Ellington

There were some quiet days in Jackson while Mayor Frank Melton was recovering from surgery in Texas. I was in City Council covering the debate on digital billboards two weeks ago, and we journalists blinked at each other like it was the first day of spring. We could almost imagine what it would be like to cover government without Melton. Politicians will always argue and preen for the cameras, but in ordinary times, there are no states of emergency, no raids, no felony indictments.

For Jacksonians, these are not ordinary times.

Even before Mr. Melton returned, city government was convulsed by the news—broken online by the Jackson Free Press—that Parks and Recreation Director Ramie Ford was being transferred, possibly as a pretext to his forced resignation. Mr. Melton's chosen successor as director of Parks and Rec was Charles Melvin of Youth Services. By both his and Mr. Melton's admission, Melvin's chief qualification for office is his "superior athletic ability." This would make him an excellent recruit for a softball team, but it has nothing to do with good government.

After Mr. Melton returned, he announced that Ford was actually being transferred to a new department called Neighborhood Enhancement, which Melton would create by restructuring city government, merging departments and budgets. Ford admitted that even he hadn't known about his promotion that morning, when most features of the new department were "finalized."

When City Council tried to go into executive session to discuss Melvin's appointment, Melton ordered City Attorney Sarah O'Reilly-Evans and her staff to leave the council meeting. The city attorney is the city's attorney, not Melton's personal attorney. He had no business ordering her to leave.

When O'Reilly-Evans left that meeting on Melton's orders, she showed that she is truly his servant. O'Reilly-Evans believes that she has the right to walk out on her client, namely City Council, and then tell the press she walked out because council members were threatening her. City Council is now contemplating cutting funding to the city attorney's office, and rightly so.

O'Reilly-Evans is not an aberration in this administration. She essentially acted as mayor during Mr. Melton's surgery, along with Chief Administration Officer Robert Walker. State law requires that the executive branch be entrusted to another elected official, namely a member of City Council. O'Reilly-Evans has not been elected to anything, yet Mr. Melton simply awarded control of the executive to his chosen subordinates, as if the mayor's office is now his personal property to dispense as he sees fit.

This is the imperial style of succession. Instead of president to vice president to speaker of the house, it's straight to Harriet Miers.

Now, Mr. Melton has returned to the Upper Level on another raid, with his fellow indicted felons Michael Recio and Marcus Wright and his police chief in tow. It seems not to faze the mayor that it was raids of this kind that got him in trouble in the first place, and he seems as indifferent to the terms of his bond and probation as Recio and Wright are of their assignment to desk work.

In only one week, Mr. Melton has turned Jackson on its head again. He has shown that he has nothing but contempt for the rule of law, and he has shown that being one of his true believers—sometimes to an unsettling extent, as anyone who has heard (Permanently) Interim Fire Chief Todd Chandler or Councilman Frank Bluntson speak of "Frank's passion" can attest—is more important to this administration than finding and keeping the best person for the job.

Melvin came with Melton from the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics, as did other members of Melton's administration, like Police Chief Shirlene Anderson.

Marcus Ward, who was Melton's pick to be the city's lobbyist, took that position at only 28 years of age, with a fraction of the experience, resources and qualifications of John Waits of Winston & Strawn, who had represented the city with great success until then. Now, Waits is back as city lobbyist, and Ward has become chief of staff, apparently content with his place in Melton's pecking order.

Recio and Wright rose from obscurity to de facto special agents through their loyalty to the mayor. They continue to "protect" the mayor—as they did at 2 a.m. last Sunday at the Upper Level—even though they are no longer allowed to carry weapons and are supposed to be doing desk work.

Let us not neglect Stephanie Parker-Weaver and Bob Hickingbottom, who both work for the city when they are not smearing Melton's opponents. Let us not forget the members of Melton's lawn crew, some of whom allegedly chanted "Wood Street Playas" as they beat and kicked Tonari Moore outside the Upper Level a few months ago, just after they allegedly helped Melton demolish the duplex on Ridgeway.

Probation Services Company, which oversees Mr. Melton's compliance with the terms his bond and probation, is managed by Robert Johnson, who was Melton's campaign manager during the mayoral campaign.

