By Donald V. Watkins ©Copyrighted and Published on July 2, 2018; Republished January 29, 2021 [Author's Note: I am republishing this article as a final tribute to Nathan Chapman, who died on January 17, 2021 from a long battle with cancer. Nate was one of my mentors, best friends, and role models in business. He was also a truly great American. As you can see from the article, Nate was also an early victim of a ruthless COINTELPRO U.S. Attorney in Baltimore who had to be fired by the Department of Justice for targeting successful black businessmen and popular white Democrats for criminal investigations and prosecutions solely for political reasons. Unfortunately, this U.S. Attorney, who was a Republican presidential appointee and unqualified political hack, was not fired until after he had ruined Nate's businesses and career. I loved Nate like a brother and will respect his positive contributions to humanity until the day I die. Nate's obituary and home going program ] I first met Nathan A. Chapman, Jr., in 1984. He is a living symbol of hope for so many inner city youths who do not see a viable way out of the street life to achieve their dreams. Nate grew up in the inner city. He went from the housing projects of Baltimore to the top of the World Trade Center on the Inner Harbor through grit, intellect, perseverance, and hard work. Nate was an honorably discharged Air Force veteran who attended and graduated from the University of Maryland (Baltimore County) in two and a half years with a degree in Economics. Nate was the student government president during his senior year. In 1983, Nate became a Certified Public Accountant in Maryland and worked for Peat, Marwick, and Mitchell. Subsequently, Nate decided to pursue a career in investment banking and joined Alex Brown and Sons as an investment associate. At Alex Brown, Nate built a successful investment portfolio for individual and corporate clients. In 1984, I was a trial lawyer in Montgomery, Alabama who had won a record-breaking $4.1 million jury verdict in a personal injury case for a comatose client and his wife. After the verdict was paid, I nominated Nate to the court as the most capable and qualified investment banker to manage the cash award for my comatose client. Nate became the first court-approved African-American investment banker to manage a multi-million dollar financial estate for an individual client in Alabama. Nate managed this asset portfolio exceptionally well for nearly two decades. In 1986, Nate founded The Chapman Company, his own investment banking firm. Alex Brown and Sons was one of the original shareholders in the firm, along with several friends. I was an original board member and shareholder of the firm. Nate managed my personal funds, as well as the funds of my deceased brother, Dr. Levi Watkins, Jr. Levi was a heart surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital who achieved international acclaim for performing the first surgical procedure for the implantable defibrillator. I also introduced Nate to scores of government, corporate, and individual clients in and around America. His financial advisory services were rendered to these clients in an outstanding manner. In 1987, Nate founded Chapman Capital Management, an investment advisory and management company. Along the way, Nate became the first African-American and one of a small number of investment bankers nationwide to obtain all four “principal” designations in the financial advisory services industry. During the course of my service on the board of The Chapman Company, we became the first African-Americans to take four companies public on a listed American stock exchange: (a) DEM, Inc. (NASDAQ Symbol: DEMI); (b) Chapman Holdings (NASDAQ Symbol: CMAN); (c) Chapman Capital Management Holdings (NASDAQ Symbol: CMGT); and eChapman Holdings (NASDAQ Symbol: EMAN). Our corporate offices occupied the top floor of the World Trade Center in Baltimore. In 1995, Maryland Governor Parris Glendening appointed Nate to the University System of Maryland Board of Regents. During his second five-year term, Nate was elected by the other Regents to serve as Chairman of the Board. He was the first African-American and youngest chairman in the history of the board. A Friend, Mentor and Hero Apart from his unprecedented professional success in listing four minority-owned financial entities on NASDAQ and underwriting these transactions in the process, Nate has also distinguished himself in his personal life. Throughout the time I have known Nate, he has been a mentor to scores of minority students who sought to enter the financial services industry. Nate sponsored many of these students through the award of numerous academic scholarships. Nate also helped young entrepreneurs launch their businesses and was a constant source of knowledge, inspiration, and support for these business owners during the development phase of their businesses. In 1999, Nate helped me organize and launch Alamerica Bank in Birmingham, Alabama, which opened as a full service commercial bank in January 2000. Alamerica’s bank charter was the first and only one issued by the Alabama Banking Department to a majority black ownership group. Alamerica Bank is one of only nineteen black-owned banks in America. The Bank never sought or received federal “bailout” money during the Great Recession of 2008. We have never been required to “recapitalize” Alamerica Bank. We have never participated in the symbolic “window dressing” programs that the FDIC claims it offers to minority-owned financial institutions. Alamerica Bank’s call report for December 31, 2017, showed total assets of $35 million, with $6.3 million in capital. Alamerica’s Tier 1 Leverage Ratio was 16.7%; its Tier 1 Capital Ratio was 18.8%; and its Total Capital Ratio was 21.1%. Alamerica’s regulatory capital ratios exceeded the 13.3% national average and were among the best in the banking industry. Yet, Alamerica Bank catches more hell from state and federal regulators than any bank in Alabama. My experiences with Nate helped me to understand why this is the case. Promoting Equitable Educational Funding Nate personally advised me while I served as the lead counsel for the black plaintiffs (from 1984 to 1994) in the decades-long lawsuit against the State of Alabama, its governor, and Alabama’s historically white colleges and universities to end Alabama’s racially dual system of higher education. Nate’s strategic thinking, extensive financial background, and sound professional advice enabled the plaintiffs to win an unprecedented $500 million in educational enhancement funding (above and beyond the regular state appropriations) for Alabama State University (“ASU”) and Alabama A&M University, the state’s two historically black four-year universities. Nate rendered these services on a pro bono basis. Nate also gave ASU the blueprint for achieving a category “A” Wall Street credit rating, which made it possible for the University to borrow money for new facilities and campus expansion without the permission of state officials who had perpetuated the challenged racially dual system of higher education. Chapman’s sound financial and educational advice (as the former chairman of the University System of Maryland Board of Regents) laid the groundwork for ASU to achieve Level Six accreditation from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. This is the highest level of accreditation for a university in Alabama and was previously enjoyed only by the University of Alabama and Auburn University. Again, Nate did not