text:
It's staggering that millions of voters are prepared to vote for Donald Trump with less information on what's under his hood than they would ever accept from a used car salesman.
Since Watergate days when Richard Nixon sought to dispel the idea that he was a crook playing fast and loose with his taxes, all major party nominees have disclosed their tax returns as a gesture of transparency . Tax returns seldom tell the whole story, but, as Mitchell Zuckoff wrote in Saturday's New York Times, they can provide important information to measure against campaign rhetoric.
Hillary Clinton, often criticized for her untrustworthiness , and Bill Clinton have shared their tax returns for every year going back to 1977. But not Donald Trump. And he is unlikely to do so, unless the negative consequences of withholding his returns were to exceed the benefits.
He now no longer hides behind a tax audit but claims releasing returns could cost him the election. Four years ago, Trump chided Romney for not releasing his returns. I wonder what those defending his right to withhold now would say if Hillary had done the same.
All pressure to date has been ineffective. Ron Fournier, writing in The Atlantic, proposed that the news networks not cover Trump until he does. That's not likely. The post-1963 Parkland Hospital lesson is to cover presidential candidates, and budget- strapped news media aren't going to pay reporters without having them report something.
Perhaps at minimum they can stop describing Trump as a self-made billionaire, "ardent philanthropist" or using other terms that indicate measures of great success or generosity. They should use qualifiers such as "self-described" billionaire and "alleged" philanthropist. Without his tax records, we don't know if anything he says about himself is true, and, given his track record, it may well be blue smoke and mirrors.
The press should not tire of the pursuit. If they stay with the story, even some of Trump's unqualified supporters may begin to question his character and wonder if they're just being played for suckers by another huckster.
From what we know, Trump is nowhere as wealthy as he claims to be. He claims he is worth "in excess of $10 billion." Fortune in May wrote that he was worth $3.9 billion. Bloomberg in July pegged him at $2.9 billion.
Since his serial bankruptcies, Trump doesn't actually build anything anymore. He licenses his name to others to put on their properties, and he collects management fees. His personal brand is his wealth and, according to Forbes, the value of his licensing income is $125 million not $3.3 billion.
Although Trump claims in his Federal Election Commission filing that his annual income is $557 million, Fortune estimates it at $160 million. And New York City officials said based on his filings he's been receiving tax breaks for people making less than $500,000 per year.
It's possible Trump pays no taxes and has avoided doing so for years. The Washington Post and Politico found in two different earlier decades he had paid nothing. The tax code provides lawful loopholes for property developers to use real estate depreciation rules and other business "operating losses" provisions. There are myriad tax games afoot in how he plays with his golf courses and "conservation easements."
Self-dealing among his approximately 500 businesses could hide still more income. And what would his populist acolytes say about his use of Delaware holding companies, Cayman Islands and other offshore tax dodges or carried-interest tricks used by hedge fund managers? Make America great again? He may already be getting all our nation's great public services [from defense to Medicare] for free. Is his tab as citizen something to be picked up by the little people?
How much does he really donate to charities? He's cultivated the image of philanthropist, but he may well make no charitable contributions out of his own pocket. According to The Washington Post, his gaming charitable deductions are shocking. Add to this information how much he writes off his lavish lifestyle as a business expense. How many of the perks he receives are reported as taxable income? Tax returns alone would not make this clear.
George Will in Real Clear Politics has warned that Trump doesn't want to release his tax returns "because he's deeply involved with Russia." Dark Russian interests may well be silently bank-rolling his businesses. Indeed, the mysterious roles of campaign manager Paul Manafort and energy adviser Carter Page suggest that, if Trump isn't a Manchurian candidate, he may well be just a gold plated dupe. If these allegations are not true, he deserves to have the cloud removed. But until this is clarified, the press must dig deeper. Tax returns could disclose his partners and parties to whom he owes money, but it's unlikely that dealings with either the Russian mafia [or American mobsters] would result in the exchange of 1099 forms.
Nominees for ambassadorships and cabinet posts have their taxes and personal finances screened carefully. Shouldn't the same standard apply to presidential candidates? Shouldn't Congress act on this? The Sunlight Foundation thinks so. Is it too late to have the Commission on Presidential Debates make release of returns a prerequisite for participation?
Ronald Reagan famously said, "Trust, but verify. " Until we know what's in Donald Trump's tax returns, nothing he says about himself should be trusted. As one blog commenter said: "The ad writes itself. 'Donald Trump: Cheats on his wives. Cheats on his taxes. Cheats on America.' "
I welcome your comments in the section below. To be alerted when a new blog is posted, click on "Follow' in the lower right portion of your screen.


text:
Creating an engaging, memorable and amazing experience should be a top goal for any event or conference organizer.
Amazing events don't just "happen." They are seeds that are planted by someone or a team who has a "why" bigger than selling seats. These are the events that become amazing over time with the investment of many who are involved.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Pop-up hand puppet - witch black 61 cm
Code: 11755AProduct detailed description
Introducing the Hand Puppet Pop-up Cone, a high-quality product made in the Czech Republic that is sure to bring joy to kids and adults alike. Our puppets are made from certified materials, ensuring that they are safe for kids as young as 3 years old.
Our pop-up cone design makes playing with these hand puppets easy and fun. Children can use them as hand puppets and let their imaginations run wild, or they can play with the pop-up cone itself and discover new ways to explore the world around them.
Playing with hand puppets has been shown to be beneficial for children's development. It helps to improve their communication skills, boosts their self-confide
nce and self-esteem, and develops their empathy and emotional intelligence. With our Hand Puppet Pop-up Cone, children can develop these important life skills while having fun.
As a B2B customer, you want to provide your clients with high-quality, safe, and engaging toys that support children's learning and growth. Our Hand Puppet Pop-up Cone ticks all the boxes. Made in the Czech Republic with the highest standards of quality and safety, these hand puppets are sure to delight children and adults alike.
If you run a toy shop, day care, kindergarten, pre-school, or small puppet theater, the Hand Puppet Pop-up Cone is the perfect addition to your product line. Give your customers a fun and educational toy that supports children's development and provides hours of entertainment.
Additional parameters
Category: | Puppets in the cone 52-60cm |
Warranty: | 2 years |
Weight: | 0.09 kg |
Age by Certification: | CE 3+ |
Dimensions: | 10 x 21 x 61 cm |
Material: | Textile |
Use: | Toy |
Rozměry: | 10 x 21 x 61 cm |
Be the first who will post an article to this item!
Textile and plush toys from MORAVSKÁ ÚSTŘEDNA BRNO are characterized by very high quality workmanship and sophisticated design. All toys are safe and regularly tested. The materials used in the production are of high quality, health-safe and certified for use in the manufacture of toys. The main materials are plush, micro plush, cotton and felt. The development and production of all MÚ toys is carried out exclusively in the Czech Republic. Great emphasis is placed on the design and layout of these textile and plush toys and the products are therefore created in the hands of expert, in-house designers. The range includes products for schoolchildren, preschoolers and even the youngest children. The collection of MÚ Brno products also includes many licensed motifs. The most famous is the Mole, which is produced in many designs and sizes. There are also Mole's friends, the whole Rumcajs family, the popular Four-Leaf Clover, Hurvínek with Mánička and Spejble, the inseparable pair of Křemílek and Vochomůrka, Rákosníček, Maxipes Fík and Popeye the Sailor. The list of toys on which you can find a tag with the MORAVSKÁ ÚSTŘEDNA BRNO logo does not end there. The company's designers have created a long line of other fairy tale characters, plus rabbits, elephants, teddy bears, dogs and other cuddly creatures.


