“Good Old Boys” retaliate against a Judge who IS doing the RIGHT THING…!!!
The Water is Dirty in North Las Vegas!
“In an Independent Investigation the timeline of these events is critical in order to understand why a recall election is being instituted against a North Las Vegas Municipal Court Judge”
North Las Vegas, Nevada
July 26, 2015
Elected 2011, Catherine Ramsey was elected as the first female Judge to North Las Vegas Municipal Court.
Judge Ramsey attempts to fight off corruption within the institution she now works:
July 5, 2011: Judge Ramsey comes into work and finds the prior Judge’s Judicial Executive Assistant Forti has vacated her office and turned in her keys and badge. Judge Ramey is told by Human Resources Director Joyce Lira the employee made a hasty decision and cannot purchase PERS unless she is a current employee. Court Administrator Debbie Miller and City Human Resources Director Lira asked Judge Ramsey to give Forti additional 30 days of pay. Judge Ramsey says no. She quit.
Chief Judge Sean Hoeffgen North Las Vegas Municipal Court make an arrangement with the City Manager and overrules Judge Ramsey’s decision. The employee is placed on Administrative leave. Chief Judge Hoeffgen has Judge Ramsey sign the letter placing Forti on administrative leave since it is her Department. Now Judge Ramsey is being sued because she did what the Chief Judge and City Manager told her on her very first day on the job.
July 2013: Chief Judge Hoeffgen tells Judge Ramsey that he will not rotate the Chief Judge position to her because his friend was elected Mayor, goes to his church and wants him to remain the Chief Judge. Chief Judge Hoeffgen then also says if the two judges do not agree who will be Chief Judge, the Mayor decides. Judge Ramsey is quick to point out the separation of powers between the branches, and it would be the Supreme Court to decide, not the Mayor. The Judges agree not to have a Chief Judge for one year. NOTE: Mayor John Lee is still upset about Judge Hoeffgen not remaining as Chief Judge. Mayor Lee makes comments made about the Chief Judge position at the 10-1-14 City Council Meeting which was also made in violation of open meeting laws.
A lawsuit is filed by a former employee Forti who quit on June 28, 2011. The lawsuit names the City and Judge Catherine Ramsey as Defendants. This is the ONLY lawsuit filed against Judge Ramsey, and it is NOT for workplace misconduct as claimed by the Recall group.
August 13, 2013: City Attorney Jeffrey Barr resigns from office. His signature stamp is being used to issue Failure Appear Warrants for persons who fail to show up for their appearance date at the windows. His signature stamp is no longer valid after he quit. People can be arrested on those warrants and falsely imprisoned. Each occurrence can cost the City of North Las Vegas up to $50k.
September 11, 2013: Judge Ramsey informs Chief Deputy City Attorney Webster the Failure to Appear Warrants issued by Jeff Barr after he quit are invalid. The proper signature needs to be used and corrected in the system. It is not. Judge Hoeffgen allows the City Attorney to approach and sign their name on top of the invalid signature. This is done in the Court file after someone is arrested and being arraigned on the charge. Judge Ramsey does not allow this to happen as the invalid warrants need to be re-issued in order to be valid.
October 2013: The City Attorney Sandra Morgan settled the City out of the Forti lawsuit in October 2013 for $25,000. The Settlement included all city employees such as the City Manager and Chief Judge Hoeffgen but purposefully excluded Judge Ramsey from that settlement. Had Judge Ramsey been included in that $25,000 settlement, this lawsuit would never have happened. The lawsuit is only as a result of Judge Ramsey’s act as a Judge and as directed by the then Chief Judge Hoeffgen and his agreement with the City Manager. The City has a duty to defend her under the statute. NRS§41.0339. They (City) refused to do so.
November 2013: The City acknowledges the Court had accumulated $937,278.83 in their fund to purchase a computer software management system for the Court. NOTE: funds were committed for expenditure under NRS§176.059. The City later swept that account and took those fees over Judge Ramsey’s objection.
December 2013: City refused to defend Judge Ramsey in the lawsuit. The Court discusses the City’s refusal to provide a defense and agree to hire a firm to fight the lawsuit. The Court hired a law firm to defend the Court and assert the duty to defend against the City. The next day, Judge Hoeffgen “changes his mind” and tells Judge Ramsey he does not approve of court funds being used.