charge ASU any money for his advice and guidance. U.S.A. v. Nathan A. Chapman, Jr. In 2002, Thomas M. DiBiagio, a George Bush-appointed U.S. Attorney in Baltimore, commenced a series of politically motivated criminal investigations. These investigations focused on (a) then-Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, a Democrat, at the height of a tight 2002 gubernatorial contest that she lost to Republican gubernatorial nominee Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., and (b) the Baltimore City Council, whose members were Democrats. In July 2004, DiBiagio sent a memo urging his federal prosecutors to obtain "Three 'Front-Page' White Collar/Public Corruption Indictments" before Nov. 6, four days after the presidential election. This was rogue prosecutorial conduct, plain and simple. The Justice Department forced DiBiagio out of office in early 2005. In a 2007 New York Times interview, Deputy Attorney General David Margolis acknowledged for the first time that he asked for DiBiagio’s resignation because a " reasonable person could have concluded that he was trying to affect the outcome of an election, and we just can't have that ." Nate’s high-profile status with Maryland’s Democratic power players brought him squarely within the ambit of DiBiagio’s politically-motivated criminal investigation. Prosecutors were sure that Nate had “dirt” on several Democratic politicians. When Nate informed them that he had no incriminating information on any “target” or “subject” of their investigation, they turned on him in a nasty and vindictive way. Working with a willing and equally culpable Securities and Exchange Commission, rogue federal prosecutors simply manufactured a criminal case of wire, mail, and investment advisory fraud against Nate that centered on executive loans that The Chapman Company made to Nate, which were board approved and collateralized by his shares of stock in the company. Prosecutors supported their trumped-up case by twisting and distorting factual scenarios on otherwise lawful conduct in order to please Thomas DiBiagio and achieve his goal of destroying a key supporter of Democratic candidates. Prosecutors sanitized their rogue conduct by forum shopping Nate's criminal case until they landed in the courtroom of a black federal judge who was molded in the ingratiating mindset of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. This judge made sure Nate was properly railroaded. The criminal case of U.S.A v. Nathan A. Chapman, Jr. , ended the Chapman companies as an ongoing business enterprises and sent Nate to prison for 63 months. I was called as a witness in the case by both the prosecution and the defense. Based upon my interaction with them, the prosecutors had no interest in hearing the truth -- before, during, or after the trial. Nate's case also involved several financial transactions between affiliated parties (i.e., the Domestic Emerging Markets-Minority Equity Trust and the designated sub-advisors). Based upon Federal Reserve Board Regulation W, which governs affiliated transactions for regulated financial institutions, the transactions for which Chapman was charged and convicted were entirely proper and legal at the time and are legal today. Regulations similar in nature to Regulation W were issued by agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission and state and federal bank chartering organizations. Chapman’s conduct would have been legal under these regulations, as well. Nate’s conviction resulted from a politically-motivated prosecution by rogue prosecutors who operated with impunity in a rigged system. The prosecutors did not care about the board's approval of the executive loans in question, Regulation W, or anything else, except pleasing DiBiagio. They were clearly on a DiBiagio-inspired political “hit” mission to destroy Nate Chapman and the financial services companies he had built, at any cost. Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and the Baltimore City Council members were never prosecuted on any public corruption charges arising from DiBiagio's investigation. Nate was the only victim of Thomas DiBiagio's rogue prosecutorial misconduct. Nate lost all of his professional licenses and his standing in the financial community, while the rogue prosecutors in his case moved on to other careers. To this day, Thomas DiBiagio and his rogue prosecutors have never been held accountable for what they did to Nate. Epilogue I have worked all over the world with the most sophisticated and respected financial experts on the planet. Nate is in this class of professionals. What makes Nate different from his peers is the degree to which he has given back to his community in time, resources, and mentorship. This is where he stands alone. Having desegregated the University of Alabama’s Law School in 1970, I know trailblazers when I meet them. Nate is a trailblazer. He literally transformed the educational, business, and financial landscape for blacks in America. Thousands of African-Americans and scores of black institutions across the nation are measurably better off today because of Nate Chapman’s relentless work in business, higher education, and finance. Nate's criminal case will go down in history as one of the greatest tragedies in the federal criminal justice system. Throughout it all, the rogue prosecutors were never able to strip Nate of his intellect, humility, dignity, self-respect, or positive impact on American society. Nate remains a close friend, mentor, and one of my real life heroes.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on December 1, 2024 An Editorial Opinion State-supported historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) were created as a legal remedy in states that did not admit Black students to historically White colleges and universities (HWCUs) after the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified on July 28, 1868 .   Prior to ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, slaves of African descent were deemed to be “chattel property.”  In 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court declared in Dred Scott v. Sandford that Blacks, whether enslaved or freed, had no rights that White men were bound to respect, Upon ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, Blacks gained American citizenship, including the right to a public education in "separate but equal" schools.   After state-supported HBCUs were created for college-bound “Negroes,” they never received per student funding on par with their state-supported HWCU peer institutions (absent a court order).  The “equal funding" aspect of the “separate but equal” doctrine enunciated in Supreme Court’s Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) case was willfully ignored by states throughout old Confederate states for over 100 years.  The reason was simple -- White-controlled state legislatures saw no value of any kind in investing in HBCUs.   In the early 1980s, three state-supported HBCUs – Alabama State University (ASU), Alabama A&M University (AAMU), and Tennessee State University (TSU) -- sued their respective state governments for the equitable funding and expanded academic offerings that had been denied to them for over a century.  These lawsuits were litigated for about 25 years and resulted in equitable funding for a brief period of time, the established of state-funded endowment funds, and new academic program offerings at each HBCU.   Upon the expiration of court-ordered equitable funding, Alabama and Tennessee promptly resumed their longtime pattern and practice of underfunding state-supported HBCUs.    