text:
Response to Jack Bloom's comments on the Pope and Condoms
The DA leader in the Gauteng legislature, Jack Bloom, has written a statement defending the Pope's recent widely reported scepticism of condoms. Bloom's comments show a poor appreciation of AIDS science. His attempt to rescue the Pope is flawed.
By Nathan Geffen, TAC Treasurer
(This article was originally published on politicsweb on 3 April 2009.)
The DA leader in the Gauteng legislature, Jack Bloom, has written a statement defending the Pope's recent widely reported scepticism of condoms. Bloom's comments show a poor appreciation of AIDS science. His attempt to rescue the Pope is flawed.
Bloom claims that the Pope's comments are more subtle than the media has reported. He gives the full quotation as, "if the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through … the humanisation of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another."
Other sources have reported the Pope's words differently and there appears to be some confusion about what precisely he said. Nevertheless, assuming Bloom's quotation is accurate, explicit in the Pope's statement is that condom distribution risks worsening the HIV epidemic; the media have not got it wrong. It is for this reason that numerous organisations including one of the world's leading medical journals, The Lancet, have criticised the Pope. The TAC released a statement criticising the Pope primarily because of our concern that what follows from the Pope's statement is opposition to sex education programmes in schools that includes information on and availability of condoms. Schools, after all, are one of the most important locations for AIDS prevention work.
Bloom concludes, "Condoms or no condoms, if we constantly reduce sex to biology rather than committed relationships, we will never change the risky behaviour that drives our AIDS epidemic."
The second part of this conclusion is correct. It is uncontroversial that risky behaviour drives the transmission of HIV. We need to try to change it. Promoting committed relationships is surely part of that. However, to argue as Bloom does that condoms are irrelevant (the only reasonable meaning of "condoms or no condoms") is dangerously wrong. If condom distribution were removed from AIDS prevention programmes the scale of the HIV epidemic would very likely be far worse.
Bloom compares the rise in HIV prevalence in Gauteng to the decline in HIV prevalence in Uganda and argues that the difference is that Gauteng concentrated on condom distribution while Uganda emphasised fidelity and abstention. He supports his argument by stating that the antenatal survey in Gauteng shows a rise in prevalence from 29.4% in 2000 to 30.3% in 2007, while in Uganda, HIV infection dropped from 18 to 6%. Bloom has dressed his opinion up with scientific arguments. But his facts are selective and his science is wrong.
It is extremely difficult to compare two very different geographical locations and draw conclusions about which of condom, abstinence or fidelity promotion was the key to success. This is why scientists prefer to draw conclusions from controlled experiments or properly analysed observational data – not from opinions about controversial and hazy facts. But let's nevertheless briefly look at Uganda and Gauteng.
Condom distribution coupled with increased condom use was very much a part of the Ugandan HIV programme during the period in which prevalence dropped substantially. It was coupled with intensive public education which promoted increased monogamy ("zero grazing") and delayed sexual debut. The programme was successful though not as much as is popularly believed. There are two additional reasons why Uganda's prevalence dropped: it was probably overestimated in the first place and many people died of AIDS because they went untreated.
Uganda's prevention programme was not uniformly implemented and the evidence appears to show that different aspects of the programme were more effective at different times and in different places. A good summary of what happened in Uganda can be found in this article from The Lancet:
By contrast Gauteng, as with every other province, has failed to run a useful public education campaign on HIV prevention and more importantly has been subject to a conservative national policy not to make condoms available in schools. Also, Gauteng is not Uganda: culturally they are no more similar than, say, Britain and Russia. It is not clear that a Ugandan style public information campaign would work in Gauteng nor is it clear how such a campaign can be replicated there.
Rather than comparing Gauteng to Uganda we have to ask: What does the best available scientific evidence currently show? Several reputable sources provide essentially the same answer. For example, the AIDS Research Institute of the University of California, San Francisco, which examined prevention programmes implemented in US schools, stated:
An assessment of the peer-reviewed, published research reveals no evidence that abstinence- only programs delay sexual initiation or reduce STIs or pregnancy. By contrast, credible research clearly demonstrates that some comprehensive sex education, or 'abstinence-plus,' programs can achieve positive behavioral changes among young people and reduce STIs, and that these programs do not encourage young people to initiate sexual activity earlier or have more sexual partners.
Their analysis can be downloaded here (PDF). There is also some evidence showing that condom promotion and distribution has been successful at keeping HIV under control in Thailand and Brazil.
Bloom's position on condoms appears to be informed by his personal moral judgments. He says that "youths interviewed in one study … thought it quite normal to have multiple sexual contacts" is "shocking". The reality is that a large proportion of youths in South Africa begin having sex at a young age and some of them have multiple partners. There are many complex reasons for this and there is no known practical intervention that is likely to change it soon. It is therefore important that sexually active youths have access to condoms and are taught what their benefits are.
It is worth reiterating that the scientific evidence is clear that condoms properly used are an effective way to reduce the risk of HIV transmission. A panel of 28 experts assembled by the US National Institutes of Health made this finding:
The Panel concluded that, based on a meta-analysis of published studies "always"users of the male condom significantly reduced the risk of HIV infection in men and women. These data provided strong evidence for the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV transmission in both men and women who engage in vaginal intercourse.
The report can be downloaded here (PDF)
We have just emerged from over a decade of an unscientific response to the HIV epidemic by the state. This cost at least three hundred thousand lives. Surely this has taught us how important it is that all political parties and their spokespersons base their views on how to alleviate the epidemic on the best available science.


text:
National Bike Month comes to a close
National Bike Month which takes place every May, ends this week. To celebrate a month of cycling focused activities, EveryONE is highlighting some recent cycling research published in PLOS ONE.
As biking becomes ever more popular and bike-sharing programs expand, such as in New York City last weekend, cycling injuries and fatalities may increase as well. Although most people acknowledge the utility of wearing a helmet, encouraging cyclists to actually use them can be difficult. A study examining the efficacy of several helmet-promotion measures showed that attitudes about helmets making people "look ridiculous" or "old-fashioned" can be hard to counter. Even providing cyclists with free helmet was only mildly successfully in convincing non-helmet users to wear one. The most effective measures included pressure from family or friends to wear it, as well as shifting the safety dialogue from helmets as head and brain protection to promoting helmets as "face-protecting" devices. So folks, as you get on your bikes this weekend, protect your face and wear a helmet.
Aesthetics aside, competitive cyclists are frequently seeking ways to improve their performance and speed recovery. Compression sportswear, from sleeves to knee-high socks to shorts, is one current performance-enhancing trend. These products tout improved arterial blood flow from the compression as a way to increase speed, reduce chances of injury and shorten recovery time. A pair of compression cycling shorts can be quite expensive though, so before you go purchasing your way to shorter race times, evidence in recent research indicates that claims of their efficacy may be overreaching. In fact, a study on athletes wearing compression shorts showed blood flow to the muscle actually decreased, contradicting many of the claims from these sportswear companies. Getting faster may just require more time in the saddle.
Theft of bikes is a persistent issue facing casual and competitive cyclists alike, but there's some good news on this front: recent research showed a relatively simple deterrent to be surprisingly effective. The study found a 62% decrease in bicycle theft in locations where an ominous sign showing a person's eyes and the words "Cycle Thieves We Are Watching You" (below) was posted above the bike racks. Theft in locations without these posters rose.
For more research on bikes and cycling performance, visit PLOS ONE.
Citation: Constant A, Messiah A, Felonneau M-L, Lagarde E (2012) Investigating Helmet Promotion for Cyclists: Results from a Randomised Study with Observation of Behaviour, Using a Semi-Automatic Video System. PLoS ONE 7(2): e31651. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031651
Sperlich B, Born D-P, Kaskinoro K, Kalliokoski KK, Laaksonen MS (2013) Squeezing the Muscle: Compression Clothing and Muscle Metabolism during Recovery from High Intensity Exercise. PLoS ONE 8(4): e60923. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060923
Nettle D, Nott K, Bateson M (2012) 'Cycle Thieves, We Are Watching You': Impact of a Simple Signage Intervention against Bicycle Theft. PLoS ONE 7(12): e51738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0051738
Image Credits: cyclist by jesse.millan, poster from pone.0051738


text: The two Warner Brothers Yakko and Wakko and their Warner sister Dot had been (supposedly) created in the 1930's, but their cartoons were too screwy for the general public to handle. The three Warners were locked up in the studio water tower until they escaped in the 90's. There, they run wild, causing chaos everywhere!


text:
Wondering if anyone actually reads hard copy catalogs anymore? The answer is a resounding YES. Many customers actually prefer the tangible feeling of pages between their fingertips—even if they still make their selections and purchases online. What does this mean for your business? Well, if you want to do more than post the same drab online catalog or "dated" print version this year, we can help!
Work with the AlphaGraphics marketing and design team to craft a dazzling catalog that's as useful as it is memorable. Whether you're marketing your upcoming fall line, providing technical details for automotive parts, or selling the latest wedding accessories, our advanced marketing and print solutions will maximize your visual impact and ROI.
Our catalog printing options include:
Our catalog finishing options include:
Why spend valuable time and resources juggling the details? AlphaGraphics makes it easier for you to do business by providing extensive full-service design, printing and distribution solutions that let you focus on your operations instead of your overhead.
(605) 334-7333


text:
Registration is required to post to the Forum, Photo Gallery, and create articles on the site.
Need Help?
In the Forum, choose the Index tab.
For each Category, there is an envelope icon to subscribe.
Click each Category of interest to you (using the drop down box on the top of the Index page speeds up the process a bit) and click the envelope icon.
You should receive email when that Category has a new post.
Page 1 of 2