The longer Melton remains in power, the more key positions in city government are feted to his political subordinates. Melton's group is forcing qualified personnel like Peyton Propere and Meisha Jones from government and promoting people like Charles Melvin. (Jones moved up through the ranks over 10 years as a civil servant until she was transferred from the police department to the Grants Division. She was fired two weeks later. At least three former employees from the Grants Division have filed wrongful termination suits, including Jones.) Now, the group is reaching out to other centers of power, promoting candidates for sheriff like Lester Williams, who also served under Melton at MBN.

In time, whether through felony convictions or public disgust, Melton's tenure as mayor will come to an end, and when he leaves, he will take his underqualified, overpaid cronies with him. The question for Jacksonians—and for City Council, in particular—is how much damage will he have done by then?

Previous Comments

ID

74522

Comment

A whole HELLUVA lot of damage! Hopefully, not all will be lost. This city will need a lot of healing when FM vacates City Hall.

Author

Fitz

Date

2007-02-14T19:03:25-06:00

ID

74523

Comment

Good editorial!

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-02-14T20:27:41-06:00

ID

74524

Comment

"Probation Services Company, which oversees Mr. Melton’s compliance with the terms his bond and probation, is managed by Robert Johnson, who was Melton’s campaign manager during the mayoral campaign." -Brian Johnson editorial I'm having trouble understanding this quote within the context of your editorial. What, if any, are the implications inferred here. I would really be interested if you would elaborate.

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-14T21:41:30-06:00

ID

74525

Comment

With respect, I would be much more interested with what you have to say about that quote than what a journalist has to say about that quote. Are you disputing any of it? If not, what message do you think it sends? I'm curious. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2007-02-14T22:38:58-06:00

ID

74526

Comment

There's nothing to dispute, Head. The quote is what it is. But my question still stands: within the context of the editorial what is the journalist's inference? What message does it send to YOU? I'm curious too!

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-14T23:05:03-06:00

ID

74527

Comment

Hey, you brought it up--and since you're the person named in the paragraph, your interpretation is probably much more interesting than mine anyway. So why not share? Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2007-02-14T23:43:46-06:00

ID

74528

Comment

I think what most people get out of an inference like that, justified or not, is that there's some dealin' going on in smoky rooms to keep Melton away from Jail and trouble as long as possible. After he's out, he'll run off to Texas and hide from Justice like he is now.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-02-14T23:52:44-06:00

ID

74529

Comment

I don't know about that. I feel very much like we're being asked to read tea leaves here--Robert Johnson obviously feels that the fact that he wears both hats is of particular significance, and I'd like to know why. Until he posted, I didn't even see anyone else bring it up--so clearly he sees something in the statement that I don't. So how about it, Mr. Robert Johnson? Can you explain to us why we should be paying special attention to that statement? Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2007-02-14T23:58:28-06:00

ID

74530

Comment

So, did he work/volunteer for the Melton campaign or not? Isn't this the same Robert Johnson that was Chief and worked briefly at JDP with Shirlene and Melton? If that is so, then it is important for readers to know that an associate of Melton's also oversees his parole.

Author

pikersam

Date

2007-02-15T00:00:30-06:00

ID

74531

Comment

I would say Mr. Johnson, that there is an appearance of conflict of interest if you were his campaign manager and in charge of monitoring his probation. At least, that is what I am reading into the exchange between you and Mr. Head and the article. However, as an experienced and well regarded law enforcement professional, would you agree that there is an appearance of a conflict of interest if you were his campaign manager and were in operating a company in charge of monitoring his probation?