On September 18, 2023, the U.S. Departments of Education and Agriculture declared that 16 land-grant HBCUs , including AAMU , were systematically underfunded during the past 30 years by a total of $13 billion .  None of these 16 underfunded HBCUs attempted to collect its respective amount of the equitable funding money. Instead, the presidents of these HBCUs sought and received pay hikes, contract extensions, and/or "golden parachutes" for themselves.   A Fundamental Change on the Higher Education Landscape   On November 5, 2024, Donald J. Trump was elected president of the United States. Cutting waste in government and eliminating the U.S. Department of Education are two cornerstones of the incoming Trump administration.   A South African-born billionaire and "First Buddy" Elon Musk leads Trump’s initiative to eliminate wasteful government spending and promote government efficiency.  Trump and Musk are idolized in “Red states” where nearly all state-supported, undergraduate baccalaureate-granting, HBCUs are located.   As such, state-supported four-year HBCUs are at-risk of being dismantled due to this fundamental change in the political and higher education landscape.  Now, the expenditure of billions of tax dollars on HBCUs (and similarly situated HWCUs) must be justified on a cost-efficiency basis at the federal and state government levels.   Under this analysis, the legal and financial justifications for the continued existence of state-supported HBCUs (and HWCUs with the same performance ratings) may no longer exist.  This is true for several reasons.   First, Black college-bound students can now attend any college or university that their high school GPA and college admission test scores qualify them for.  Those who fall short on the required academic credentials may gain admission through the athletic portal, if they excel in sports.  Others can be admitted to community colleges and technical schools of their choice. Furthermore, the federal court orders that directly benefitted and protected ASU, AAMU, and TSU expired many years ago.   Second, four-year graduation rates at state-supported HBCUs have been abysmal.  The graduation rates at these HBCUs range from 20% to 30% each year.  The four-year graduation rates at most HWCUs range from 60% to 80%.   The extremely low four-year graduation rates at state-supported HBCUs may be viewed by "Red state" legislatures as a poor return on the tens of billions of tax dollars invested annually in these institutions.   Third, despite a sea of opportunities to excel in a capitalistic society that creates emerging technologies and fuels global commerce, no state-supported HBCU in America has taken the initiative to become No. 1 in the world in any of the thousands of opportunity zones that feed this rapidly developing commercial growth.  Instead, state-supported HBCUs appear to be hopelessly trapped in a “victim” mentality that keeps them on their knees begging for charity dollars and increased annual state appropriations.  Furthermore, state-supported HBCUs have placed little focus on potential revenues derived from dominance in sponsored research projects, proprietary patents that are capable of worldwide commercial application, and the surging cache of domestic and international licensing rights.   Epilogue   Without a legal justification for their continued existence and without carving out an earned place in global commerce, I expect state-supported HBCUs in the Old South will be dismantled in the near future much like Black high schools were dismantled during the desegregation of public schools in the 1960s and 70s.   From what I have observed, none of the state-supported HBCUs today has the will, courage, and/or ability to fight the dismantlement agenda described in this article. In 2023, one of them -- AAMU -- signed on to Donald Trump’s Project 2025 agenda without any pushback from the state's Black community . Finally, prestigious private HBCUs will likely benefit from the dismantlement of state-supported HBCUs.  Institutions like Tuskegee University, Morehouse College, Spelman College, Howard University, and Hampton Institute are among those private HBCUs that are expected to grow and thrive on the new higher education landscape.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on November 29, 2024 Post-Election Update --- John Morgan is the founder of Morgan & Morgan, a national consumer protection and personal injury law firm. Morgan is a mega-donor to the Democratic Party. In 2017, Morgan & Morgan partnered with famed civil rights attorney Ben Crump to launch his new law firm Ben Crump Law, PLLC .   Wednesday night, John Morgan torched Kamala Harris and her campaign on Fox News .  Morgan said Harris has “ no talent ” and can never run for president again.   Morgan also said Harris raised and spent $2 billion in a losing campaign.  He claimed Harris campaign staffers were calling donors this week to raise money for her $20 million campaign debt.   According to Morgan, Harris is considering a run for governor of California and/or another run for president in 2028. Morgan said Harris " should go away and never, ever come back again ."   Finally, Morgan said he is a “Bill Clinton” Democrat.   He now feels that the Kamala Harris faction of the Democrat Party has pushed him out of the party. Ben Crump, a Harris supporter, has not responded to John Morgan's blistering remarks about Harris.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on November 24, 2024 An Editorial Opinion   In March 2018, the city of Birmingham, Alabama committed $90 million from its neighborhood improvement funds (over a 30-year period) to build a new downtown football stadium for The University of Alabama at Birmingham’s football program.  The stadium opened in 2021 for Blazers football.   The stadium’s seating capacity was designed to discourage its use as a venue for the Magic City Classic between Alabama State and Alabama A&M Universities, which draws 60,000 patrons each year.   Starting in May 2018, the city of Birmingham, Alabama began to defund its police department.   Over the next six years, the city’s 912 sworn officer force was cut in half.   Fast-Forward to 2024   Today, the UAB football team plays its home games in the new Protective Stadium. The games draw relatively small crowds to the 47,000-seat, $175 million stadium.  Yesterday’s attendance for the UAB-Rice game was only 16,181.   Of course, the mayor and council members sit in a luxury skybox that was given to the city as a “thank you” gesture for its $90 million handout to stadium developers.   City officials sat in their skybox yesterday and watched UAB defeat Rice 40-14.   Meanwhile, most of the city’s 99 designated neighborhoods and communities are falling apart from urban rot and violent crime.   In May, Birmingham-Southern College could no longer cope with the deteriorating urban decay and skyrocketing homicides in the community surrounding its 192-acre campus and closed its doors permanently.   The Magic City Classic continues to be played in Legion Field, a 97-year-old football stadium that is so structurally flawed and unsafe from an engineering standpoint that only ASU and AAMU will play a football game in this deathtrap.   The defunding of the police department that started in 2018 guaranteed that Birmingham’s murder rate would skyrocket.  Today, Birmingham is the “ Murder Capital of the U.S . ”   Who are the Winners and Losers?   