text:
Subscribe to Cases that cite 124 U. S. 236U.S. Supreme Court
United States v. Johnston, 124 U.S. 236 (1888)
United States v. Johnston
Argued December 15-16, 1887
Decided January 9, 1888
The entire administration of the system devised by Congress for the collection of captured and abandoned property during the war was committed by the acts regulating it to the Secretary of the Treasury, subject to the President's approval of the rules and regulations relating thereto prescribed by him, and with no other restriction than that the expenses charged upon the proceeds of sales be proper and necessary and he approved by him, and his approval of an account of expenses incurred on account of any particular lot of such property made before the passage of the Joint Resolution of March 31, 1868, 15 Stat. 251, is conclusive evidence that they were proper and necessary, unless it appears that chanrobles.com-red
their allowance was procured by fraud or that they were incurred in violation of an act of Congress or of public policy.
The Joint Resolution of Congress of March 31, 1868, 15 Stat. 251, affords evidence that the practice of the Secretary of the Treasury prior to that date not to cover into the Treasury the sums received from the sale of captured and abandoned property, but to retain them in the hands of the Treasurer in order to pay them out from time to time on the order of the Secretary, was known to Congress and was acquiesced in by it as to what had been previously done, and all this brings the practice within the well settled rule that the contemporaneous construction of a statute by those charged with its execution, especially when it has long prevailed, is entitled to great weight and should not be disregarded or overturned except for cogent reasons and unless it be clear that such construction is erroneous.
Settled accounts in the Treasury Department, where the United States have acted on the settlement and paid the balance therein found due, cannot be opened or set aside years afterwards merely because some of the prescribed steps in the accounting which it was the duty of a head of a department to see had been taken had been in fact omitted, or on account of technical irregularities, when the remedy of the party against the United States is barred by the statute of limitation, and the remedies of the United States are intact owing to its not being subject to an act of limitation.
The following was the case as stated by the Court:
This writ of error brings up for review a judgment for the defendant in error in an action brought against him on the twenty-ninth day of April, 1879, for the value of certain cotton which came to his hands as an assistant special agent of the Treasury Department in the year 1865, and which, it is alleged, he has not accounted for to the plaintiff, but converted to his own use. The defendant became such agent on the eighth of May, 1865, under a written appointment by the Secretary of the Treasury. He was charged with the duty of receiving and collecting such cotton in the Counties of Lowndes, Monroe, Oktibbeha, and Noxubee, in the State of Mississippi, as had been purchased by or was held on account of the so-called Confederate States government, and of forwarding the same to agents of the department as Memphis or Mobile, as in his judgment was best for the government. His commission was accompanied by a letter of instructions requiring him, with as little delay as possible, to ship the chanrobles.com-red
cotton received or collected to William W. Orme, supervising special agent at Mobile,
"sending forward with each lot an account of expenses (which will be paid by them), together with a full record of the cotton shipped, etc., as required by the fourth regulation concerning captured, abandoned, and confiscable personal property."
He was informed that his compensation would be thereafter fixed, and would depend in great measure upon the result of his efforts, but that it should be reasonable and liberal for the services performed. The defendant, in his answer, denied that he had omitted to account for any cotton received or collected by him as such agent. For further defense, he alleged that after the times mentioned in the complaint, and on or about March 15, 1866, a just, true, and full accounting of his acts as such agent was had with the United States, upon which he surrendered all papers, documents, and vouchers in his hands relating to his agency; that upon such accounting, the sum of $33,972.59 was awarded to him, of which $2,186.69 represented his per diem allowance and the balance his commissions; that said per diem allowance was paid on the fifteenth of May, 1866, and said commissions on the fifteenth of January, 1868, and that he was thereupon fully released, acquitted, and discharged from liability of every kind to the government. By agreement of the parties, the issues were heard and determined in the first instance by Hon. William G. Choate, as referee, who made a report of his special findings of fact and law, accompanied by an elaborate opinion in support of the conclusion that the defendant was entitled to a judgment dismissing the complaint on the merits. The case was subsequently tried by the court, the parties, by written stipulation filed, having waived a jury. The court adopted the special findings of fact made by the referee as its own findings and dismissed the complaint.
The several lots of cotton in question were delivered to one Stewart, of Mobile, in the latter part of the year 1865. The circumstances under which they were delivered were, according to the findings of fact, as follows:
The cotton in the counties constituting defendant's district was stored at various chanrobles.com-red
points more or less remote from the Mobile and Ohio Railroad, much of it in very bad condition, requiring rebaling or new covering and ropes. In consequence of many impediments, arising from the unsettled state of the country, to the successful execution by the defendant of his duties by agents of his own selection, he obtained special authority from the Secretary of the Treasury to make contracts with responsible persons for collecting cotton, putting it in shipping order, and delivering it at the railroad, the contractors to be paid in kind at the time of delivery or in money after he cotton had been sold and the proceeds realized by the government. The first lots of cotton were shipped to Dexter, the supervising agent at Mobile. Afterwards the defendant was directed by the Secretary to ship, and he did ship, the cotton directly through his own agents at Mobile to Simeon Draper at New York, who had been appointed as the general agent of the Treasury Department to sell all the cotton collected in the South. Defendant's first agents at Mobile were Weaver and Stark, but on August 14, 1865, he appointed one Cuny. The government did not furnish money to pay the expenses attending the collection, transportation, and shipping. But Cuny undertook with the defendant to settle all bills for railroad freights, the weighing and pressing of the cotton, and other incidental expenses connected therewith up to the time of shipment to New York, and he also agreed with the defendant to furnish the means necessary to cover such expenses. He arranged with Stewart at Mobile to provide means for these purposes, the latter to be reimbursed from time to time by government cotton at the market value. Stewart accordingly made large advances to Cuny between September 4, 1865, and January 26, 1866. These advances included $9,307.21 of expenses which Dexter, supervising special agent for the Treasury Department for the district in which Mobile was situated, incurred on cotton from Johnston's district, and which expenses Dexter insisted should be paid by the defendant. The latter at first declined to pay that bill, but subsequently, upon the advice of Mellen, a general agent of the Treasury Department, he sold cotton to meet it. Under the arrangement between chanrobles.com-red
Cuny and Stewart, the latter received between October 17, 1865, and December 16, 1865, different lots of cotton, aggregating 483 bales, which is the cotton now in question, and gave credit therefor at its market value in his account with Cuny for advances. The total value of this cotton was $82,300.24. Stewart paid the internal revenue tax of two cents per pound -- $3,486.64 -- on all except the last 100 bales, leaving $79,813.60 as the net value of the cotton. The first of these transfers to Stewart was without the knowledge of the defendant, but he subsequently approved or acquiesced in what Cuny did. This disposition of the 483 bales was without authority from the plaintiff, except as to the part used in meeting Dexter's bill.
The following additional facts were found by the court below:
"August 18, 1865, the Secretary of the Treasury issued a general letter of instructions directing all cotton to be forwarded to Simeon Draper at New York for sale, and that all money required by supervising agents to defray expenses should be sent upon their estimates therefor made to the Secretary on the first of each month. In September, 1865, Mr. Johnston had made an arrangement to draw against Simeon Draper at New York for the expenses on the cotton incurred at Mobile, including the cost of transportation to Mobile, and such drafts were drawn accordingly to the amount of upwards of $150,000 between the twenty-ninth of November, 1865, and the thirty-first of January, 1866. The drafts included one dollar a bale commission, which defendant paid to Cuny on the cotton shipped by him after the drafts were paid. To carry out his instructions that these drafts should be accompanied by vouchers showing the details of the expenses drawn for, the receipted bills of the railroad company paid by Cuny through the advances made by Stewart, and other bills so paid, were surrendered, and duplicate receipts were taken to conform to the shipments to Draper, against which drafts were drawn, and these duplicate vouchers accompanied the drafts. The same expenses which had thus been paid out of the cotton transferred to Stewart, to the amount of about $68,000, were included
in the drafts upon Draper, and by him paid to Johnston, so that as to these 483 bales, the defendant had been a second time paid by the government to that extent, the expenses for the payment of which they had been transferred to Stewart."
On the eleventh of January, 1866, the Secretary of the Treasury, by letter, called upon the defendant to make up and forward a full statement of his transactions, and sometime in the month of February, 1866, the defendant and his chief clerk, Dr. Vaughan, went to Washington with their books and papers and an account current or summary statement which had been made up at Columbus purporting to show the whole amount of cotton collected by the defendant and the disposition thereof. They were referred, by the subordinate in the Secretary's office in charge of the captured and abandoned property division, to the Commissioner of Customs, who at that time, under direction of the Secretary, had charge of the examination and passing of similar accounts. Meanwhile, however, certain charges against the defendant had been received in the Treasury Department from the War Department, and the Secretary directed that these charges should be answered before the defendant's account was passed upon, and a special reference of these charges was made by the Secretary for examination to a clerk in his office named Parker, since deceased. These charges were satisfactorily answered, and the examination of his accounts by the commissioner of customs followed. Some objections were made to the form of the account of cotton collected, and a new account was made up upon blanks furnished by the office of that part of the transactions. In the account current or summary statement made up at Columbus, the 483 bales of cotton in question were stated as follows:
" Sold by R. H. Cuny, to pay bills of Dexter and others, 483''"
"At the suggestion of the examining officer in the Commissioner's office, a new summary statement was made up by Dr. Vaughan, dividing this item into two, namely: "
Sold by consent of General Agent Mellen, by R. H. Cuny,
to pay Dexter's bill of expenses, . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Sold and proceeds paid to officers and garrisons to
secure protection to cotton in their charge, and
to repel thieves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428
"The only vouchers now remaining on file in the Treasury Department in support of this last item are two affidavits, one by the defendant and the other by Dr. Vaughan, the defendant's clerk and chief assistant, sworn to at Washington during the pendency of this examination, showing payments to military officers for extra vigilance in guarding the cotton, protecting it against thieves and raids, copies of which are hereto annexed, marked 'Schedules C and D.' The number of bales assigned to the item of Dexter's bill does not conform to any particular lot of cotton, part of the 483 bales transferred to Stewart, but is substantially correct, as representing, upon an average of the net proceeds of the cotton, the amount of Dexter's bill."
"There was exhibited to the officers appointed by the Secretary to examine his accounts some proofs of large expenditures of money, which, together with the payments to military officers, they held to be sufficient to justify them in passing this item. These expenses, aside from the payments to military officers, aggregated about $68,000, and the military payments about $29,000. These expenses, other than the military payments, were properly and necessarily incurred by the defendant in the discharge of his duty as assistant special agent in the care and protection of the cotton after its delivery by the contractors, and all these payments, including the military payments, were made necessary by the unsettled state of the country, the great accumulation of the cotton which the railroad company was unable to transport, the danger of theft and robbery, and the interference of other agents or persons claiming to be agents of the Treasury Department and of military officers. The military payments included $10,000 paid out for Colonel Young, which, however, was not proved to have been received by him, and which the defendant collected from the
contractors. These military payments were all made in the bona fide belief that they were necessary to protect the interest of the United States in the cotton, to secure increased vigilance, or to prevent connivance with parties interfering with or attempting to interfere with the cotton."
"The result of the examination of the account in the Office of the Commissioner of Customs was that the Commissioner wrote to the defendant a letter dated the fifteenth March, 1866, as follows:"
" Your property accounts as assistant special agent of the Treasury at Columbus, Mississippi, from May 8, 1865, to March 15, 1866, have this day been examined in this office and passed, there being no difference."
"Upon the receipt of this letter, the defendant wrote to the Secretary, communicating to him the contents of the letter received from the Commissioner of Customs and stating that he had presented to Mr. Parker written answer to the military charges, and that Mr. Parker expressed himself entirely satisfied, and that he would so report to the Secretary, and requested an instruction to Mr. Draper at New York to pay him his commissions allowed under the regulations on the sales of such cotton as Mr. Draper had received of his collecting, when the Secretary should receive a report from Mr. Parker."
"To this the Secretary replied under the same date, March 15, 1866, as follows:"
" I have received your letter of this date advising me that the Commissioner of Customs had favorably reported on your property account and that your explanation of charges made by certain military officers against you has shown them to be without substantial foundation, and asking me to instruct the cotton agent at New York to pay you the commissions allowed by the regulations of August the 18th last on the sales of such property of your collection as he has received. It affords me great pleasure to receive so gratifying a statement in regard to your affairs, and I have accordingly this day instructed the Commissioner of Customs to issue a requisition for your per diem compensation at the rate of $6 per day from the date of your appointment and for such mileage as you may be entitled to at the rate of ten cents per mile. At present, no payments on account of commissions or
percentage are made to any of the agents of the department, and I deem it inexpedient to make an exception to this rule in any case till sufficient time has elapsed to enable me to examine and understand the whole matter connected with the collection and forwarding of government cotton. Just now my time is too much occupied with other matters of vital importance to afford me an opportunity to give your case that consideration which justice to yourself, no less than to the Department, requires."
"On the same day the Secretary, by letter, instructed the Commissioner of Customs as follows:"
" The compensation of Harrison Johnston, assistant special agent to this department, whose appointment is dated May 8, 1865, has been fixed at $6 per day, with an allowance to cover traveling expenses of 10 cents per mile for all distances actually traveled by him, and commissions on the cotton collected by him at the same rate as is allowed to other assistant agents, in accordance with general letter of instructions dated August 18, 1865. You are accordingly hereby authorized to issue a requisition in the usual form for his per diem allowance at that rate to date and for such mileage as he may be entitled to. For the present, no payments on commissions or percentage account are made to any agents."
"On the sixteenth March, 1866, the defendant was directed by the Secretary to answer certain charges made in letters received by the department from General Agent Mellen, to which the defendant replied in a letter to the Secretary on the same day containing the following passage:"
" I had the honor on yesterday to request you to instruct Mr. Draper to pay me my commissions, basing that request on the assurance that my answers to all charges were satisfactory, and my property account correct, not knowing then of these letters from Mr. Mellen. I now beg leave to withdraw the request until you are fully satisfied of my every official act."
"No further direct action was taken by the Secretary with reference to these changes of General Agent Mellen, or the defendant's reply thereto."
"On the sixth September, 1866, the defendant wrote to the
Secretary of the Treasury:"
" If there are no longer any reasons for withholding the commissions due me from the sale of cotton collected by me and forwarded to Mr. Draper, I will thank you for an order upon Mr. Draper to pay over to me commissions due me under regulations of August 18, 1865."
"To which the Secretary replied on the seventeenth September, 1866:"
" The numerous undecided claims upon the cotton collected by you make it inexpedient to award you at present the promised commissions on the net proceeds of sale of the amount of your collections."
"On the eighth January, 1867, the Secretary wrote the Commissioner of Customs as follows:"
" Hereafter, in the adjustment of accounts of agents of the Department who have been engaged in the collection of captured and abandoned property, you will make no requisition in favor of any of them for any balance that may be found due until the details of such account have been referred to me and you have received further instructions relative thereto."
"On the ninth March, 1867, the Secretary wrote to the Commissioner of Customs as follows:"
" As the various supervising and assistant special agents lately in office are claiming the amounts to which they deem themselves entitled as commissions on the proceeds of property collected by them under my general letter of instructions of August 18, 1865, you will please report to me the names of those whose property accounts, as well as money accounts, have been satisfactorily adjusted."
"To which the Commissioner replied on the twelfth March as follows:"