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-02-15T00:01:41-06:00

ID

74532

Comment

Those are certainly valid questions to ask, but I'm really more interested in why Mr. Robert Johnson felt that this was important enough for him to grace us with his presence. Clearly he feels that these facts are of particular significance, but I read through the article without really thinking very much about them. Such is the nature of the world--we overlook things that are meaningful to others. I hope he doesn't feel hurt by my callous lack of attention to these details, but we all move through life with our blind spots as the fallible human beings we are. So in the spirit of sharing, blessed community of love and mutual respect that we are, I'd really like to hear why that statement is meaningful to you, Mr. Robert Johnson. Please open up and let your words take flight, sir! There's no sense in holding it all in. We're all friends here. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2007-02-15T00:06:02-06:00

ID

74533

Comment

That is assuming that the two Robert Johnsons are one and the same. I just wish he had recorded his songs in a better format. That damn tape sucks.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-02-15T00:15:18-06:00

ID

74534

Comment

Mr. Johnson, I believe the message that the statement you quoted sends is that the head of Probation Services now played a prominent role in Mr. Melton's campaign for mayor. To your knowledge, is that incorrect?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-02-15T00:37:43-06:00

ID

74535

Comment

I have to agree with Kingfish on this one. Anyone wishing to, could call themselves Robert Johnson on a Blog providing no one else was using that name. If the Robert Johnson referred to in the article wishes to discuss this excellent editorial, then there are ways to do so with no possiblity of confusion.

Author

ChrisCavanaugh

Date

2007-02-15T09:43:14-06:00

ID

74536

Comment

I commented on the editorial, Head, because I suspected that it would be perceived the way some posts on this thread seem to perceive it. Certainly, the reader who directed my attention to it in the first place seemed to think it was a "guilt by association" link. The editorial claimed some strong stuff with regard to Melton's current associates. Seems I was the only mention of any past association and by implication was part of what the editorial finds wrong with the current associates and the Melton administration. It is a fact that I volunteered (unpaid) as Melton's co-campaign manger for about three months in 2005. I've worked in and volunteered for a number of campaigns, both here in Mississippi and in Michigan. At the risk of being thought to "protest to loudly", let me say that I spent more than thirty years in public life and positions of public trust. During that time I formed inumerable relationships of one form or another, both personal and professional. Nothing in those relationships, whether it was as a campaign volunteer or for that matter as a candidate for elective office myself, ever interfered with me maintaining my integrity, fulfilling my job responsibilities and/or doing the right thing. So, Head, that was the inference I drew from the quote in the editorial and therefore felt the need to respond. I hope this has been helpful. (Ditto on the format,kingfish.)

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T13:45:41-06:00

ID

74537

Comment

Mr. Johnson, First, thank you for commenting. (I am taking it on faith that you are the Robert Johnson in question. Our reporter Adam Lynch has tried to reach you by phone previously and had no success. Please do call 601-362-6121 x7 or x8 to discuss these matters at length.) You wrote: I suspected that it would be perceived the way some posts on this thread seem to perceive it. Looking back over the thread, I can't see any nefarious "perception" of your position or integrity. What I do see is Kingfish and others noting "the appearance of a conflict of interest" in your position. Until now, you have not informed the public about your past political association with Mr. Melton, nor have you offered any assurance that despite this past association, your company will treat Melton like any other person on probation. I am sure you understand, under these circumstances, why citizens are concerned. It seems that the mayor is either ignoring the terms of his bond and probation or receiving permission, from your company, to continue carrying out late-night police raids, which would seem to violate the spirit of his bond and probation. Now that you've joined us, I invite you to reassure everyone on why they need not be concerned. How long has it been since you've had any political or personal association with Mr. Melton? How directly involved are you in supervising his probation? Does your company have protocols in place meant to ensure the monitor's impartiality? Just how does this process work? Any information you could provide would be welcome. Again, you may call for a formal interview if you're uncomfortable posting here, or you can write me at brian [at] jacksonfreepress.com. Thank you.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T14:37:07-06:00

ID

74538

Comment

Apologies to all for a technical glitch. This editor's note was accidentally double-posted, so a few comments are not visible on this thread. I'm just going to paste them over: Well put, chief. I would like to take this opportunity to urge anybody who has not already done so to contact their City Council representative, preferably by phone, and politely but firmly express their concerns about the mayor's conduct. The City Council has the power to effect change, but is not currently exercising that power to its fullest extent. Council members--especially in wards 1, 3, 4, and 5--need to know that their constituents are concerned. Cheers, TH Posted by: Tom Head on Feb 14, 07 | 1:05 pm