There has never been a Judge recalled within the State of Nevada and it’s our understanding there has never been a Judge recalled in this country for over 40 years.
If you are going to recall any elected official make sure that you understand the facts.
What has this elected official done to warrant a recall, who is financially supporting it, and who would benefit from it?
We would like you to have a clear understanding as to why this judge is being recalled.
“Can you believe there is lots, lots more?”
February 2014: Judges agreed to use the funds as soon as possible (so they do not get “swept” per NRS§176.059). Judge Hoeffgen later “changes his mind” about using the $937,278.83 of funds. He says the City needs it. He states there is nobody around but him with knowledge of the agreement that was made about the computer software management system with the former Judge Vandlandschoot and former City Manager Ustick. The City later swept that account and took those fees over Judge Ramsey’s objection.
February 24, 2014: Judge Ramsey once again informs the City Attorney that the Failure to Appear Warrants are invalid. She asks again for the signature to be changed and begins dismissing the invalid warrants in open court. This does not cost the City “thousands a month” as alleged, because the City Attorney has one year to file amended complaints. The City Attorney had an opportunity to reissue the warrants and did not. The loss of this revenue is on the City, not the Court. The Court is not a revenue source, but rather to see that justice is served.
February 26, 2014: Judge Ramsey informs Judge Hoeffgen and Court Administrator Marshall if we don’t win the Motion to Dismiss, then the City might have to be brought back into the lawsuit. This is because of the City and Judge Hoeffgen’s involvement and agreement to place this employee back on Administrative Leave after she quit and turned in her badge.
Judge Ramsey tells Judge Hoeffgen and Court Administrator Marshall she can find a copy of the previous Court Administrator’s email to the City with the Agreement. Judge Ramsey spoke to Judge Vandlandschoot who told her where it was. The next day, February 27, 2014, the City enacted a new Administrative Policy 6.02 which blocks Judge Ramsey’s access to her own court staff‘s emails. Judge Hoeffgen does not want Judge Ramsey to look for the Agreement.
March 2014: City refuses to hire an employee to replace the IT position that was vacated when an employee transferred from Court IT to the City IT Department. The City scheduled a meeting on a day Judge Ramsey was to discuss the position, knowing Judge Ramsey is unavailable. Judge Ramsey sends email requesting it be filled out of the budget and not AA fees. Use of AA fees for long term employees is not proper per the Administrative Office of the Courts.
City finance asks for the $12,000 fees incurred in December and January to be reconciled. City Attorney and the Court’s Attorney Lyons meet to discuss settlement the $12,000 fees used by the Court and settlement of the lawsuit.
April 7, 2014: Judicial Executive Assistant Kathryn Avena warns Judge Ramsey she thinks the City is trying to lock her out of her office and on criminal charges. Avena goes on leave for a medical procedure on April 20, 2014. Avena returns in May for a few days, then goes on FMLA. She never returns.
April 16, 2014: Judge Ramsey instructs Court Administration to issue Bench Warrants in her court instead of Failure to Appear warrants. This is also to be in compliance with NRS§5.065(2) regarding the use of facsimile signature produced through a mechanical device, because two signatures cannot be used together.
April 24, 2014: A defendant was charged with battery constituting domestic violence, 2nd offense. The defendant pled, with counsel, however, the City Attorney could not prove up a prior offense as required under NRS§400.485(4). Counsel did not stipulate to the priors and the charge was amended to a first pursuant to statute. The City Attorney later appealed, however, “forgot” to mention to the District Court they could not prove up the prior offense nor did they ask for a bifurcated sentencing to do so. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3.3 sets for the ethical duty of candor toward the tribunal. Here, the City Attorney purposefully omitted crucial facts on appeal in order to obtain a favorable ruling from the Appellate Judge.
May 1, 2014: Review Journal newspaper writes an article titled North Las Vegas Municipal Court criticized over costly case holds and had a photo of Judge Ramsey. It is about two inmates not being transferred to District Court. The article blames Judge Ramsey and goes on to say it hurts the City’s bottom line and could lead to the improper prosecution of potentially unfit defendants such as Latimore and Thomas. NOTE: neither of these two defendants are Judge Ramsey’s cases. Both cases were assigned to Judge Hoeffgen. Judge Ramsey has only handles cases with last names ending in A-K, and has since 2011. A copy of the court dockets were sent to the RJ, but no retraction was ever printed.