By any objective measurement, the winners in this scenario are UAB, its football program, boosters and fans, and the city officials who watch UAB football games from the city’s luxury skybox.   The losers are Birmingham’s impoverished neighborhoods, city taxpayers, ASU and AAMU, Magic City Classic patrons, BSC, and the escalating number of homicide victims in Birmingham each year.   This is a tragic situation for city taxpayers who do not receive the seven basic city services they pay for each year with their tax dollars.  Instead of getting a return on their investment of tax dollars, Birmingham taxpayers get royally screwed by their elected officials on a non-stop basis.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on November 24, 2024 An Editorial Opinion Birmingham, Alabama’s all-time record for homicides occurred in 1933 with 148 killings. The city's population at the time was just under 269,000 people. Today, the city has experienced 145 gun-related homicides. Today, the city’s population is estimated to be 195,400 people. With just under six weeks to go in 2024, Birmingham is only four homicides away from breaking the 1933 record. At the current rate of homicides in the city, this record will be broken by the end of November. Rather than developing an effective plan for combatting the skyrocketing homicides that have turned Birmingham into the " Murder Capital of the U.S. ," Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin has used his time this year to spit-shine his image on social media and write a book that is reportedly full of self-praise and self-centered glorifification. Defunding the Police has Consequences. Mayor Woodfin has defunded the Birmingham police department for many years. As a result, more than 900 innocent murder victims have been killed throughout the city since Woodfin took office in 2017. Today, no one in Birmingham is safe. Mass murders are a frequent occurrence. Where Does Birmingham Go from Here? City elections are scheduled for August 2025. At that time, Birmingham voters can keep Mayor Woodfin and his team of tainted city council members and see how many times Birmingham can break its own homicide record between 2025 and 2029. Alternatively, Birmingham voters can put some new people in City Hall who know how to lead, how to properly fund the city's police department, and how to solve the city's growing homicide crisis.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on November 20, 2024 An Editorial Opinion The  Milken Institute  is an independent economic think tank based in Santa Monica, California, with offices in Washington, D.C., New York, Miami, London, Abu Dhabi, and Singapore.  The Institute publishes annual rankings of the Best-Performing Cities (BPC) in the U.S.   The BPC rankings for 2024 evaluate the performance of 403 metropolitan areas across the U.S. based on 13 indicators that cover labor market conditions, high-tech impact, and access to economic opportunities.  The 13 indicators used for the 2024 rankings are depicted in the chart below: The Institute ranked 200 large cities and 203 small cities.  Huntsville, Birmingham, Montgomery, and Mobile, Alabama are listed among the 200 large cities.   Rankings for Large Alabama Cities   In 2024, Huntsville ranked No. 16, Montgomery ranked No. 150, Mobile ranked No. 151, and Birmingham ranked No. 158.   Montgomery improved its ranking from No. 167 in 2022 to No. 165 in 2023, and to 150 in 2024.   In contrast, Birmingham’s rankings dropped from No. 104 in 2022 to No. 110 in 2023, and to No. 158 in 2024.   Likewise, Mobile's rankings dropped from No. 122 in 2022 to No. 139 in 2023, and to No. 151 in 2024.   Huntsville ranked No. 12 in 2022, No. 40 in 2023, and No. 16 in 2024.   Birmingham Continues to Lead the State of Alabama in Negative Rankings   In 2024, online financial website WalletHub.com ranked Birmingham as the worst-run city in Alabama.   In 2024, Forbes magazine ranked Birmingham as the No. 3 most dangerous city in the U.S. The Milken Institute’s poor economic ranking for Birmingham adds to the city's growing constellation of negative rankings.   Do Any of These Negative Rankings Matter to the Residents of Birmingham? According to the objective rankings by respected financial organizations and think tanks, Birmingham is the worst-performing city in the state and the city’s performance rankings are getting worse.   The only relevant question at this point is this: Do the residents of Birmingham even care about the city’s rapidly deteriorating economic, public safety, and mismanagement conditions?

By: Sophia Conti , a Guest Contributor Originally Published on Websiteplanet.com ; Republished on November 16, 2024 While the economic challenges of the last few years have tested organizations of all stripes, Black-owned businesses closed their doors at twice the rate of other businesses during the pandemic. Studies show that less access to the financial system and lack of family wealth to draw from – both key avenues of financial security during economic slowdowns – are partly to blame. Consumer spending habits are another major challenge for Black-owned businesses, which can struggle to scale up because of a misperception that their target market is a narrow demographic. Minority-owned businesses, however, are often marketing to broader audiences who never consider them. I have personally experienced how convenient it is to visit the website of a prominent retailer and locate a significant portion of my shopping list in a single location. However, in order to contribute to the advancement of Black-owned enterprises in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, and the Netherlands, I have assembled an extensive roster of more than 450 Black-owned businesses spanning various sectors. Please take a moment to explore the list provided below! Click here to read the full list of Black-owned businesses with good and services available in the U.S. market. [About the Author: Sophia Conti is a freelance writer, editor, and content strategist. She specializes in digital marketing and B2B content for small businesses and entrepreneurs. When not writing or editing, she can be found searching used bookstores and watching the penguins at the San Diego Zoo.]

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on November 15, 2024 An Editorial Opinion On Wednesday, president-elect Donald J. Trump picked former Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz for U.S. Attorney General.  Gaetz’s selection sent shockwaves throughout the Department of Justice (DOJ).   Gaetz resigned from the House of Representatives immediately after Trump’s announcement. Gaetz was under investigation by the House Ethics Committee for alleged sexual misconduct, illicit drug use, obstruction of an investigation, and related allegations.  That probe is now likely ended, as it only applies to sitting House members.   Gaetz was previously investigated by the DOJ for sexual misconduct involving a 17-year-old girl, a charge which he denied.  DOJ never charged Gaetz with wrongdoing in that case.   Whether Matt Gaetz assumes the Attorney General position, via a Senate confirmation vote or a recess appointment, he will oversee the entire federal law enforcement apparatus, including the DOJ, FBI, DEA, ATF, U.S. Marshals, all 94 U.S. Attorneys offices, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons.   Unlike state attorneys general who are elected to their positions, the U.S. Attorney General is an appointed cabinet member .   The Attorney General's job in the federal system is to advance and protect the president's public policy initiatives using the federal legal apparatus to do so.  