" In reply to your inquiry of the ninth inst., received this A.M., asking for the names of those agents whose property accounts have been examined and adjusted, I have to report that up to the present only money accounts have been adjusted."
"On the 13th March, 1867, the Secretary wrote to the Commissioner of Customs as follows:"
" Referring to your reply of yesterday to my inquiry of the ninth inst. relative to the property accounts of supervising and assistant special agents, I now request that you will transmit them to the First Auditor for immediate examination and adjustment. "
"On the 4th June, 1867, the defendant wrote the Secretary as follows:"
" I desire to be informed whether all claims for proceeds of cotton from my district have been adjusted, and whether there is any further objection to the payment of my commissions as assistant special agent of the Treasury Department."
"To which, on the 12th June, 1867, the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury replied:"
" The Secretary directs me to say that nothing can be done in the matter until the accounts of the New York agency and the various property accounts of the supervising special agents are collected and settled, which he has ordered to be done as speedily as practicable."
"On the 15th of January, 1868, the Secretary wrote to the Commissioner of Customs as follows:"
" You are hereby authorized and instructed to issue a requisition on F. E. Spinner, Treasurer, and U.S. Special Agent, in favor of Harrison Johnston, late assistant special agent, for the sum of $26,785.90, being the balance in full found due to him for commissions on the net proceeds of cotton collected by him, and sold in New York on government account, in accordance with my letter of August 18, 1865. The total amount earned by him under that letter is $31,785.90, on which he has had previously an advance of $5,000. The present requisition is for the balance. This requisition followed an adjustment of the balance at that sum communicated to the Secretary by the Commissioner of Customs in a letter dated January 15, 1868, and requesting a remittance to cover the same, and this amount was thereupon paid to Mr. Johnston."
"On the sixteenth of August, 1868, the First Auditor addressed to the Commissioner of Customs a letter containing a detailed statement of the defendant's property account, stating that he had examined and adjusted the same, charging him with 30,610 bales collected, and crediting him with the cotton shipped to Draper, paid to contractors in kind, and various other items of credit, as in the previous account rendered by the defendant, and passed by the Commissioner of Customs, and included the following credits: "
By cotton sold to pay expenses . . . . . . . . 55 bales
" " " and proceeds paid military
officers for protecting cotton
from being burned and stolen
by raiders . . . . . . . . . . . 428 bales
"At the foot of this account so stated the Commissioner added:"
" Admitted and certified. N. SARGENT"
Commissioner of Customs
"On the twenty-seventh of February, 1869, the Commissioner of Customs wrote the defendant as follows:"
" Your account as Assistant Special Agent of the Treasury Department at Columbus, Mississippi, on account of captured and abandoned property, for cotton received and disposed of, has been adjusted and closed on the books of the department."
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the Court.
By the Act of March 13, 1863, providing for the collection of abandoned property, it was made lawful for the Secretary of the Treasury, as from time to time he should see fit, to appoint a special agent or agents to receive and collect all abandoned or captured property -- other than property used, or intended to be used, for carrying on war against the United States -- in any portion of any state or territory designated as in insurrection against the lawful government of the United States by the President's proclamation of July 1, 1862. The second section provided that
"Any part of the goods or property received or collected by such agent or agents may be appropriated to public use on due appraisement and certificate thereof, or forwarded to any place of sale
within the loyal states as the public interests may require, and all sales of such property shall be at auction to the highest bidder, and the proceeds thereof shall be paid into the Treasury of the United States."
The third section directed the Secretary to cause a book or books of account to be kept, showing from whom such property was received, the cost of transportation, and the proceeds of the sale thereof. The owner was given the right, within a prescribed period, to prefer his claims to the proceeds in the Court of Claims, and on proof of his right to the same, and that he had not given any aid or comfort to the Rebellion,
"to receive the residue of such proceeds, after the deduction of any purchase money which may have been paid, together with the expenses of transportation and sale of said property, and any other lawful expenses attending the disposition thereof."
But the Act of July 2, 1864, 13 Stat. 375, c. 225, greatly enlarged the powers of the Secretary of the Treasury in reference to captured and abandoned property. The first section authorized sales of such property, under the act of 1863, to be made "at such places, in states declared in insurrection, as may be designated by the Secretary of the Treasury, as well as at other places" authorized by the original act. In addition to the property to be received, collected, and disposed of as provided in the act of 1863, the agents, approved by the Secretary, were required to take charge of and lease the abandoned lands, houses, and tenements within the districts therein named, and provide, in such leases or otherwise, for the employment and general welfare of all persons, within the lines of national military occupation in the insurrectionary states, formerly held as slaves, who are or shall become free. Sec. 2. It was also provided that all moneys arising from the leasing of abandoned lands, houses, and tenements, or from sales of captured and abandoned property, collected and sold in pursuance of the act of 1863 or of the act of 1864,
"shall, after satisfying therefrom all proper and necessary expenses, to be approved by the Secretary of the Treasury, be paid into the Treasury of the United States, and all accounts of moneys received or expended in connection therewith shall be audited
by the proper accounting officers of the Treasury."
Sec. 3. By the eleventh section of the same act, it is provided that
"The Secretary of the Treasury, with the approval of the President, shall make such rules and regulations as are necessary to secure the proper and economical execution of the provisions of this act, and shall defray all expenses of such execution from the proceeds of fees imposed by said rules and regulations, of sales of captured and abandoned property, and of sales hereinbefore authorized."
It is quite clear that while the approval of the President was made essential to the validity of all rules and regulations in relation to captured and abandoned property, the entire administration of the system devised by Congress for the collection of such property within the insurrectionary districts, and its sale thereafter, was committed to the Secretary of the Treasury. Upon him alone was imposed the responsibility in the first instance of making rules and regulations for the "proper and economical execution" of the statutes in question, through agents whom he should designate. Congress was aware of the unsettled condition of that part of the country dominated by the military power of the insurrectionary government, and recognized the necessity of investing some one officer with full authority to decide what expenses were fairly chargeable against the proceeds of captured and abandoned property. Such authority was conferred upon the Secretary of the Treasury, subject to no other restriction than that the expenses charged upon the proceeds of sales be "proper and necessary," and be approved by him. But no rule was prescribed for his guidance in determining what expenses were to be regarded as of that character, for the reason, perhaps, that as each collection and sale of captured and abandoned property must depend upon its special circumstances, it was not practicable to establish a rule that would control every case. As no expenses could be charged against the proceeds of any sale except upon the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, and as his discretion must have been exercised with reference to the special facts of each case, his approval of an account of expenses in relation to the collection chanrobles.com-red
and sale of any particular lot of captured and abandoned property should be deemed conclusive evidence that such expenses were proper and necessary unless it appeared that the allowance of such expenses was procured by fraud, or that the expenses were incurred in violation of some positive statute, or of public policy. It is impossible to suppose that Congress intended that every such account, after being approved by the Secretary, should be subject to review by some subordinate officer of the Treasury, or even by the courts, and to be disallowed merely because, in the judgment of that officer or of the courts, such expenses should not have been incurred.
It is, however, contended that the words in the third section of the act of 1864, "all accounts of moneys received or expended in connection therewith shall be audited by the proper accounting officers of the Treasury," negative the supposition that those officers cannot disallow expenses incurred in the collection and sale of captured and abandoned property which the Secretary may have approved as proper and necessary. By "proper accounting officers of the Treasury," in that statute, it is contended is meant the First Auditor and the First Comptroller. It is consequently argued that the settlement upon which the defendant relies constitutes no obstacle to the examination of the items of his accounts.
The Act of March 3, 1817, c. 45, § 2, 3 Stat. 366, provides that
"All claims and demands whatever by the United States, or against them, and all accounts whatever in which the United States are concerned, either as debtors or creditors, shall be settled and adjusted in the Department of the Treasury."
By the same act, it was made one of the duties of the First Comptroller to examine all accounts settled by the First Auditor, and certify the balances arising thereon to the register. And among the duties of the First Auditor is that of receiving and examining all accounts accruing in the Treasury Department, certifying the balance due on such accounts, and transmitting the same, with the vouchers and certificates, to the First Comptroller for his decision thereon. These provisions have been preserved, and constitute §§ 236, 269, 277 of the Revised Statutes. It is contended in behalf chanrobles.com-red
of the defendant that the accounts which the third section of the act of 1864 required to be "audited by the proper accounting officers of the Treasury" were strictly money accounts, as distinguished from property accounts, whereas the accounts of the defendant in respect of the 483 bales of cotton in question belong, it is insisted, to the latter class. The referee, in his opinion, says:
"What took place in this case was this: the defendant, having finished the work of his agency, was called upon by the Secretary of the Treasury to settle his property accounts. The defendant presented himself at the Treasury Department, appeared before the officers designated by the Secretary for the purpose of adjusting accounts of that character, and put in a claim to be credited with the 483 bales in question. As to this, he claimed that he had expended on behalf of the government, and as necessary disbursements in the execution of the duties of his agency, a sum considerably exceeding the value of the 483 bales for which he acknowledged himself liable to account. It would have been competent and proper for the Secretary or the accounting officer to have treated this claim for disbursements as a money account, which would then, according to the routine of the office at that time, have gone to the First Auditor for examination. That this was not done is, however at most, an irregularity. The Secretary had authority and jurisdiction, however, to settle and adjust the defendant's property account, and this he did, making this offset or allowance. He thereby necessarily passed and approved the expenses in question, both as to their nature as necessary and proper and as to their amount, and by the statute this question was confided to his exclusive determination. Upon the basis of this adjustment of the property account, the defendant's account for commissions was duly adjusted and paid by order of the Secretary. In fact, the Department twice thus acted on the basis of the adjustment of the defendant's property account."
While there is much force in this view of the case, we do not deem it necessary to decide whether the accounts of defendant, in respect to the 483 bales of cotton, were required chanrobles.com-red
by the statute of 1864 to be audited by the First Auditor and transmitted to the First Comptroller for his decision thereon. If the act of 1864 should be held to have required this, it would not follow that those officers could have disregarded the action of the Secretary of the Treasury in allowing the expenses in question. In auditing those accounts, they would have been bound to regard such action of the Secretary as final. What was said in United States v. Jones, 18 How. 96, may be repeated here as applicable to accounts which have been finally acted upon by a head of department, invested with authority in the premises. There, the question was as to the right of accounting officers to review the action of the Secretary of the Navy in approving certain disbursements made by an officer of the navy in conformity with the orders of the Secretary. This Court said:
"The accounting officers of the Treasury have not the burden of responsibility cast upon them of revising the judgments, correcting the supposed mistakes, or annulling the orders of heads of departments."
See McKnight v. United States, 13 Ct.Cl. 298, 309.
But, waiving any decision as to the power of accounting officers under the act of 1864, it is sufficient for this case to say that the Secretary of the Treasury proceeded upon the ground that the defendant's accounts in reference to this cotton were property accounts, the settlement of which belonged to him exclusively, and that such settlement could be made by him personally or through such of his subordinates as he might designate for that purpose. In Rice v. United States, 21 Ct.Cl. 419, it was said by Richardson, C.J.,who was entirely familiar with the mode of conducting business in the Treasury Department, that
"While Mr. Chase was Secretary of the Treasury and for some time afterwards, the money received from captured and abandoned property was merely deposited with the Treasurer, and was not technically, in departmental language, 'covered into the Treasury,' and so, according to the construction then given by the Department, was not subject to the constitutional provision that 'no money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law.' Constitution, Art. 1,
§ 9, par. 6. More than two and a half millions of it was paid out by Secretaries Chase, Fessenden, and McCulloch (Hodges' Case, 18 Ct.Cl. 704) without any appropriations therefor, when Congress interposed, and passed the joint resolution of March 31, 1868. 15 Stat. 251."
By that joint resolution, it was provided that
"All moneys which have been received by any officer or employee of the government, or any department thereof, from sales of captured and abandoned property in the late insurrectionary districts, under or under color of the several acts of Congress providing for the collection and sale of such property, and which have not already been actually covered into the Treasury, shall immediately be paid into the Treasury of the United States, together with any interest which has been received or accrued thereon."
The language of this resolution affords some evidence that Congress was aware of the manner in which the several acts relating to captured and abandoned property had been executed, and did not intend to disturb what had been previously done under the practice prevailing in the Treasury Department.
In view of the foregoing facts, the case comes fairly within the rule, often announced by this Court that the contemporaneous construction of a statute by those charged with its execution, especially when it has long prevailed, is entitled to great weight and should not be disregarded or overturned except for cogent reasons and unless it be clear that such construction is erroneous. 25 U. S. 210; United States v. Moore, 95 U. S. 760; Hahn v. United States, 107 U. S. 402; United States v. Philbrick,@ 120 U. S. 52, 120 U. S. 59.
We have said that the approval by the Secretary of the Treasury of an agent's account of expenses in the collection and sale of captured and abandoned property would not be conclusive if it appeared either that such approval was procured by fraud or that such expenses were incurred in violation of some positive statute or in contravention of public policy. Much was said at the argument to the effect that the transactions of the defendant were based upon fraud; that he withheld or suppressed evidence that it was in his power chanrobles.com-red
to produce, and that what he did was calculated to debauch military officers to whom money was paid by him for the performance of services, in respect to which they were forbidden by law to accept compensation. It is only necessary to say that the findings of fact do not sustain these propositions. The record contains nothing to justify this Court in holding that the defendant had been guilty of any fraud that would invalidate the settlement of his accounts with the government. Taking the findings of fact to be correct, as is our duty to do, we must assume that the payments made by the defendant of the allowance of which complaint is now made
"were made necessary by the unsettled state of the country, the great accumulation of the cotton which the railroad company was unable to transport, the danger of theft and robbery, and the interference of other agents or persons claiming to be agents of the Treasury Department, and of military officers,"
and, in respect to what are called military payments, that they
"were all made in the bona fide belief that they were necessary to protect the interests of the United States in the cotton, to secure increased vigilance, or to prevent connivance with parties interfering with, or attempting to interfere with, the cotton."
The utmost that the record establishes is that there were irregularities, perhaps carelessness, in the final closing of defendant's account with the government. It may be that he should have been required to present more satisfactory evidence than it may be supposed from the record he did in fact present. These considerations, however, even if entitled to weight as matter of law, lose much force after the lapse of years without action upon them by the government. The defendant ought not now to be held to the same strictness of proof that might justly have been required of him when all the circumstances connected with the cotton in question could have been readily established by competent evidence. We are of opinion that no case is made by the government to invalidate the settlement of defendant's accounts. We concur with the referee when he says that
"It would be an exceedingly dangerous doctrine that settled accounts, where the United States had acted on the settlement and paid the balance
found due on the basis of that settlement, could be opened or set aside merely because some of the prescribed steps in the accounting which it was the duty of a head of a department to see had been taken had been in fact omitted, or if they could be so opened and set aside on account of technical irregularities in the allowance of expenses years afterwards, when the remedy of the party against the United States is barred by the statute of limitations and the remedies of the United States on the other side are intact, owing to its not being subject to any act of limitation."
The facts found being sufficient to support the judgment, it is