May 19, 2014: City Attorney Sandra Morgan files a Judicial Ethics complaint against Judge Ramsey for the use of Court funds and staff in a personal civil case; adjudicating cases outside the presence of prosecution; changing the terms of plea bargains without informing the prosecution; dismissing complaints for failure to appear and refusing to assess fees on warrants; amending charges over prosecutor’s objections.
May 22, 2014: At a June 12, 2013 court session, Counsel for defendant pled to traffic violations without the prosecution being present. The prosecution gave up their right to be present for traffic based on a July 23rd 12 memo from the Chief Deputy City Attorney Steve Webster. The City Attorney had not attended traffic sessions for the previous 11 months. This case was no different. The City brought a Motion to Reconsider, which was denied. The City Attorney appealed this decision and argued they were not given the opportunity to be heard at sentencing. The Appellant Judge agreed, vacated the pleas and remanded it back to Judge Ramsey to hear on the merits.
The City Attorney, however, “forgot” to mention to the District Court they had previously gave up this right. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3.3 sets for the ethical duty of candor toward the tribunal. Here, they purposefully omitted crucial facts on appeal in order to obtain a favorable ruling from the Appellate Judge. The City Attorney amended the charge of hit and run property damage under NRS 484E.020 to a charge of hit and run under NRS484E.010. Judge Ramsey dismisses the case on May 22, 2014 as it was amended to a felony and City Court lacks jurisdiction. The two appeals are later used in the Recall effort.
May 31, 2014: Un-named editorial in Review Journal: North Las Vegas Judge’s actions merit boot from bench.
June 25, 2014: Judge Ramsey files answer to the Forti lawsuit and brings the City and Judge Hoeffgen back into the action.
July 1, 2014: If a Judge vacates office or is not re-elected, so is their (JEA) Judicial Executive Assistant. After warning Judge Ramsey the City was trying to remove her JEA from the bench by criminal charges and or by the ethics complaint, Judicial Executive Assistant Kathryn Avena files a hostile work environment complaint and is reassigned to a City Department. Although the complaint has never been seen or produced, Human Resources found no violation of Title VII in July, 2014. Human Resources refuses to process new hires, and a replacement Judicial Executive Assistant has yet to be hired.
Judge Hoeffgen again refuses to honor his “gentlemen’s” agreement for rotation of the Chief Judge position to Judge Ramsey, a female, in Department One. There still is no Chief Judge.
July 10, 2014: Two clerks talk over the Judge in Court and then one of them begin to talk to a defendant, who is represented by Council, and asks for his personal identifying information. This is not proper court conduct by employees and was disrupting the proceedings. Judge Ramsey had to stop her proceedings and sternly asks the clerks to stop. Then she gave an admonishment they are NOT to talk to the attorneys or their clients directly.
Judge Ramsey immediately informed the Court Administrator of the incident as it was a training issue for her that needed correcting. That same clerk had just come off a year reassignment of being in Court for similar reasons. Ramsey makes everyone in her Court follow the rules and not be disruptive. There is no bias and prejudice toward attorneys when the Judge has everyone follow the rules. A Judge maintains control of the courtroom by not allowing clerks or attorneys to disrupt proceedings.
Detective Miller contacts Judge Ramsey about a case he is working on. He is referred to Judge Ramsey’s attorney. It was later discovered on September 26, 2014 by way of a Channel 8 report that the City Attorney referred criminal charges to the Clark County District Attorney who found insufficient evidence to prosecute.
July 18, 2014: Demand is made to the City to return the Judicial Executive Assistant Avena or permanently reassign her to the City and allow the Court to hire a replacement Judicial Executive Assistant. It is ignored.
Letter and exhibits are sent to City from Attorney addressing issues of alleged hostile work environment claim. No further communication is received from City and no formal complaint is filed against Judge Ramsey.
August 2014: Court becomes a Court of Record. City Attorney can no longer misrepresent or omit the facts to the Appellate Court. Claims are made Judge Ramsey turned off camera in her court. The Court has always been televised by video internally within the Court every day since taking office. That has never changed. Judge Ramsey believes in a fair and level playing field for everyone. Judge Ramsey held firm against the City when they wanted copies of proceedings when the public could not. Now it is a court of record and is available to everyone. NRS§ 5.010(2). Her court is always been open to the public and they are encouraged to attend.