The Attorney General also has a concomitant duty to enforce the labyrinth of more than 8,000 federal civil and criminal laws.    An Opportunity to Reform a Historically Corrupt DOJ   The DOJ is one of the most corrupt law enforcement organizations on the planet.  The agency has a long, ugly, and documented history of targeting innocent, law-abiding Americans for persecution and prosecution dating back to social justice activist Callie House’s politically-motivated prosecution on phony fraud charges in 1916.    Other high-profile targets of DOJ weaponization programs include pan-African businessman Marcus Garvey , singer Billie Holiday , civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. , actress Jean Seberg , anti-Vietnam War activist Daniel Ellsberg , Congressman Harold Ford, Sr . (D-Tennessee), Atlanta Mayor Maynard Jackson , Detroit Mayor Coleman Young , Birmingham Mayor Richard Arrington , Jr., former federal judges U.W. Clemon and Alcee Hastings , Alabama Gaming Magnate Milton McGregor , Baltimore businessman Nathan A. Chapman , U.S. Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Governor Bob McDonald (R-Virginia), and state attorney Marilyn J. Mosby (D-Maryland).   The DOJ operated COINTELPRO from 1956 to 1971, Operation Fruhmenschen from 1972 to 1982, and Good Ol’ Boys Roundup from1980 to 1995, all of which targeted innocent Americans whom the department deemed were threats to the established political order of their day. Rogue federal prosecutors and wayward FBI agents roam America's political landscape like a pack of rabid dogs. Donald Trump has publicly called these wayward FBI agents " scum " and has repeatedly declared that the federal criminal justice system is " rigged ."   Modern-day presidents, including Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, were too weak, compromised, or aloft to reign-in DOJ lawlessness.   The worst Attorney General in modern history is Merrick Garland .  Charitably speaking, Garland is a weak-kneed, psychologically castrated, eunuch.  Politically-motivated prosecutions flourished on his watch. Nobody in Washington respects him.   One of the worst federal prosecutors in DOJ history is Special Counsel Jack Smith . His lawlessness has been documented in multiple court cases.  To put Jack Smith in context, I must mention William "Chick" Bush . The coldest person I have ever met in life is William Bush, a convicted killer who has been on Alabama’s death row since 1982.  The second coldest person I have met in life is Jack Smith.  If there is a conscience in Smith’s body, I was not able to find it. He reminds me of a government-backed "hitman." The chief of DOJ's criminal division when Donald Trump was catching the most hell from Jack Smith was Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. This is the same official who oversaw the DOJ's shady attempt to " fix " Hunter Biden's felony gun possesion and tax evasion cases with an undeserved " no jail time " plea deal that blew up under judicial scrutiny. Polite fled the DOJ after Biden's "sweetheart" plea deal fell apart. The Rabbit's Got the Gun As a defendant in two pending federal criminal cases who says the federal criminal justice sytem is " rigged, " Donald Trump's pick of Matt Gaetz for Attorney General sends a strong signal that the president-elect intends to reform it.  In my neck of the woods, local hunters describe Trump's pick of Gaetz this way: " Oh shit, the rabbit's got the gun ."   If Matt Gaetz's DOJ (a) investigates Merrick Garland, Jack Smith, and Kenneth Polite, Jr., for running a system of criminal prosecutions that targeted law-abiding Americans for political reasons, while showing extreme favoritism to a well-connected politico like Hunter Biden, and (b) prosecutes this trio of rogue DOJ officials (if warranted), this law enforcement action would go a long way towards reforming the federal criminal justice system.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on January 29, 2020 Most people of interracial goodwill have never heard of Gene Rightmyer, the former Knoxville, Tennessee-based ATF agent who organized and led the Good Ol' Boys Roundup (Roundup) from 1980 through 1995. During this sixteen-year period, more than 1,000 people participated in the Roundup, including an estimated 500 federal, state, and local law enforcement and Department of Justice (DOJ) officials. At least 10 percent of the attendees had federal law enforcement affiliations. During this 16-year period, only 4 black law enforcement agents ever attempted to attend the Roundup. As discussed below, two of them who were accompanied by a white ATF agent got into a confrontation when the white ATF agent was accused of "bringing niggers to the Roundup" by the event staff members who were operating the "Nigger checkpoint." For the most part, the Roundup attendees, who gathered each year in May at a campground near Ocoee, Tennessee, came from law enforcement agencies in the Southeast part of the United States. The Roundup was also attended by white supremacists like Richard Hayward and Jeffrey Randall, who were members of a militia group based in Alabama. They were welcomed at the Roundup in multiple years. Hayward videotaped the 1990 Roundup. In 1992 and 1993, Hayward openly distributed former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke's presidential campaign literature and souvenirs, as well as materials publicizing the National Association for the Advancement of White People. Racist signs, bumper stickers, hats, banners, and other display items littered the campground site when Hayward and Randall attended the Roundups. The Roundups started in a rural part of Tennessee approximately four years after the April 29, 1976 Report on COINTELPRO, which was authored by Senators Frank Church (D-Idaho) and John Tower (R-Texas), was issued and published in the Congressional Record. The Report documented widespread federal, state, and local law enforcement abuse of black leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Rosa Parks, and other civil rights activists who protested in the 1950s, 60s and 70s for equal rights, fair justice, and voting rights in America. On July 11, 1995, the Washington Times blew the whistle on this annual racist Roundup of law enforcement agents and their invited guests. An investigation by the DOJ's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) ensued. Over 900 people were interviewed and statementized in connection with the OIG investigation. The March 1996 OIG Report The OIG acknowledged in a March 1996 Report that "the persons who attended the Roundup may have had a motive to conceal or minimize the instances of racial or other kinds of misconduct in order to make their attendance at a Roundup appear more benign than it might have been." In other words, many of the law enforcement-affiliated Roundup participants who were interviewed provided investigators with less than full, candid, and truthful information. In its Report, the OIG made many findings, including the following: 1.[O]ur investigation revealed ample evidence of shocking racist, licentious, and puerile behavior by attendees occurring in various years. We also found that an atmosphere hostile to minorities -- and to women -- developed over time because inadequate action was taken by the Roundup organizers to appropriately deal with instances of racial or other kinds of misconduct." 