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T17:05:09-06:00

ID

74539

Comment

I say preferably by phone: Face to face lobbying is the most effective kind, so if you can actually make an appointment to meet with your representative in person to discuss your concerns, so much the better. For most people, though, telephone contact is probably the best option. Snail mail is probably the second best option. Email should be considered a last resort for folks lobbying their representatives, IMHO--it does not force them to have a two-way conversation with you, as face-to-face or telephone lobbying does, and it does not give them a physical object they have to figure out what to do with, as a written letter does. Representatives can deal with an email in 5 seconds; the other approaches involve more time on their part. Cheers, TH Posted by: Tom Head on Feb 14, 07 | 1:11 pm

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T17:06:02-06:00

ID

74540

Comment

". At least three former employees from the Grants Division have filed wrongful termination suits, including Jones.) Now, the group is reaching out to other centers of power, promoting candidates for sheriff like Lester Williams, who also served under Melton at MBN." This is frightening--how many lawsuits will Melton set off, leaving the city to pay the bill??? Posted by: Laurel on Feb 14, 07 | 1:11 pm

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T17:06:59-06:00

ID

74541

Comment

The level of corruption and incompetence in Jackson government is overwhelming. The city would be better off changing to a council+city manager form of governance. Posted by: Willezurmacht on Feb 15, 07 | 12:52 pm

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T17:07:31-06:00

ID

74542

Comment

I wonder if President Allen would share with us the number of lawsuits that have been filed against the city because of the mayor? Surely he has the stack sitting on the corner of his desk. Posted by: Fitz on Feb 15, 07 | 1:02 pm

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T17:08:06-06:00

ID

74543

Comment

>Brian Johnson: >Our reporter Adam Lynch has tried to reach you by phone previously and had no success.< For one of the reasons stated below, I feel a need to, again state that I have not received any phone calls from Adam. Today I received an e-mail from him and he was provided with several contact numbers for me. >Until now, you have not informed the public about your past political association with Mr. Melton, nor have you offered any assurance that despite this past association, your company will treat Melton like any other person on probation. < I didn't see a need to and nobody asked. You know, I really don't recall anyone asking for reassurance from or feeling a need to point out that the Sheriff had a "past political association" with the Mayor during the time the Sheriff was conducting his investigation. Maybe no one was aware of it or cared or made certain assumptions? >I invite you to reassure everyone on why they need not be concerned.< See above; why is it assumed in one case and not another? A concerned citizenry is a good thing and I wouoldn't dare placate anyone. But, if ithe concern is about whether I'm going to do my job professionally and responsibly...well, I'll just let my reputation speak for itself too. >Does your company have protocols in place meant to ensure the monitor's impartiality? Just how does this process work?< The short answer is, yes there are protocols, but "how the process" works is much longer and this forum is not quite the place to explain. >Any information you could provide would be welcome. Again, you may call for a formal interview if you're uncomfortable posting here, or you can write me at brian [at] jacksonfreepress.com. Thank you.< As I said in my e-mail to Adam, if you have any questions contact me. By the way, I'm not uncomfortable answering questions, giving information or expressing my opinions in any public or private forum; through blogs or otherwise, but thanks for the concern, and your response.

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T17:19:57-06:00

ID

74544

Comment

Thank you for your response, Mr. Johnson. For the record, Adam called PSC on Friday and on Monday, but regardless, we're communicating now. Adam and Mr. Johnson have now spoken about the process. To summarize, Mr. Johnson argues that his authority over probationees is very limited. The role of his company is only to report on potential violations to the proper authority, which in this case is Judge Tomie Green. That authority then makes decisions about possible sanctions. Even if a probationee committed a crime directly in front of a PSC monitor, that monitor would have no authority to arrest or otherwise sanction the probationee, Johnson says. Like anyone else, they could only call the police and then report the violation to the proper authority. In reporting violations, PSC may make recommendations, though acting on those recommendations is at the court's discretion. For instance, if the PSC monitor believes that the probationee acted in good faith, i.e. that the violation was inadverdent, etc., then he can pass that information on to the court. That said, what are you insinuating about the sheriff?

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T17:55:19-06:00

ID

74545

Comment

you watch how you talk to your elders boy, y'hear?