text:
Illinois promised its employees generous pensions. But didn't face the music and set aside enough money to make it possible to pay what they promised. They bought votes with phantom money. But payback time has arrived. How do they turn phantom dollars into real ones?
Surprise! By picking your pockets. Do you want to take money out of your wallet to reward the politicians of Illinois for this folly? They expect you to. They have convinced themselves that the federal government - your tax dollars - will guarantee their pension obligations. Here "guarantee" means "pay for."
Fortunately there is push back, both in Illinois and in Congress. Illinois Policy Institute opposes a federal bail out.
(Now that this Illinois group has called out Quinn he has back tracked and said the controversial wording was a drafting error.)
Citizens Against Government Waste named Illinois Governor Pat Quinn its Porker of the Month for September, 2012.


text:
Riding in deep, sticky snow just got a whole lot easier. 45NRTH's Helva pedals feature an open CNC-forged body that excels at shedding snow. Its super thin 9mm profile gives you maximum clearance while cornering and riding in deep ruts, plus they're light. Sealed DU bearings keep them spinning smooth and replacement pin kits are available (sold separately) in seven different colors so you can color-coordinate your rig.
- Size: 110mm wide x 100mm long x 9mm high
- Spindle diameter: 9/16-inch
- Weight: 308 grams
Part Numbers
Option | UPC | MPN | Store SKU |
Platform / Black | 708752084414 | PD4500 | 45N30525732K |