August 6, 2014: City Council Meeting where Mayor Lee, on his own, and not part of public comment or in response to an issue raised by the public, brought up his own issue of the recent (July 10, 2014) employee complaints to discuss it in the open forum. This was done without notice and was not on the agenda in violation of Open Meeting Laws per NRS 241.020. Further, this discussion by the Mayor and City Attorney centered on the character, alleged misconduct, competence or health of Judge Catherine Ramsey and written notice was not given to her as required under NRS 241.033.
The City Attorney Sandra Morgan was present, and had a duty to stop the discussion, but instead, participated in it and confirmed administrative action was being taken. The Mayor asks what they can do to “shut her down” and asks the City Attorney about filing a complaint. City Attorney Sandra Douglas calls the Mayor “your honor”, then corrects herself, but confirms her office has filed a Judicial Ethics Complaint.
August 28, 2014: Judge Hoeffgen does not object to using Court funds to hire outside counsel regarding a replacement Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1. A meeting is set for September 8, 2014.
City proposes a (MOU) Memorandum Of Understanding. Judge Ramsey indicates she cannot sign the MOU as drafted. Judge Ramsey suggests the Court hire independent Counsel to review it. The MOU as drafted changes the control and reporting of Court employees to the City. City Manager contacts the Court to set up a meeting to discuss proposed changes.
September 5, 2014: Judge Hoeffgen again “changes his mind” about hiring an attorney and the payment of fees for legal expenses for hiring outside counsel regarding a replacement Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1.
September 7, 2014: A temporary agency is used to hire Sara Keys, as Human Resources refuses to hire anyone as a Judicial Executive Assistant for Judge Ramsey.
September 15, 2014: Judge Hoeffgen again agrees to use Court funds to hire outside counsel regarding a replacement Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1, as long as the pro-tem item is pulled from the agenda. The requested item is pulled from the Agenda. A meeting is held and Adam Levine retained on behalf of the Court.
September 17, 2014: Attorney Levine forwards a draft letter to the City for the Judges to review regarding employment of Sara Keys as a Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1.
City forwards a memorandum of understanding to the Court for review. Judge Ramsey requests it be reviewed by their Court Attorney before signing. The City Manager sets up a meeting to discuss it with Judge Ramsey. That meeting is set for October 2, 2014.
September 22, 2014: Judge Hoeffgen again “changed his mind” regarding the hiring of attorney Adam Levine and refuses to allow the court to proceed, thus leaving Judge Ramsey stuck in limbo with only a temporary employee that does not have full access to court programs and is not the JEA of her choice for permanent employment.
September 23, 2014: I team report that the Clark County District’s Office told the I-Team that it found “insufficient evidence to file criminal charges against Judge Ramsey”. City Attorney Morgan confirms they contacted the Clark County District Attorney’s office about potential criminal charges.
September 2014: Judge Hoeffgen has refused or otherwise neglected to sign the Joint proposed local rules of practice for North Las Vegas Municipal Court which set forth a rotation schedule for Chief Judge.
September 29, 2014: Judge Hoeffgen and Court Administrator sign the Memorandum Of Understanding without informing Judge Ramsey.
October 1, 2014: City Council Meeting discussions in violation of Open Meeting Laws. The City Clerk places the item back on the agenda after confirmation to the Court it would not be in the Agenda. The Mayor uses this agenda item to discuss the days off. He calculates Judge Ramsey as having 78 days off, and gives a figure of $94,000.00 it cost the City.
A pro-tem judge cost $100 a session or $200 a day. Judge Ramsey attended mandatory conferences, training, and participated in community related events. Some days included were actually half days, holidays, weekends, days she worked and even days off by the other judge. The Mayor used over 16 months to get his figures. Besides conferences, Judge Ramsey had 19 days off in 2011-2012; 22 days off in 2012-2013; and 29 ½ days off in 2013-2014. There is no limit on days off for judges, but for comparison, she earned over 37 days off a year when she was a City Attorney. This is televised and re-played on Channel 8 News and used in the Recall Petition.
City Council discusses the signing of a Memorandum Of Understanding regarding Court employees. Judge Ramsey was not invited to any meetings regarding a Bailiff program, nor was her meeting to be held about the MOU until October 2, 2014. The City Manager, City Attorney Sandra Morgan, and even Judge Hoeffgen were all aware her meeting was not scheduled until the following day. The City Manager or City Attorney Morgan did not disclose this fact to the Council when asked. The Mayor went on to discuss issues with Judge Ramsey without notice or her presence in violation of Open Meeting Laws.