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-02-15T18:21:31-06:00

ID

74546

Comment

I haven't "argued" anything. I simply stated a fact to Adam and drew a comparison to the authority of a private entity such as PSC in dealing with parolees and probationers to that of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, Parole and Probation Division. MDOC agents have arrest authority and can arrest offenders on "probable cause" that they may have violated the terms and conditions of their parole or probation. PSC , nor any other private entity has such arrest powers. Offenders arrested by MDOC can be held in jail until such time as there is a revocation hearing before the supervising judge (probation violations only; there is another process for parole revocations that is not germane to PSC or this discussion.) PSC, on the other hand, would report to the supervising judge the same information as would a MDOC agent with the exceptoion that it is not likely the offender would be in jail as a result of being arrested by the PSC agent. Beyond arresting the probationer and holding him in jail pending a revocation hearing the MDOC agent has no more authority to "sanction" the probationer than a PSC agent Any "sanctions" for the alleged violation comes from the supervising judge. Just as MDOC is expected to execute an affidavit with regard to probation violations, thusly is a PSC agent. MDOC agents may make recommendations to the court concernin any sanctions that may be meted out, PSC may do likewise; however, again it is the judge's call. With the exception of the authority to efffect an arest, PSC's responsibilities mirror those of the MDOC. As an aside, a number of violators don't go to jail; often they are continued on probation with more restrictive conditions and placed back into the supervision of MDOC (or PSC). I appreciate you trying to post up this information from second hand sources, but clarity is much better when it comes from direct sources. If you need further clarity, please give me a call. As to your last comment, I'm not "insinuating" anything about the Sheriff. If it appears to you that I am, it would fit my description of your comments about me and PSC in your editorial. The Sheriff had a "political association" with the Mayor during the Mayoral campaign and served on a Police Search committee. Why is my role in the same campaign viewed differently than your view of the sheriff's role in that same campaign as it relates to me and PSC being able to do our job properly? Now, for purposes of full disclosure: I am a long time, current, supporter of the sheriff.

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T18:50:25-06:00

ID

74547

Comment

....Police CHIEF Search committee...

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T18:58:32-06:00

ID

74548

Comment

and for the record Mr. Johnson, although I have some legitimate questions about your role in the campaign and your company, I've always had alot of respect for you and thought you were one of the better if not best police chiefs we've had in the last couple of decades. The department was definitely better when you left than the way you found it and I really did not like the way you were treated on your last day. thanks for your years of service as police chief here in Jackson.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-02-15T19:24:22-06:00

ID

74549

Comment

Legitimate questions are okay and always welcome, Kinfish, ask away.

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-15T23:08:18-06:00

ID

74550

Comment

Thank you for the further clarification, Mr. Johnson, although it doesn't seem to contradict the gloss I wrote above. I offered that gloss because you wrote previously that this forum was "not quite the right place to explain." However, I can see why the comparison with MDOC is helpful. I am very curious about how a PSC agent determines whether or not to grant permission to a probationee to engage in behavior ordinarily forbidden by that probation. Set aside the example of Mr. Melton, because I understand that you won't talk about individual cases. Let's pose a hypothetical case. Let's say that my cousin Festus was on probation that forbid him from leaving the state. He absolutely insists, however, on visiting Branson, Missouri, over the weekend. Would he have to ask permission from his PSC agent, or would he just inform him? Or would Festus have to ask permission from someone else, like the judge? As for the sheriff, he gets no free pass from me or the Jackson Free Press. There have been times when his actions have been suspect, and we have reported on them. For instance, it was quite strange that the sheriff held Evans Welch for several days virtually incommunicado. Finally, Welch's lawyer demanded that he be released, and he was. Then, we got a call that sheriff cruisers had arrived in force at Welch's parents' house. From a Sep. 13 JFP report: Today, Sheriff Malcom McMillin confirmed that at least five cruisers did come to rearrest Welch yesterday, though he said his department is no longer seeking Welch's arrest. He said that paperwork problems involved with Welch's release had been resolved. "There was," McMillin said, confirming that at least five cruisers had come to arrest Welch, "but it was a mistake." Five cruisers seems a bit--how to put this?--excessive to pick up a man with no history of violence. Also, I'm a bit concerned that a "paperwork problem" can apparently launch five police cruisers after a man. A final example. Sheriff McMillin failed to take mug shots of Mr. Melton, Wright and Recio. He said it was because there was no mug shot camera at the courthouse and he brought his digital camera to take them but then forgot in all the chaos. This accident was extremely politically convenient for Mr. Melton, because it prevented the mugshot meme from entering the public consciousness. Can you imagine how many times the media would have run those mugshots by now? The mayor should have sent the sheriff a thank you card for that. We have reported on all of this already, so I don't understand why you would think we have doe eyes for Mr. McMillin. I respect both his and your public service. The public service we try to provide is to shine as much light as we can on our public officials, so that citizens are informed about their government. Anyway, can Festus just tell his PSC agent that he's leaving for Branson, or does he have to ask permission?