text:
Need a Contractor in Miami Lakes? We got you covered!
Master Painting & Remodeling INC is a premier painting and remodeling company serving all Miami Lakes and South Florida. Owned and operated by Rod M, Master Painting and Remodeling INC has been providing businesses and residents with exceptional general contractor services since 2006. The company now offers not only superb painting services, but offers clients quality complete remodeling services as well.
Dedicated to creating beautiful, efficient, and functional environments at affordable rates and with exceptional workmanship, we are committed to 100% customer satisfaction.
With several highly-skilled teams of painters, tile layers, installation professionals, MP&R is capable of handling multiple jobs at once. Striving for perfection in all aspects of their business, Rod is conscientious about the details of every project Master Painting and Remodeling INC undertakes.
We never take short cuts, never cut corners. We strive to offer our clients the best the Miami Lakes and South Florida has to offer in the way of residential and commercial painting, renovation and remodeling services.
Master Painting and Remodeling INC uses the highest quality products in all its projects. Passionate about providing customers with style and comfort, Rod M goes the extra mile to obtain the perfection customers want. Rod himself is a "hands-on" contractor. He works with his team of professional painters and remodelers to make sure every project is handled efficiently and to the customer's specifications and satisfaction.
Do you want a warranty that you can count on?
If you're like us, you want the things that most commonly go wrong to be covered under the warranty. Nothing is more frustrating than to find out that the most common things that go wrong with a product or service are not covered. When our name is on a project we completed, we want it looking good for as long as it can. Our reputation depends on it. That's why we stand behind our work and offer more value to our customers.
Our warranties are an extension of our maximum quality and they cover any issue with the materials and workmanship during the duration of your warranty and you get to choose between our standard warranty or extended warranty.
Choosing a color scheme is a great way to infuse your home with elegance and individuality, ensuring that it suits your personality and lifestyle. Yet for many homeowners, the sheer variety of colors and combinations is intimidating and overwhelming. You don't need to abandon your dreams, however; Master Painting and Remodeling is here to help!
As a full-service painting company, Master Painting and Remodeling is pleased to offer professional color consultations. Our experienced consultants and designers can help you craft the perfect color palette, whether it is a single room, your whole house, or your offices. This valuable service ensures that your new painting project achieves the look and feel that reflect your style and taste.
More Help: Sherwin Williams Color
As a new college student you don't have a lot of money to do anything with.
I got a very nice paint job for my room for a very decent price i was surprised at how easy and neat the paint was applied, I absolutely loved
the job. AMAZING!
Had an amazing experience with Master Painting and Remodeling! They were able to understand what I wanted and make recommendations. After the superb interior paint job, kitchen, and bathroom remodeling, I can say my house feels like a home.
Incredible folks here, I bought a brand new townhome that they had the contract for and when I closed, they were recommended by one of the engineers on the job, they did above and beyond what I could've imagined...and reasonably priced!!!!
218 Commercial Blvd #207
Lauderdale-By-The-Sea, FL 33308
80 S.W. 8th Street, Suite 2000
Miami, FL 33130
433 Plaza Real, Suite 275
Boca Raton, FL 33432
We are committed to communicating with you in a professional manner and protecting your confidential information. We use the information you provide (e.g. name, address, phone number, email, etc.) to contact you to share information about our (products/services). We will not share your information with any third party outside of our organization, other than as necessary to fulfill your request. This company does not sell, trade or rent your personal information to others.
Please contact us to correct or update information at any time.


text:
Style No. VIN071223-AS— This item is Awesome!
All items are final sale. No returns, exchanges, or refunds.
From Linen to Velvet galore ,our Dresses, Jumpers, Robes, Kimonos are perfect for styling your wardrobe.
Good Condition, Original Unaltered Condition, See Photos
Overall Dimensions:
Waist: 18.75"
Length: 33.75"
*Our vintage items may have occasional wear, damage, or character flaws. Feel free to reach out to our team with any questions, comments, or concerns.*
This is from the Sunbeam Collection


text:
Today's international actions are a continuation of the international actions of July 24th and August 28, 2010. They are yet another reflection of the solidarity of people around the world with the people of Iran, who have risen heroically to bring down the Islamic regime of stoning and qesas and hijab and torture and execution. Today, once again, we declare that this regime is the murderer of Iranian people and the shame of humanity. It must be replaced by a humane government.
Flogging and stoning and execution and imprisonment and torture are political tools of this government, used to terrorize the society and suppress the rising wave of peoples' protests. And today, people all over the world identify the Islamic Republic with this savagery. People around the world have very well realized that this is a religious, reactionary and misogynist government that has forcibly imposed a system of gender apartheid, reactionary sharia law and total denial of legal rights upon Iranian people.
Today, on the 18th of September 2010, as a continuation of the demands of the 100 Cities of the World protests on August 28, we declare our demands as follows:
1. We fully support the struggle of Iranian people against this savage, religious regime. We declare that the path to freedom for Iranian people is not through threats, military incursions, or economic sanctions, but rather is through the force of peoples' struggle in Iran and all across the world to pull down the Islamic Republic.
2. Flogging, stoning, execution and torture should be abolished. We demand that the United Nations, in a special resolution, unequivocally forbids these kinds of punishments in all countries.
3. We demand that Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani and all of those who have been imprisoned on charges of extramarital sexual relationships or homosexuality, as well as all political prisoners, should be freed from the Islamic Republic's prisons immediately.
4. We declare that the Islamic Regime of Stoning should not be recognized as the Iranian government. This regime should be expelled from all international organizations, and all political contacts with it should be severed. We declare that the leaders of the Islamic Republic should be prosecuted in international court on charges of 31 years of genocide, mass executions of tens of thousands of political prisoners, gender apartheid, imprisonment, torture, execution, rape, and Islamic sharia's inhumane punishments, all of which are flagrant violations of all international conventions and agreements.
We, along with the Iranian people, will continue our struggle until we achieve our demands. As an urgent action we strongly demand that Ahmadinejad, the president of the Regime of Stoning, be banned from the United Nations' General Assembly in September 2010.