At the City Council Meeting, the Mayor explained that Judge Hoeffgen agreed to a salary reduction to assist the City during the financial difficulty and the other judge did not. Judge Hoeffgen gives up deferred compensation (a benefit he does not take), car allowance and cost of living increase. It should be noted that even though the Mayor comments this against Judge Ramsey, it is believed the Council Members and the Mayor also took a cost of living increase for 2015-2016.
January 5, 2015: Ryann Juden, Chief of Staff, tells Judge Ramsey he will get the lawsuit settled if she resigns. He then goes on to say there is a “political tsunami” forming around her, and given what he knows you (Ramsey) are not going to make it to the summer. He continued by saying, given the information that is out there he can, as he has in the past, make a mailer of half-truths and the low information voters aren’t going to know the difference and you (Ramsey) won’t have a snowball’s chance of being even appointed to a position. He again tells her to resign and talks about the recall effort being formed. This is confirmed in the ethics complaints filed by Human Resource employees Washington and Bonner.
February 2015: Ryann and Mayor Lee made unsuccessful push to gain more power for City. They wanted the right to re-write rules that govern North Las Vegas by a Majority Vote. Rumor was they wanted to rewrite City Charter to get rid of Department one, which is created by City Charter and can’t be eliminated by ordinance, as opposed to Department 2 that is created by ordinance and can be eliminated by ordinance.
Judge Hoeffgen tells Judge Ramsey and Court Administrator Cindy Marshall that he was pressured to sign the MOU because he was tired of the Mayor bugging him about it and coming over to his house every night and on the weekends pressuring him.
March 5, 2015: City Manager tells Court they are not permitted to participate in recruitment interviews and sit on the interview panel for Bailiffs.
March 11, 2015: A Notice of Intent (Recall Petition) was filed with North Las Vegas City Clerk. The three signers all have connections to the Mayor.
March 15, 2015: Un-named editorial in RJ: Remove Ramsey
March, 2015: City unilaterally transfers court warrant employees and the Marshal Division effective April 1, 2015. The MOU Judge Hoeffgen and Court Administrator Cindy Marshall signed permits the City to do this. Judge Hoeffgen now uses fact that Judge Ramsey did not sign the agreement to stop the transfer as it is not a legal agreement.
March 23, 2015: City will now requiring a typing test for Sara Keys to be processed as an Executive Judicial Assistant for Department 1.
Court hires Holland & Hart Attorneys at Law to assert its rights under Sparks, and to stop the unilateral transfer of the Marshal Division and warrant employees. Court and City are drafting a Services Agreement.
April 6, 2015: Judge Ramsey files a Motion for Settlement Conference due to the City refusing to participate or postponing any settlement discussions. It is clear the City does not want the Forti matter resolved or risk receiving an adverse ruling. The lawsuit is a key issue in the recall attempt and used in the petition.
April 14, 2015: Attorney Hall writes letters to City Hall and unions declaring independence under the Sparks decision.
April 27, 2015: Attorney Hall meets with Channel 13. Court declares its independence from North Las Vegas City Hall.
April 28, 2015: Un-named editorial in RJ: Recall Judge Ramsey to halt NLV court’s overreach.
May 2, 2015: Two former human resource employees file ethics complaint and alleging Mayor Lee and his former Campaign Manager now Chief of Staff Juden on the warpath to ruin one city Judge while bullying the city’s other Judge. This confirms what Judge Ramsey has been saying all along, the Recall is a political hit Job.
May 28, 2015: Human Resources refused to accept the paperwork for Sara Keys to be processed as an Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1.
A Recall Petition is filed.
June 2, 2015: Secretary of State qualifies the Petition for Recall.
June 9, 2015: Ramsey files complaint challenging sufficiency of the Petition for Recall.
June 18, 2015: Hearing on the Emergency Injunction; Cases consolidated.
Judge Hoeffgen threatens in a meeting with Court Administrator Marshall, Attorney Hall and Judge Ramsey that the City is a one Judge City, which is him, and even if Judge Ramsey survives a recall, the City will get rid of her department.
June 28, 2015: Hearing on Complaint for Sufficiency.