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-16T00:48:26-06:00

ID

74551

Comment

Not to mention this little ditty about the sheriff's department's refusal to give a mother back the remains of her daughter for a horrifying length of time. (We understand that, since this article appeared, the remains have been returned.) I'm also curious, Mr. Johnson, as to why you left the Melton campaign. Mr. Melton was promising all over town (especially up north) that you would be very high up in his administration, not in uniform. Then you disappeared, and didn't show up in the administration as he'd promised. Can you tell us why the sudden turnabout? Many people have wondered since then. BTW, thank you both for answering questions on the site and for returning Adam's messages. I don't yet know the details of your interview with him today, as I'm out of town, but I appreciate your attempts at transparency, and I'm sure the public does as well.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-02-16T00:59:37-06:00

ID

74552

Comment

I have to say that I was worried when I first saw your posts in this thread, Mr. Johnson--I suspected at first that you were trying to intimidate Brian--but the candor of your posts here is very refreshing, and I appreciate reading them. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2007-02-16T01:06:45-06:00

ID

74553

Comment

Mr Johnson has always been candid. actually, both of them. However, I must correct Johnson the younger. I think Mr Welch had been arrested for domestic violence or a similar charge before plus he was a diagnosed schizophrenic. I'm not justifying 5 police cars, just making a little correction.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2007-02-16T01:53:48-06:00

ID

74554

Comment

King, I appreciate the correction, though I considered mentioning the domestic violence charge. In Welch's case, it doesn't actually indicate violence, per se, because it was his mother who called the police on that charge. Notice that it's not an assault charge. Experts have told me that this is the charge police give in order to get someone committed at their parents' request, and this charge came immediately previous to Welch's time at the state hospital. In his commitment papers, Welch was described as extremely antisocial but not particularly violent.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2007-02-16T11:01:14-06:00

ID

74555

Comment

Well, if Johnson had been a part of Melton's team (as Melton did play it off in the community because of the former Chief's character and integrity) this City would certainly be on its way to "being better when he left than the way he found it." I appreciate the Chief/Commissioner talking with Adam and his dialog here with Brian. I have to confess, when I read the story, I thought the intention of the Johnson mention was to show some inappropriate relationship and that Melton would "get away" in all circles. Hope the Chief continues to join in on future conversations as he is very well spoken. Maybe the question about Melton's administration and why Johnson isn't a part of it is better asked to Melton who made the decisions. I would suspect Melton probably knew of Johnson's character and integrity and would not let him "get away" with all the bad public policy, or let da Mayor get away with the false impression that he had the skills of and could act as a law enforcement official and could be Mayor and Police Chief.

Author

JenniferGriffin

Date

2007-02-16T12:34:07-06:00

ID

74556

Comment

>>>I'm also curious, Mr. Johnson, as to why you left the Melton campaign. Mr. Melton was promising all over town (especially up north) that you would be very high up in his administration, not in uniform. Then you disappeared, and didn't show up in the administration as he'd promised. Can you tell us why the sudden turnabout? Many people have wondered since then.<<< In an earlier post on one of these threads I stated that I would let my reputation speak for itself....it probably speaks to this question as well...Kinda like standing at the Crossroads...

Author

Robert Johnson

Date

2007-02-16T13:44:21-06:00

ID

74557

Comment

Well said, Mr. Johnson! Thank you.

Author

Fitz

Date

2007-02-16T17:07:53-06:00