Steinsaltz filed bankruptcy on 3 / 16/ 01 Federal Court Case 01-31261-SHF. She was a practicing attorney at the time. Debbie knew she coming into a 600k trust. She did not want to use her inheritance to payoff her debts. She devised an elaborate scheme to bellyup while hiding the trust fund money from the Federal Government. She defrauded all U.S. taxpayers by defaulting on her student loans which are backed by the United States Financial Reserve.

Among the creditors holding the bag after being defrauded by Steinsaltz: 1) AT T Universal Card, 2) Banco Popular, 3) Bank of America, 4) Citibank, 5) Citibank USA, 6) Discover, 7) First USA Bank NA, GE Capital Cons Cardco, 9) HRS USA Rooms to Go, 10) Hyundai Motor Finance, 11) Lane Bryant, 12) MBNA America, 13) Sallie Mae Servicing Center, 14) Seymour Judith Steinstalz, 15) WFNNB Avenue.

Of course her mother Seymour Steinstalz was one of her creditors but really part of the scam to defraud taxpayers, default on her student loans, ext. Even though Steinstalz was an attorney, she gave POWER OF ATTORNEY to her mother in an effort to hide land and property during the bankruptcy.

crimes against the U.S. Government have been comitted and are coming to light. Time for some responsible journalism and investigate.

Hey, at least I’m not one of those anonymous posters.

The first class mailing pieces that you are referring to were undoubtedly mailed by the candidates themselves.

We typically do not mail political mail with first class postage.

Any duplicity that may have occurred are a result of two people in a household with different last names, misspelled SOE provided data or one piece mailed by us and another mailed by the candidate with a stamp over the permit imprint.

We absolutely household every mailing list we use.

I seriously doubt you received 2 IDENTICALLY ADDRESSED mailing pieces for each of these candidates.

This isn’t my first Bar-B-Que.

Love the reference to the Chinese food coupons though.

Great alternative to special-interest financed campaigns.

Political advertisement paid for and approved by Hunan Wok…NO MSG

How else would he know to the number how many pieces Judge Simon or Judge Ehrlich actually sent out.

George, what a scam you are running this year. My home got 2 of those coloring books for each of these candidates because the pieces weren’t householded.

Also, what the hell…You sent them out first class postage? What happened to bulk rate to save these candidates a few bucks.

And yes, I would agree that sending out the political penny saver might make sense when the book is the ONLY one you are getting that year — it is different or unique.

But when my mailbox is stuffed with Hurley, Williams and Pratt books within 48 hours (oh my god, can you get someone to spell check your mail in the future please!!), I’d suspect that most are going straight into the garbage.

The only way these things would be worth a damn in 2010 is if you put coupons for Chinese restaurants on the outside cover.

Those “expensive 16-page booklets on newsprint which cost a small fortune” cost just over 6 cents each to print.

Compare that to the typical 9 x 12 cards or 11 x 17 fold overs, which cost $.23 – $.25 cents each to print and they are an absolute bargain.

While they are not for every candidate, it gives a Judicial candidate the opportunity to tell their story.

As for your comment: “Nobody is going to read those booklets”:

Tell that to Merrilee Ehrlich, who mailed 261,833 of them in 2008.

Also, tell that to Arlene
Simon Campione who mailed 200,918 of them in 2006.

You can reach them at the courthouse, in their chambers.

Somebody must have read those books Buddy.

As for the comments about the last few pages of the booklets containing voter educational materials:
There are over 100,000 new voters in Broward this year who have never voted on the DS200 machine.
Many do not have access to computers to retrieve instructions from the SOE’s website.

What is the problem with these candidates informing their constituents about the voting process?

I believe you have said at one time or another that an educated voter is an informed voter.

You cannot expect different results by doing the same old things Buddy.

FROM BUDDY:
No one can prove to me that one piece of advertising won a race.
Saying that is selling short the hard work the candidates did.

Candidates should try everything. Ask questions. Don’t blindly follow your political consultant because they have lost as many times as they won…but they won’t talk about those times.