June 29, 2015: Judicial Executive Assistant Sara Keys resigns, as City refused to process her paperwork for a full time employee.
July 1, 2015: Judge Ramsey and Court Administrator Cindy Marshall sign a personnel action form for human resources to process hiring paperwork for Kimalee Goldstein as a Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1 with a start date of July 13, 2015.
July 2, 2015: City Attorney Sandra Morgan sends a fundraiser announcement for Judge Ramsey’s Job at 12:58 p.m. The Hearing did not start until 1pm and the Judge had not made any ruling. Judge Ramsey’s position is not up for election, nor has a call for election been made. City Attorney Morgan is campaigning for a position that has not been posted, nor is it open.
Hearing on Complaint of Sufficiency. Hearing ends at 5:18 p.m.
July 6, 2015: Holland & Hart letter that Judge Hoeffgen “changed his mind” regarding scope of representation and wants to wait until after the recall to continue to meet about entering into a services agreement. Confirms Judge Hoeffgen has been meeting on his own with City representatives.
July 7, 2015: Human Resources refuse to give Judicial Executive Assistant Kimalee Goldstein paperwork to begin background check and processing as Court employee. HR representative calls Cindy Marshall and tells her informally that it is not fair to process anyone if the Judge is being recalled.
July 8, 2015: Un-named editorial in RJ: State Supreme Court should back Ramsey recall ruling.
July 10, 2015: Writ and Emergency Injunction is filed to Supreme Court; matter is currently stayed.
July 13, 2015: Human Resources refused to give new hire paperwork for Kimalee Goldstein to be processed as a Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1.
Judge Hoeffgen agrees with Judge Ramsey about using counsel for Judicial Executive Assistant; Holland & Hart send a letter to process paperwork for Kimalee Goldstein as Judicial Executive Assistant.
July 20, 2014: Human Resources finally gives Kimalee Goldstein paperwork to be processed as a Judicial Executive Assistant for Department 1. They stall processing by requesting certified copies of high school transcripts when she had certified copies of college transcripts. Other City employees work while their background is being completed, yet they won’t let her.
July 22, 2015: Court Administrator Cindy Marshall forwards another Memorandum Of Understanding relating to Court employees and shared services with the City. Judge Ramsey suggests the MOU be forwarded to Court Attorney Anthony Hall of Holland & Hart to review as they are counsel for Court and working with City to prepare a services agreement.
After going through the series of events it is clear that this Judge is working in a hostile environment and there are two sets of standards. Some folks would say that we are twisting the evidence, but before you believe them do your own research and educate yourself!
But what’s more alarming is the person that filed an Ethics Complaint against Judge Ramsey is bucking for her job.
On July 18th Sandra Douglass Morgan appeared on the Veterans In Politics talk show 48:38 minutes into the show the host asked:
“Is this person that bad” (referring to Judge Ramsey). Morgan commented by saying: “I am not focused on this person”.
I hate to tell you; if you are going to unseat a Judge especially in a Re-Call Election you should focus on what he or she is doing or not doing!
Click onto link: http://audio.vegasallnetradio.com/VIP/VIP2015-07-18.mp3
(VIPI) Veterans In Politics International
Steve Sanson President VIPI
“If you turn a deaf ear or a blind eye to corruption; you are just as guilty as the perpetrators that are committing the injustice.”
Karen Steelmon Auxiliary Director VIPI
Richard Carreon President VIP Nevada Chapter
Vicky Maltman Auxiliary Director VIP Northern Nevada Chapter
Dennis Egge President VIP Hawaii Chapter
Reginald Angus Argue President VIP Canada Chapter
Established in 1993:
Mission: To educate, organize, and awaken our veterans and their families to select, support and intelligently vote for those candidates whom would help create a better world, to protect ourselves from our own government(s) in a culture of corruption, and to be the political voice for those in other groups who do not have one.
For information or if you would like to become a member or donate to our cause please visit www.veteransinpolitics.org we are a not for profit.
Veterans In Politics internet talk show:
*If you would like to be a guest on our show please contact: email email@example.com or if you would like to place a commercial on anyone of our shows please dial 702 283 8088.
*If you would like to visit any of our archived interviews or find out who is going to be interviewed next go to; http://www.vegasallnetradio.com/veterans-in-politics.html
Veterans In Politics International
702 283 8088