and doctor; between taxpayer and government – and pervert them to their own ends.

2. $900 Million in False Billings

The DOJ found the defendants to be responsible for a total of $900 million in false billings. The largest portion of fraudulent billings was traced to Florida, where a total of 100 defendants were charged for their involvement in approximately $220 million in false billings for home health care, mental health services and pharmacy fraud. According to the release,

In one case, nine defendants have been charged with operating six different Miami-area home health companies for the purpose of submitting false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, including for services that were not medically necessary and that were based on bribes and kickbacks.  In total, Medicare paid the six companies over $24 million as a result of the scheme.

Defendants in California, Texas, and Michigan are charged with committing more than $100 million worth of fraud in each state.

3. This Was a Joint Effort

Medicaid Fraud Control Units in 23 states and the Medicare Fraud Strike Force in 36 federal districts coordinated with the Justice Department and the Department of Health and Human Services in  the “unprecedented nationwide sweep.”

National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results https://t.co/LQk9OJpzKN pic.twitter.com/HMVFxvFrgd

— Justice Department (@TheJusticeDept) June 22, 2016

The Medicare Fraud Strike Force operations are part of the Health Care Fraud Prevention & Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), a joint initiative announced in May 2009 between the DOJ and HHS to help prevent waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

4. New Study Identifies 27 Home Health Care Fraud “Hotspots”

The U.S. Health & Human Services Office of Inspector General released a new study in conjunction with the DOJ’s arrests citing 27 geographical “hotspots” in 12 states where health care fraud is committed most often.

Eye on Oversight: OIG identified 27 hotspots for probable home health fraud. Watch the VIDEO. https://t.co/1KPY9RQe6D

— OIG at HHS (@OIGatHHS) June 21, 2016

The states include Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Utah.

5. This Recent Bust Helped Pad Federal Authorities’ Record

Since its launch in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force has charged over 2,900 defendants who collectively have falsely billed the Medicare program for over $8.9 billion. Wednesday’s announcement marks the second time that districts outside of Strike Force locations participated in a national health care fraud bust, and they accounted for 82 defendants charged in this takedown.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post 5 Fast Facts: The Largest Health Care Fraud Bust in History appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to the RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through the top five controversial and crazy stories in the world of law and policy each day. So who is ranting and who is raving today? Check it out below:

People are Pissed at Facebook Over Supposed Suppression of Conservative News

You know that trending news section on Facebook? It’s on the top right side of your feed and highlights the breaking news each day. Well former Facebook workers are now claiming that they were told to “artifically manipulate” what shows up in the trending news feature, with a favoritism given to more liberal news. They also claim that they were told to blacklist conservative sites and sources. But Facebook is hardcore denying that anything of the sort ever happened, and ironically, Facebook’s “trending news controversy” is trending on Facebook right now.

Facebook Says It’s Taking News Bias Allegations “Very Seriously” https://t.co/wnad5QbNi3 pic.twitter.com/cdggzpeQuP

— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) May 10, 2016

Samantha Bee Says “Bye, Bye” to Ted Cruz

Samantha Bee, host of “Full Frontal with Samantha Bee” had a lot of fun with Ted Cruz’s presidential run. But now that Cruz has officially dropped out, the show needed to bid goodbye to its favorite punching bag. And in true Samantha Bee fashion, she said that goodbye with quite a fantastic and hilarious sendoff.

Carry on, Bee. We can’t wait to see what you do with the rest of this crazy election cycle.

West Point Women in Trouble

16 female, black cadets at West Point under scrutiny for photo with clenched fists in the air. https://t.co/mOcL32p5bL

— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) May 9, 2016

Sixteen African-American women graduating from West Point are in hot water over a photo that features them raising their fists. The school is investigating the photo, and comparisons are being made to the girls’ actions and the Black Lives Matter movement. While that doesn’t seem like a big deal, West Point expressly forbids expressing political opinions while representing the school. But the women claim that their gestures were just celebratory. So who’s right? We’ll have to see if the school ends up disciplining the students but people on both sides of the debate are pretty mad.

North Carolina v. The DOJ: All Hell Breaks Loose

North Carolina’s bathroom bill has royally pissed off the DOJ, and now both sides are suing each other. It all started when the DOJ gave NC Governor Pat McCrory until yesterday to begin to remedy the new anti-LGBT policies, which the DOJ believes to be discriminatory. McCrory asked for more time, and when he was refused, sued the DOJ. Now the DOJ has filed a civil rights lawsuit against the state. Check out Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s epically badass speech on the subject:

Jon Stewart Calls Donald Trump a “Man-Baby”

Jon Stewart may be retired from the “Daily Show” but that doesn’t mean he’s done going with his scathing social commentary. On David Axelrod’s CNN podcast Stewart said:

He’s a man baby. He has the physical countenance of a man and a baby’s temperament and hands. … (Vanity Fair editor) Graydon Carter did a joke about Donald Trump’s hands 25 years ago, he’s still not f—ing over it.