You failed to mention WHERE Elijah Williams made this remark about Jeb Bush. You notice the round of applause he got?

It was at the Republican Executive Committee meeting.

What was he supposed to say there? Bush is no good?

I’d say it was a smart thing to say given the audience.

FROM BUDDY: He didn’t have to say anything at all about Bush.

Buddy, Finkelstien comments on here a lot, what is his opinion of Ms. Steinstaltz exploiting his client’s cast for her own personal gain?

DEFENDER’S AIDE PUNISHED FOR JOKE JUDGE ALSO REBUKED FOR ROLE IN EXCHANGE
[Broward Metro Edition]

South Florida Sun – Sentinel – Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
Author: Tonya Alanez
Date: Oct 24, 2007

A veteran Broward assistant public defender is being punished for an inappropriate courtroom exchange with a judge about a teenage boy who had sex with an adult male.

Brian Reidy, a supervisor in the Broward Public Defender’s Office, has written an open letter of apology, has been docked one week’s vacation and must address his colleagues at a staff meeting on Friday, he and his boss, Howard Finkelstein, said.

Circuit Judge Jeffrey Levenson’s role in the exchange is “regrettable,” said Broward Chief Judge Victor Tobin. Levenson, 50, apologized for his conduct at an administrative judge’s meeting on Tuesday and “everybody is on notice that we expect the finest of conduct in our judges and our lawyers,” Tobin said.

The remarks were made Thursday when the judge and attorneys were working out jury instructions. The case involved a 41-year-old man charged with four counts of unlawful sexual activity for having consensual sex with a 16-year-old football player.

According to a transcript:

Levenson asked what position the boy played.

The prosecutor, Adriana Alcalde, said he was a linebacker.

But Reidy replied: “Tight end.”

And then Levenson weighed in: “Wide receiver?”

Alcalde expressed her dismay: “Judge, you know, I don’t think that that joke is even remotely funny.”

Levenson immediately apologized: “I take it back, it was politically incorrect, and I really apologize for that.”

Public Defender Finkelstein said he is appalled that one of his staffers would engage in such inappropriate banter. As for the judge, Finkelstein said, he should be ashamed of himself for reducing a group of people “to nothing more than a punch line to a joke.”

Tobin, the chief judge, took a softer stance. He said Levenson, one of the “hardest-working” and “most community-oriented” judges on the Broward bench, had been told “we need the utmost in professionalism and good conduct from the judges.”

In an interview with the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Levenson acknowledged judges are “held to a higher standard” and he had crossed the line.

“I should not have made that comment, it exhibited insensitivity,” he said. “I apologized at the time and I apologize now. I feel that I’m a fair, sensitive, neutral arbiter and I always strive to be.”

Alcalde said she remains incensed by the comments. “It was said in a tone that there was no doubt that it was meant to poke fun at the victim.”

Reidy, 49, said his transgression was out of character for a “tolerant, open-minded” person with 22 years in the public defender’s office.

“I’m really disappointed in myself for what I said,” Reidy said. “This comment undermines a lot of what I think I’ve tried to accomplish in my career.

“It certainly is not indicative of how I think as a person or how I believe as a person.”

FROM BUDDY: Political observers believe got Merrille Ehrlich elected because: (1) She was a female running against two males. (2) She was a fresh face running against an ex-School Board member (Eichner) in the runoff. (3) She campaigned harder.

Ehrlich had a different campaign manager, but the same direct mail firm.

Ehrlich spent at least $70,000 on those brochures. I’ll take your word that they were the same.

I have been around politics — both inside campaigns and reporting on campaigns — since the 1970s. Many believe a mailer like that is a waste of money. There are more effective ways to reach likely voters.

Some political consultants will push the most costly methods — especially to unsophisticated judicial candidates — because they get a cut of every penny spent.

The money could be better spent on cable TV or even billboards for name ID. Billboard, bus signs and even the bags that the newspaper is delivered in are not used enough.

Just ask non-lawyers that you know. Did anybody read 16 pages of copy in those booklets? You could have reached all those folks at less expense on more expensive paper.

Kevin.