2. Racist signs were posted in at least two years: 1990 and 1992. These signs included, "Nigger checkpoint," "Any niggers in that car?," "no niggers," and "17 cents lb." There was a drawing depicting an African-American's face with a circle around it and a red slash across the circle. 3. Racist skits were performed in 1990 and 1992. In the Redneck of the Year skit, "a dog was traded for a man in blackface who then pretended to perform oral sex on a person in mock Ku Klux Klan garments." Also, "a Fort Lauderdale, Florida police officer competing in the Redneck of the Year contest performed a skit where he claimed to have found a watermelon which had fallen off the back of a passing truck, struck it until it broke open, and then pulled out a doll he had painted black. He described the doll as a seed and told the audience that one must 'kill the seed when it is young," and proceeded to beat the doll." 4. In 1990 and 1992, "persons whom [OIG] could not identify were checking to determine if any blacks were in any of the cars driving through the campground. The phrase used by the persons engaged in the activity was 'checking cars for niggers'." 5. In 1995, a white ATF agent who came to the Roundup with two black officers was taunted about the presence of the black agents. He was told by a Fort Lauderdale officer that "ATF fucks up everything they touch ... Now you are bringing niggers to the Roundup." After the confrontation, "unidentified persons painted the words 'niggers go home' and 'whites only' on toilets in the campground." 6. T-shirts were sold at the Roundup that were found to be racially insensitive. For example, one T-shirt for sale depicted three police officers around a police car and two black persons being held face down on the hood of the car. The caption of the photo on the T-shirt read, "Boyz on the Hood." Another T-shirt had a crude drawing of the figure used in the children's game, "Hangman," and the initials "O" and "J" beneath the figure. 7. In numerous years, Confederate flags were displayed in various locations in and around the Roundup campground. In one photo, a group surrounding the flag are shown making obscene gestures and raising their fists in a Nazi salute. A future Roundup president and Richard Hayward can be readily identified in the photo. 8. [W]e found evidence that cassette tapes of music by a performer named David Allen Coe were played during various years, including the song, "My Wife Ran Off With a Nigger." 9. [P]ublic nudity was commonplace at various Roundups [with] women dancers, women baring their chests, [and] a retired officer exposing himself with his badge displayed on his penis. The women dancers were strippers. The other women who were baring their breasts were consensual sex partners for single and married agents. During the 16-year run of the Roundups, no FBI, DEA, or ATF agent, or other DOJ official reported this ingrained, flagrant, and sustained display of racism and sexism to the OIG or the U.S. Attorney General. Likewise, no federal, state, or local law enforcement agent was fired because of his participation in the Roundups. Roundup's Racism in the Law enforcement Community Never Died The racist attitudes and conduct that permeated the Roundups from 1980 to 1995 are fairly prevalent inside the FBI, DEA, ATF, and DOJ, as well as state and local law enforcement agencies today. This is particularly true in Southern states. For example, in Birmingham, Alabama, two closeted individuals closely associated with the Skinhead movement are firmly entrenched in the U.S. Attorney's Office. They are not operating in any undercover capacity to infiltrate this racist organization. Instead, they share the group's racial beliefs system. Both of these individuals are affectionately coddled and protected by at least one magistrate and two sitting U.S. District Court judges on the federal bench for the Northern District of Alabama. These individuals no longer use the term "nigger" in racially mixed company, but they freely use this derogatory term while relaxing and socializing in intimate settings with all-white friends and family members. More information about these Birmingham-area law enforcement Skinheads will be detailed in my upcoming book, "Inmate 36223-001: The Story of a Political Prisoner."

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on November 25, 2022 An Editorial Opinion Most people have probably never heard of James M. Cole, Lanny A. Breuer, or Jack Smith. This is the trio that former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (2009 to 2015) selected to run the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice during President Barack Obama's administration. Cole was Deputy Attorney General (2010 to 2015). Breuer served as Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division (2009 to 2013). Jack Smith served as the chief of the Department of Justice’s Office of Public Integrity (2010 to 2015), which investigates and prosecutes public figures on corruption cases. Smith was hired for his Office of Public Integrity job by Lanny Breuer, a political operative who also worked as a special counsel from 1997 to 1999 in the Office of White House Counsel under President Bill Clinton. Breuer defended Clinton in various matters, including: (a) Congressional and Department of Justice investigations of the Clinton campaign's fundraising, (b) independent counsel Ken Starr's investigation into Clinton’s sexcapades with Monica Lewinsky, and (c) the impeachment proceedings against Clinton. On November 18, 2022, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the appointment of Jack Smith as the Special Counsel who will oversee the criminal investigations into the retention of national defense information at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate and parts of the January 6, 2021, insurrection. A deep dive into Jack Smith’s past reveals that he is too flawed for this high-profile assignment and must step aside in the Trump case. This assessment is provided by a political Independent and trained legal expert who did not support Donald Trump's candidacy for president in 2016 and does not support it today. U.S. v. Milton McGregor, et. al. Lanny Breuer and Jack Smith botched the June to August 2011 criminal trial and January to March 2012 retrial in the high-profile case of U.S. v. Milton McGregor, et. al . , Cr. No. 2:10-cr-186-MHT (M.D. Ala). On October 4, 2010, Breuer announced that the defendants in the McGregor case had been charged in a 39-count indictment with committing 138 federal felony offenses , including conspiracy, federal program bribery, extortion, money laundering, honest services mail and wire fraud, obstruction of justice, and making a false statement. Breuer said the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to bribe Alabama state legislators for their votes and influence on proposed gaming legislation. The defendants pleaded not guilty and demanded a trial by jury. The Brenda K. Morris Factor Breuer and Smith assigned Brenda K. Morris, a prosecutor in the Office of Public Integrity, as the Senior Litigation Counsel in the McGregor case. Ms. Morris was one of several Department of Justice prosecutors who hid evidence favorable to the defense of Alaska U.S. Senator Ted Stevens after he was indicted in 2008 on public corruption charges. This prosecutorial misconduct enabled prosecutors to obtain a conviction against Stevens. On March 28, 2012, the Department formally acknowledged Ms. Morris’ prosecutorial misconduct in a Statement to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee and dismissed the case against him. Top officials in the Department, including