So…here’s what I’m guessing Trump’s reaction will be:

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 10, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced it will be filing suit against the city of Ferguson, Missouri, after the city went back on a negotiated deal that would help reform the criminal justice system in the beleaguered St. Louis suburb.

This is the latest move in Ferguson in the 18 months since Michael Brown was shot and killed by a white police officer, Darren Wilson. After the nationwide protests that followed, Ferguson was investigated by the DOJ. That investigation yielded a revelation about civil rights abuses at practically every level of Ferguson’s criminal justice system, including the consistent use of excessive force by police officers against the city’s Black residents, and that the courts inappropriately focused on “making money” rather than ensuring citizens’ safety.

After the release of that report, the DOJ sat down with Ferguson officials in an attempt to hammer out a deal that would reform the city’s criminal justice system. It was announced last month that deal was reached, and just this week city officials voted for it, but with seven pretty serious amendments, citing serious concerns about costs to a city that is struggling financially as is. Ferguson Mayor James Knowles explained the decision to back away from the agreement, according to CBS News:

Knowles said the seven amendments were formulated after the analysis showed the deal was so expensive it could lead to dissolution of Ferguson. The analysis suggested that the first-year cost of the agreement would be $2.2 million to $3.7 million, with second- and third-year costs between $1.8 million and $3 million in each year.

However, Attorney General Loretta Lynch fought back against the changes, stating that, “their decision leaves us no further choice.” As a result, the DOJ is filing a civil rights lawsuit against Ferguson. This doesn’t come as a surprise–Lynch has previously threatened to file suit if Ferguson didn’t comply with the DOJ’s requests.

Ferguson’s decision to fight a lawsuit rather than spend the money to make necessary changes to its criminal justice system may seem counterintuitive, but the city seems to think paying those legal fees will be cheaper than actually making real reform. It’s a calculated gamble, however, given that the Justice Department doesn’t seem willing to let go over reforming the city’s broken criminal justice system without a tough fight.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post DOJ Sues Ferguson, Missouri Over Police Reform appeared first on Law Street.

One of the markers of the current political climate is the animosity between President Obama and Congress. One of the manifestations of this climate can be seen in the fact that Loretta Lynch’s nomination for Attorney General has continued to languish in the halls of the Senate. If his remarks at a recent press conference are any indication, President Obama has had enough.

Loretta Lynch was nominated for the position of Attorney General nearly six months ago on November 8, 2014, but her nomination has been held up in the Senate since that point. There aren’t really any substantive reasons though, as no one seems to have any objections to Lynch’s qualifications for the job. While there are some concerns over her opinions on President Obama’s immigration reform, it seems like she’ll eventually be confirmed. It’s just a matter of when at this point.

The when is difficult though, as her nomination is being held up until a bill on human trafficking is settled, according to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Democrats, however, object to the bill because it contains a provision that prevents any money from the crime victims’ compensation fund from being spent on abortion services. Not only do many Senate Democrats object to the provision on moral grounds, they also claim that the Republicans surprised them by adding that provision to the bill without consulting them. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) stated,

I don’t know how that happened or who was the author of it. But the fact is, the bill that is on the floor today has a provision in it that we were told would not be included.

However, until this matter is solved, McConnell has said that they won’t vote on Lynch’s nomination. He’s framed it as a matter of priority–it’s important to finish a bill that will help trafficking victims before moving on to Lynch’s nomination. But it’s become a game of political chicken, and her nomination is caught right in the middle.

A sense of frustration and exasperation is exactly what the President expressed in a press conference Froday when speaking about the hold ups to the Lynch nomination. He emphatically stated,

Enough. Enough. Call Loretta Lynch for a vote, get her confirmed, let her do her job. This is embarrassing. There are times where the dysfunction in the Senate just goes too far. This is an example of it.

Regardless of Obama’s impassioned statements, it’s highly doubtful that his remarks will have any effect on the GOP Senators’ actions. Especially after the fights over the Iran deal and Obama’s immigration reform, there’s no real lost love between the executive and legislative branches. Lynch’s nomination will probably remain in limbo, at least for now.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama Lashes Out at Senate Over Loretta Lynch Confirmation Hold Up appeared first on Law Street.

Heated arguments over The Dress swept the country this week, pitting couples, friends, and coworkers against each other. So naturally the epic battle of white and gold vs. blue and black hit Congress just the same, and wouldn’t you know it, they don’t agree about the color of The Dress either. Shocking, right? To their credit, they weren’t quite as heated as some of us regular folk, considering they had some actual issues to deal with this week with DHS on the brink of shutdown and continued slow-rolling on Loretta Lynch’s nomination.

Take a look at the slideshow below for a full picture of all the members of Congress who weighed in on Dressgate via Twitter. One thing that seems to unite many of them? A love of giving careful non-answers. But hey, that’s how you get elected, right?

Even experts disagree over #TheDress—see what the two we spoke with have to say: http://t.co/EMg1Z2byID pic.twitter.com/iDfYyUp0aC

— Harper’s Bazaar (@harpersbazaarus) February 28, 2015

[SlideDeck2 id=35224 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Know What Else Congress Can’t Agree on? The Dress appeared first on Law Street.