text:
Gaffney's 'Summit' in Nevada a Nonstop Procession of Extremism, Conspiracism — and Candidates
The Center for Security Policy puts a veneer of normalcy on a daylong program of fearmongering and conspiracy, even as it's being courted by GOP presidential candidates.
President Obama is a secret Muslim conspiring to destroy the United States and is using the Justice Department to squelch anti-Muslim speech. Liberals are covertly working with radical Islamists to transform the country into a radical socialist state while Muslims are pouring over our borders. Hillary Clinton is not only a liar and criminal, she is likely blackmailing the FBI director and other authorities to keep out of prison.
All these theories and many more were featured Monday at the Nevada version of the Center for Security Policy's "National Security Action Summit" at the International Peace Education Center in Las Vegas, a meeting hall owned by the Unification Church. It was everything its chief organizer, noted anti-Muslim extremist Frank Gaffney, could have hoped for.
Gaffney's CSP has been riding high on the tidal wave of Islamophobia he and similar anti-Muslim organizations have created, with the help of right-wing political candidates who have legitimized their dubious and often outrageous claims. CSP made headlines this past week when Donald Trump, the leading Republican presidential candidate, cited dubious statistics generated by Gaffney's group in defending his proposal for a ban on all immigration by Muslims into the United States.
Indeed, Monday's gathering was timed and located to coincide with Tuesday's GOP presidential debate at the Las Vegas Hilton, the better to attract the participation of the candidates. Gaffney's hopes were largely realized: Four candidates participated in the gathering, three of them (Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, and Ben Carson) via videotaped messages, and one – Rick Santorum – in person. The procession underscored the extent to which CSP's extremism has been embraced by ostensibly mainstream conservatives.
That extremism was on full, if not constant, display Monday. By the end of the eight-hour conference, attendees had been treated to a nonstop cavalcade of extremism and conspiracy.
Leading off the parade was a retired Navy admiral, James "Ace" Lyons, who claimed that not only had President Obama "embraced" the Muslim Brotherhood, but that its radical Islamists had infiltrated the nation's security agencies and the administration itself (a claim he has made previously). Lyons frequently seized the microphone to ramble about various topics, including gays in the military and women in combat, even at the end of other speakers' appearances during question-and-answer sessions.
His official speech was mostly an extended rant about Obama's supposed Muslim affinities:
You understand that we have not only a constitutional crisis, because our Congressional leadership fails to understand why they were given that leadership role. It was to stop the fundamental transformation of America – not to facilitate it.
But it was [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan, the prime minister of Turkey, who said it best: "Islam is Islam. There are no modifiers. Democracy is the train we ride to our ultimate objective, which is imposing Sharia law throughout the world, and replacing our Constitution with Sharia law." [Note: While Erdogan did say "There is no moderate or immoderate Islam -- Islam is Islam and that's it," the remark was widely interpreted as arguing against the legitimacy of radical Islamists. Erdogan also is credited, somewhat dubiously, with saying that "Democracy is the train we get off once we reach our destination," he has never said anything regarding the imposition of Sharia law.] What else needs to be said? So here we go. I've gotta say: We cannot let this stand. We have to take up and challenge everything by this administration.
… You know, for those of you who say the Obama administration has no policy, well let me tell you, you're all wrong. They have a policy, and they've been executing it brilliantly – with the complicity of our Congressional leadership, and the mainstream media. And let me tell you – any thinking American can grasp it. It's anti-American, anti-Western, but pro-Islam, pro-Iranian and pro-Muslim Brotherhood.
I have to ask you: Why would an American president embrace the Muslim Brotherhood when their creed is to destroy America from within by our own miserable hands and replace our constitution with Sharia law? It makes absolutely no sense.
And here is a group that has been able to penetrate all our national-security agencies, our intelligence agencies, and have had a massive impact on our rules of engagement, our foreign policy. This has got to stop.
Lyons also turned his venom toward Clinton, calling her "the pathological liar" and castigating her for her role in the so-called Benghazi scandal, which Republicans and right-wing media generated by claiming that Clinton had ordered American forces to "stand down" rather than rescue the American ambassador to Libya who was killed in the incident. Lyons claimed that "we switched sides in the war on terror, we facilitated the Al Qaeda militia and the Muslim Brotherhood."
Lyons also claimed that administration officials had committed crimes by lying to Congress:
"What more do you need? All of our senior leadership – [CIA directors Leon Panetta, David Petraeus, and Michael Hayden, as well as Gen. Martin Dempsey, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] – all lied before a congressional committee. They must be held responsible. Those are felonies. You go to jail for 15 years."
Lyons was followed by Mark Krikorian of the anti-immigrant Center for Immigration Studies, which specializes in manufacturing dubious statistics and pseudo-academic "studies" purporting to support various smear-driven claims against immigrants, and which has a history of dalliances with white nationalists.
Krikorian, whose remarks were delivered via videotape, focused on Trump's proposed Muslim immigration, which he dismissed as a "crude, sledgehammer approach." However, he also defended its legitimacy, saying the matter was "not a constitutional issue" since "there is no right for foreigners to come to the United States."
He went on to explain his own proposal for dealing with Muslim immigrants:
This is purely a question of 'is it good policy to simply keep all Muslims out of the United States, or not?' The way it's formulated by Mr. Trump is not good policy, certainly not in my opinion. Because the issue is not keeping out anyone who identifies as a Muslim, or is identified as a Muslim. Rather, the issue is to keep out people who adhere to the political aspects of Islam. If someone prays five times a day and fasts during Ramadan, that's none of anybody's business. But, someone who supports killing homosexuals, killing adulterers, using the law to punish blasphemers, that sort of thing – the Sharia aspect of Islam, rather than the strictly religious parts of it. That, we can and should exclude people for.
And there are a number of ways we can do it. The simplest, first thing to do is to use ideological exclusion – that's a provision, a concept that's been in the law, or was in the law for a long time, that a person who wasn't actually a member of a totalitarian party, isn't actually a terrorist or using violence but still expresses support for essentially overthrowing the Constitution or replacing the Constitution can be kept out, should be kept out.
We changed the law after the Cold War, thinking history had ended. We need to reinstitute that idea so that on visa applications and what have you, we ask some very basic, lowest-common-denominator types of questions: Do you support freedom of speech for people, even if it insults religious sensibilities? Do you support freedom of religion, or changing religions? And you know, some people will lie, but we will be setting a marker, you know – these are things that are not permitted, that Islamic supremacism has no place in the American constitutional order or American society.
Krikorian is referring to laws passed in the 1950s during the height of anti-Communist hysteria, notably the 1950 Internal Security Act (which excluded communists, totalitarians, and fascists from immigrating) and the 1952 Walter-McCarran Act, which further codified those exclusions. Those exclusions were largely overturned in the Immigration Act of 1990, which limited the exclusion of aliens to those whose "entry or proposed activities within the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences."
However, the kind of exclusion that Krikorian favors is actually present in current immigration law, which requires that applicants be "attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same." There also remain several ideological bars, including "advocates of assassination, government overthrow by force, destruction of property, and sabotage."
Krikorian's comparatively reasonable remarks shortly gave way to a presentation by James Simpson, introduced by Gaffney as an "investigative journalist" and the author of The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration, and the Agenda to Erase America, a book available for free online at CSP's website. Simpson has previously promoted similar conspiracy theories, including one claiming that communists were behind major Latino-rights organizations.
Simpson's latest bête noire is the U.S.'s refugee-resettlement program, which he claimed is providing "extreme leftists" all the pretext they need to "fundamentally transform America." According to Gaffney, Simpson travels the country providing training sessions for anti-Muslim activists in communities dealing with an influx of refugees under these programs, which are all overseen by a nefarious United Nations and its cabal of conspirators who want to "erase America."
He opened his presentation by claiming a quote from a supposed 1960s left-wing radical (actually sourced as an unnamed "SDS radical" ostensibly quoted by right-wing pundit David Horowitz) that he claimed showed their true nature: "The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution."
What he meant was that issues for them – and it doesn't matter. You can pick immigration, gay rights, welfare, civil rights, it doesn't matter. The issue for them is only relevant insofar as it can be used as a vehicle to advance them into positions of power so that they can move forward with the fundamental transformation of this country into a leftist – God knows what. Yes, thank you – socialism.
… This is what we are up against. And the resettlement immigration open-borders agenda is a perfect vehicle for the Left to complete its agenda. And let's just be clear about it. This is not a new agenda. It's been going on since the dawn of time. These are simply unscrupulous people, corrupt people who are willing to use any and every tactic to insinuate themselves into positions of power. That's all it is.
Socialism puts a pretty face on it – 'We're here to help the little guy.' No we're not. We're here to insinuate ourselves into power, suck all resources into the federal government, so we can redistribute to our friends and people who are gonna support us. That's what it's about.
The resettlement immigration issue is perfect for that. We're all seeing it. It dilutes American culture by bringing in people from all over the world of disparate cultures who have no understanding of our Constitution, no understanding of the rule of law, no interest in any of that, but only what American society can provide in benefits to them.
They will not support the notion of a constitutional Republican government. That is what is critical and essential, that's what has made us special, that's what's made us the most prosperous nation in the world, and that's what the Left wants to destroy, because it's standing in the way.
Simpson explained that the United Nations is the center of this leftist conspiracy, working in cahoots with Islamist radicals to allow in more extremists. Their main vehicle, he claimed, is refugee resettlement.
As evidence of the danger, he claimed that "at least two Paris attackers entered as refugees" (in reality, the only supposed refugee passports found near the bodies carried of two of the ISIS terrorists who killed 140 people in Paris in mid-November are now considered fakes).
And he touted the growing "pockets of resistance" in communities, particularly smaller rural towns such as Twin Falls, Idaho, and Duncan, S.C., where there is growing resistance (some of it led by extremist militiamen) to the possibility that refugees from Syria might be relocated in their midst.
Simpson claimed that these communities face demonization at the hands of "leftist" organizations such as the SPLC:
The resettlement agencies and their various supporters actually went forward and created this campaign designed specifically to oppose these pockets of resistance. And it's an organized nationwide campaign of vilification. Guess what? Can you just fill in the blanks? What is anybody who opposes the out-of-control, insane refugee resettlement program? You wanna fill in the blank? "Racist! Bigot! Xenophobe! You're all bad people!"
And it's an organized effort using the Southern Poverty Law Center and other organizations funded by George Soros and other radical leftist organizations. They're trying to change the culture by changing the narrative. And it's a massive, massive operation.
But people are fighting back all over the country. And we call ourselves pockets of resistance. That's what we're doing. We're resisting them.
Simpson was shortly followed by a video presentation from right-wing stalwart Phyllis Schlafly, who has made a career out of leading a number of arch-conservative political battles, beginning with women's rights and continuing with battles over gay rights and education. But it was immigration and refugee resettlement that were her main focus Monday.
She opened with praise for Gaffney and the CPS:
The American people need someone to alert them to the dangers to our sovereignty. … Illegal immigration is a tremendous attack on our sovereignty. Because the people coming in don't necessarily want to be Americans, they don't want to speak English, they don't want to adopt our ways. They want to help Obama engage in his transformation of the United States of America. But we think we have a perfectly wonderful country, and we want to make it great again.
Obama seems to want to bring into our country anybody who shows up at the border, but we need to be careful about who we let into our country. We want people to come who love us, who want to be Americans.
A few months ago, I wrote about the Syrian immigrants, and they are a real danger. And it's not only the people who might be vetted – and I don't think they are vetted when they come in – but even if they were, we find that the next generation of people can be easily radicalized. And they are a danger right in the midst of our country.
Just before lunch, Gaffney introduced Connie Foust, the self-proclaimed "Border Granny" who has made a career as a nativist border watcher based in Arizona.
Foust had a long and colorful career, beginning in 2005, as one of the leaders of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, where, as she described for the audience she eventually became "national border operations director for Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas."
The MCDC, however, has been defunct since 2010, and its onetime leader, Chris Simcox, is currently awaiting trial in Phoenix on two counts of child molestation. Nowadays, as Foust explained, she is primarily involved with another Arizona border-watch operation called Project Bluelight.
Project Bluelight is run by a resident of Arizona's Altar Valley, south of Tuscon in the desert borderlands, named Joe Adams. Adams is something of a shadowy figure himself, with a background as a CIA operative and drug smuggler. He was indicted in 1988 for violations of the Neutrality Act as a result of his work helping to fund (often through drug smuggling) and organize the right-wing Contra death squads in Nicaragua in the 1980s, and he later became a private investigator with ties to the Jimmy Hoffa family.
He told a reporter he was naturally attracted to the Minutemen and first joined Chris Simcox's Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in 2006, but he then left (saying MCDC was "a bunch of people who want to do a good job but don't know what they're doing") to eventually form his own offshoot, which he called Project Bluelight, suggesting that it operates with the tacit cooperation of law enforcement ("blue light" being law enforcement lingo for proceeding with the blessing of police).
Adams also had a yearlong, frequently contentious association with onetime Minuteman border-watch leader Shawna Forde, whom he met when she showed up to promote her own border-watch outfit at a Bluelight border-watch operation. Forde was later charged and convicted in the murders of an Arivaca, Arizona, marijuana smuggler and his nine-year-old daughter in their home in the early morning hours of May 30, 2009, and now sits on Arizona's Death Row. Adams sent Forde an email breaking off their association the same day the murders took place.
During her speech, Foust described Project Bluelight as "some pretty cool guys" and added: "These are American patriots like no other." Then she went on to claim that the border watchers had "assisted over the course of these years the Department of Homeland Security, ICE and Border Patrol in the apprehension of 10,000 persons plus. They have seized over 200 loads of narcotics, they have rescued over 100 persons in distress."
"We have no interest in the worker coming over for a better life. We have an interest in securing our border so we can all have life."
She then went on to describe in detail how she and other border watchers had observed Muslims coming over the border with "full beards" and "prayer rugs," and claimed she had the video to prove it.
The extremism and conspiracism reached a real fever pitch, however, when right-wing pundit Wayne Allyn Root – who nowadays styles himself as "the poor man's Donald Trump" – took to the stage.
Root covered a range of topics. He opened up by ranting against Obamacare, claiming that President Obama nakedly lied in his claims while selling it to the American public. "Now, if I do that, I'm in prison for life like Bernie Madoff," he said. "It's called fraud. Someone needs to hold them accountable. Someone needs to put people in jail."
He called Obama the "worst gambler, degenerate gambler in history" because he is someone who "makes bets he cannot win" and he is "betting with your money and your children's lives."
Root also joined in castigating plans to bring in Syrian refugees, and also claimed that he had eyewitness accounts of Muslims coming over the Mexico border.
"No one gives a damn in the media, they don't care," he said.
Because their agenda is helping Obama, supporting Obama, defending Obama, championing Obama, and soon it will be helping, championing, and supporting Hillary Clinton, even though we all know in this room that if it was a Republican guilty of everything Hillary's guilty of, he'd be in prison for the next 20 years. Everyone knows that."
The crimes that Hillary Clinton has committed, no Republican on Earth could get away with – and I'm not talking about Benghazi, I'm not talking about the emails, I'm not talking about the secret surveillance emails.
All I'm talking about is: Can you imagine a Republican Secretary of State working for a Republican president starting a foundation for charity that collects money from foreign governments by the hundreds of millions and billions and then takes the money and hands out government contracts to the same country that made the contribution from the State Department? That's not a criminal offense, that's a hanging, treasonous offense.
During the question-and-answer session, a member of the audience asked Root "when we are going to nail Hillary. Is she gonna go to jail?" Root replied that he wasn't sure: "I don't know if Comey, the FBI director, is totally on the straight-and-narrow."
"I believe we've got massive blackmail going on in the United States government," he said. "The NSA, the IRS, their goal is to find out everything about Republicans — not everybody. Republicans."
"They want to know everything about us, especially Republican politicians in Washington, D.C., and then they blackmail them," he explained. "Is Comey susceptible to that? I have no idea, but I certainly have my suspicions about the Supreme Court justice of the United States voting twice for Obamacare."
The day wrapped up with a series of appearances from GOP presidential candidates, who themselves managed to pile on with more extremism.
That was especially the case with Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, whose 15-minute video message ran earlier in the day. Cruz also had praise for Gaffney, who he described as a "patriot" who "has been attacked over and over again for having the courage to stand up and speak the name 'radical Islamic terrorism' of the enemy that is waging jihad against us."
He then went on to claim that President Obama was using the Department of Justice to "attack the First Amendment" by threatening anyone critical of Muslims with prosecution:
It raises the specter that Americans will be labeled as bigots if they dare utter the word "Islam" in connection with a terrorist attack. Our president refuses to do so – in fact, he spent a significant portion of his Sunday address as an apologist for Islam.
… And the Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, told a gathering the day after the attacks in San Bernardino, that her department would move to prosecute anyone whose, quote, "anti-Muslim rhetoric edged toward violence." As has been the case all too often in the Obama administration, we may be facing the weaponization of one of our own government agencies, deployed not to protect Americans, but to try to force them to submit to the Obama administration's code of what is and is not acceptable speech.
Cruz did not, however, acknowledge or address the wave of hate crimes and ugly attacks on Muslims that followed immediately in the wake of the San Bernadino murder spree.
The day's events ended with the Senator Rick Santorum and the videotaped messages from fellow GOP candidates Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson, giving Gaffney and the CSP exactly what they wanted: a stamp of approval from mainstream political leaders of all the conspiracy and extremism that came before it.