Breuer and Smith, knew about Ms. Morris’ prosecutorial misconduct because the trial judge in Stevens case published a highly-critical opinion about this matter on January 16, 2009 . This cloud of prosecutorial misconduct and the tainted conviction it produced in Stevens' case hung over Jack Smith and his Office of Public Integrity until the Department came clean with Congress in its March 28, 2012 statement. Despite Ms. Morris’ judicially determined prosecutorial misconduct in the Stevens case, Breuer and Smith saw fit to assign her to the prosecution team that investigated, indicted, and prosecuted McGregor and the other defendants in his case. On April 22, 2011, Ms. Morris and her prosecution team secured guilty pleas from two of the defendants – Ronald Gilley and Jarrod Massey. The tactics they used to secure the guilty pleas were highly questionable. Afterwards, Gilley and Massey became cooperating government witnesses, along with Jennifer Pouncey, a lobbyist who had previously pleaded guilty to one-count of conspiracy in a related Bill of Information. The First McGregor Trial was Entirely Unsuccessful Milton McGregor and the remaining eight defendants stood trial from June to August 2011 before Judge Myron Thompson, an experienced U.S. District Judge in Montgomery, Alabama. When the trial concluded in August 2011, not a single conviction was reached on any of the 138 felonies charged. During the trial, Judge Thompson granted judgments of acquittal on 14 counts involving McGregor and two other defendants. The jury rendered not-guilty verdicts on 91 charges, including a complete exoneration of two defendants, and not-guilty verdicts on some charges for all remaining seven defendants. The jury failed to reach a verdict on the remaining 33 charges, which represented less than one quarter of the charges that had gone to trial. Eight of the 12 jurors were for acquittal on all 138 counts, and the vote was eleven to one in favor of acquittal on one count. The jury verdicts were unanimous in favor of acquittal on 91 charges. Jack Smith and His Superiors were Forewarned that His Team of Prosecutors Could Not Win a Retrial Jack Smith, Lanny Breuer, and James Cole were expressly forewarned in writing that their prosecution team had no credibility and a zero chance of winning a retrial. This warning was set forth in multiple emails I sent to Smith, Breuer, and Cole prior to and after an in-person meeting I had on January 11, 2012 with Jack Smith and his chief deputy in Washington. A highly respected former state attorney general (from 1997 to 2011) accompanied me to the meeting. This top prosecutor also shared his view that the multitude of structural weaknesses in the government's case would prevent Smith's team from winning a retrial. Prior to this meeting, I provided Smith, Breuer, and Cole with a legal memo , dated October 28, 2011, that detailed the reasons why prosecutors would lose the scheduled retrial. Before I sent my memo to Smith and his superiors, I had it reviewed by a well-known former U.S. Attorney whose objective qualifications as a federal prosecutor far exceeded Smith's and anybody on his prosecution team. Smith and his superiors did not care about the Department's non-existent chances of winning a retrial. They had access to unlimited amounts of taxpayer money and they could spend it as they saw fit. Smith merely changed prosecutors and instructed his new prosecution team to proceed with the scheduled January 30, 2012 retrial. Smith’s decision in this regard violated a core standard of professional conduct for federal prosecutors. Section 9.27-220 of the applicable U.S. Attorney’s Manual required prosecutors to answer this basic question before seeking an indictment or a retrial: Whether “ the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction .” On March 7, 2012, Jack Smith and his prosecutors lost on all 33 of the remaining felonies charged against the six defendants who were retried. This decisive outcome ended the case. Sadly, Ray Crosby, one of the seven remaining defendants in the retrial, died of heart failure caused by the emotional stress from the entire ordeal just as jury selection had gotten underway. Neither Jack Smith, nor any member of his prosecution team member, was ever held accountable for Crosby's unfortunate death. Jack Smith Embraced Flaming Racists as Instigators and Government Witnesses While pursuing the public corruption case against McGregor and the other defendants, Jack Smith (and Lanny Breuer) knowingly embraced two flaming racists – Alabama state Sen. Scott Beason and state Representative Ben Lewis -- as instigators of the underlying FBI investigation and as cooperating government witnesses. Here is what Judge Thompson wrote about Beason and Lewis in an Order , dated October 20, 2011: “The court finds that Beason and Lewis lack credibility for two reasons. First, their motive for cooperating with F.B.I. investigators was not to clean up corruption but to increase Republican political fortunes by reducing African-American voter turnout. Second, they lack credibility because the record establishes their purposeful, racist intent.” (Doc. 1916, p. 9). Thompson also wrote: “The evidence indicates that Beason and Lewis sought to inculpate the defendants primarily to neutralize a potential political threat.” (Doc. 1916, p. 12). Finally, Thompson stated: “Beason’s and Lewis’s statements demonstrate a deep-seated racial animus and a desire to suppress black votes by manipulating what issues appeared on the 2010 ballot.” (Doc. 1916, p. 13). Despite these explicit judicial findings, Jack Smith and his cabal of federal prosecutors proceeded to publicly align themselves with Beason and Lewis in the pursuit of a clearly established racist and political agenda in Alabama. On January 21, 2012, I wrote Smith an email that stated as follows: “While gift-wrapped in lofty anti-public corruption language, the continued prosecution of Mr. McGregor is actually doing more harm than good in Alabama …. We cannot allow the Scott Beasons of Alabama to win this critical battle. Too many people of interracial goodwill paid too high a price for us to achieve our voting rights in Alabama. We cannot allow this evil to prevail as a standard of justice …. This matter is much larger than Mr. McGregor's personal fate. The battle lines between good and evil have been drawn and are clear to those of us who are children of the struggle for racial equality in the South …. We cannot allow politically motivated racists like Beason and Lewis, who had the foresight and clout to use the Department as a means to further their racial and political goals, to steal the hopes and dreams of decent, hard-working black Alabamians …. On a personal note, I never understood the mindset of battlefield commanders who sent their trial troops into battles where they knew these troops would be publicly humiliated and embarrassed. In my 39 years of commanding litigation troops in complex and challenging cases, I never subjected my troops to such a fate ….”