text:
Bahaar Pink Frilled Dress
Bahaar Pink Frilled Dress
Size Chart
Size Chart
- All the above-mentioned measurements are in inches.
- This standard size guide mentions body measurements.
- The length of garment will vary according to style unless customized.
Measurement Guidelines
- Measurements should be taken directly on your body.
- Measure around the fullest part of your bust with arms down by your side.
- Measure around the narrowest part of your waistline, above your navel and below your ribcage.
- Measure around the fullest part of your hips.
Shipping & Delivery
Shipping & Delivery
We Ship Worldwide
The dispatch time is 10 Days
Delivery time ranges between 5 - 7 days after dispatch depending on where you are located.
This time frame might be affected due to public holidays, natural calamities & other unavoidable circumstances.
You shall receive a confirmation email of your order and another email from us after your order is dispatched containing tracking information.
Any kind of custom charges are to be borne by the recipient and we are not responsible for any kind of government charges or duties if applicable in your country upon delivery.
A pink solid georgette frilled dress with a round neck, short sleeves, and a flared hem designed with "Kashmiri Aari" embroidery.
The model is wearing size S.
Color: Hot Pink
Embroidery: Kashmiri Aari
Composition: Georgette
Fit: Tailored Fit
Wash Care: Dry Clean Only
Disclaimer: The color of the product may vary, as screen resolution differs on devices used for viewing our website.
View full details


text:
Eugene Office Trailers & Portable Storage Containers
Buying & renting mobile offices and steel storage containers has never been simpler.
Or Less Costly.
Our affiliates for Eugene office trailers & portable storage containers are your temporary office, storage solutions, and portable building deal finder, and the best thing that you can do for your business.
Our price quote solutions are available 24/7 to help your company meet the demands of temporary office space and protecting your property. Our complete suite of solutions includes mobile offices and storage units and removes space problems for your business. At Used Construction Trailers we help you to get the best price by matching your needs up with suppliers in Eugene that offer on-site delivery and low-cost financing options. With so many trusted companies like Modspace, Acton Mobile, Pac-Van, and Willscot, there are many options and office trailer brands to shop from. Our goal is to help you get to find what you need from one source that lets you compare the prices from up to five local companies.
Sometimes businesses need short-term office space. You need to be able to operate on-site and have all the tools of a permanent structure available to you. From portable office buildings to mobile classrooms, we are here to help across a wide array of mobile office needs. We connect you with a few of the best office trailer dealers in Eugene, OR. Compare Prices for Free!
We'll help you save on office trailers and steel shipping containers!
Dealers Typically Located within 10 miles of these Eugene zip codes: 97401, 97402, 97403, 97404, 97405, 97408
The Best Prices on Mobile Offices in Eugene For Rent or For Sale
The cost for office trailers is contingent upon a variety of factors, but for example, through our service, you may be able to rent a used constructor trailer in Eugene for about $139 per month. Of course, for the most accurate quote we need to know a little more about you, and your needs.
Office Trailer Sizes and Space Calculator:
# Occupants | Estimated Sq. Ft Needed | Office Trailer Size |
1-2 | 195 Square Feet | 8′ x 20′ |
2-3 | 285 Square Feet | 8′ x 28′ |
3-5 | 410 Square Feet | 10′ x 44′ |
4-6 | 500 Square Feet | 10′ x 44′ |
5-7 | 650 Square Feet | 12′ x 56′ |
7 to 10 | 800 – 1,250 Sq. Ft | 24′ x 56′ |
11 + | 1,400 Sq. Ft. + |
Rent, Lease, or Purchase:
Office Trailers
Portable Storage Units
Temporary Buildings
Portable Classrooms
Used Portable Buildings
Modular Buildings
If you prefer not to use our quote engine we recommend you drive over to the trusted dealer, Mobile Modular, and check out their inventory at:
29336 Airport Rd
Eugene, OR 97402
UCT Construction Trailers
Eugene, Oregon 97402