. Despite the fact that the prosecution's case was (a) far from overwhelming and (b) sprang from a racist and partisan vote-suppression effort to manipulate the Department of Justice into becoming an unwitting tool of vote suppression, Jack Smith and his prosecution team proceeded with the retrial. On March 7, 2012, the jury found Milton McGregor and the other five defendants not guilty of all 33 felony charges. The defense victories from the first trial and retrial constituted a total repudiation and rejection of Jack Smith, his hand-picked prosecution team, and the overt racist and political agenda they sought to advance in the McGregor case. Epilogue On May 31, 2012, I emailed Jack Smith, Lanny Breuer, and James Cole this farewell message: “Several months ago, I represented Milton McGregor in connection with the DOJ's decision to retry him in its high-profile criminal case in Montgomery, Alabama. At the time, I thought that the retrial decision was made because the DOJ's internal prosecutorial review process was sorely lacking in objectivity. However, after watching the Department's stinging defeat today in the John Edwards case, it is obvious that the real problem within the DOJ's Criminal Division is not a lack of objectivity, but rather a lack of qualified senior-level case management .... I privately warned the Department in advance that it could not win the McGregor retrial, but, as case managers with decision-making authority, you decided to plow ahead and waste additional taxpayers' money in what amounted to nothing more than a pathetic exercise in futility. You have compounded the detrimental effects of the embarrassing McGregor defeat by unsuccessfully prosecuting John Edwards for committing adultery ….”. Against this backdrop, Jack Smith should immediately step down from his November 18, 2022 appointment as Special Counsel in the Trump investigation. Smith is too flawed for this important prosecutorial assignment in a politically-divided America. Simply put, Jack Smith lacks the prosecutorial judgment, objectivity, case management skills, and credibility necessary to properly assess a high-profile criminal case like Trump's. Smith has shown himself to be incapable of basing his prosecutorial decisions solely on the facts and admissible evidence in such a case. Smith is capable of destroying innocent lives without blinking an eye. Based upon what I witnessed in McGregor's case, this is his only area of expertise. As a political Independent, a trained legal expert who has won numerous landmark criminal cases, and a non-Trump supporter, I believe America deserves someone more qualified than Jack Smith to serve as Special Counsel in Trump's case. At this juncture, the publicly available evidence makes it clear that Trump's conduct warrants a criminal investigation. However, Smith's soiled reputation and sordid history as the former head of the Office of Public Integrity makes him unfit for the job.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on March 3, 2024 Charles Richard (C.R.) Patterson (1833-1910). was an American entrepreneur who started the C.R. Patterson & Sons carriage company in 1893 in Greenfield, Ohio.  Patterson & Sons grew to be the first and only black-owned and operated automobile company on the continent (from 1893-1939).   C.R. Patterson was born into slavery as the youngest of 13 children. His enslaved parents escaped from Virginia to abolition-sympathetic Greenfield, Ohio in the early 1840s.   Patterson was a local preacher in Greenfield and an abolitionist who preached equal rights and opportunities for Black Americans. Patterson was also influenced by the American abolitionist and social reformer, Frederick Douglass.  He named his oldest son in honor of Douglass. In 1873, Patterson partnered up with local businessman, J.P. Lowe, to run a carriage design firm in Greenfield.  In 1893, Patterson purchased Lowe’s share of the company and renamed it C.R. Patterson & Sons . Patterson intended to run the business with his youngest son Samuel C. Patterson, who passed away unexpectedly from illness at age 23.   Patterson's oldest son, Frederick Douglas Patterson (1871-1932), who was college educated, left his teaching position in Louisville, Kentucky to help his father run the company. Frederick took the reins of the company in 1910 after C.R. Patterson passed away. By the time Frederick Patterson took over, the company had already added automotive repair and service, as he had convinced his father that automobiles were the future.   C.R. Patterson was always financially savvy and died one of the richest people in Greenfield, Ohio, leaving the company he built to his son, Frederick Douglass Patterson. Their first automobile, the Patterson-Greenfield, rolled out on September 23, 1915 and sold for $850 . It was advertised to be of higher quality than the Ford Model T. The vehicles had a forty horsepower Continental four-cylinder engine and a top speed of 50 miles per hour. Frederick said of the Patterson-Greenfield Automobile: “It is not intended for a large car. It is designed to take the place originally held by the family surrey.  It is a 5-passenger vehicle, ample and luxurious.” The Company offered several models of coupes and sedans including a state-of-the-art 4-cylinder 30 hp Continental “Red Devil” speedster (as depicted below). C.R. Patterson & Sons was well respected and saw considerable success in the early years. Without the financial ability to expand on a large scale, the company built an estimated 150 custom-made cars between 1915 and 1918 , which were primarily sold to local and regional customers. Frederick Patterson struggled to break into the automotive sector as a large-scale manufacturer because the industry was monopolized by Henry Ford and his mass produced, less-expensive options. Despite Ford's advantage, Frederick kept at it and designed and deployed his own assembly line technique to increase output. Unable to compete with Ford’s monopoly on recreational cars, Patterson moved into commercial vehicles in 1921, producing buses and transport trucks. The company was renamed Greenfield Bus Body Company. Frederick, who died on January 18, 1932, never revealed his face to his customers, often sending a white proxy in his place to avoid customers’ prejudice. Due to the crippling effects of the Great Depression , this Black-owned, independent automotive vehicle manufacturer was ultimately forced to close production in 1939.   Both C.R. Patterson and Frederick Douglas Patterson are 2020/2021 inductees in the Automotive Hall of Fame in Detroit.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on January 22, 2023 In 2013, I published a Facebook article on what African-Americans had to do to empower ourselves. The article was published In the aftermath of George Zimmerman's acquittal in the Trayvon Martin murder case. The Zimmerman verdict made most African-Americans realize that we must empower ourselves in order to find, secure, and enjoy our rightful place in American society. It had become painfully clear that no political figure or governmental body would do this for us. At the time, I pointed out that affirmative action was under fire. The Voting Rights Act had been been gutted by the U.S. Supreme Court. State and federal court systems were totally insensitive to our rights and needs. Our major cities were bankrupt and dying. The official policy in Washington, when it came to African-Americans, was one of “benign” neglect. Everybody wanted our votes. but nobody wanted to hear our voices when setting a political agenda. I noted that our civil rights leaders were worn out and irrelevant. Our political leaders at all levels of government had been neutered and were often nothing more than pack mules for corporate special interest groups. Our religious leaders were busy building personality-based ministries. Our schools and communities were hunkered-down in survival mode. Our role models were athletes and entertainers. Our teenagers were being slain in record numbers, all too often by other black teenagers. Our mayors did not have a clue on how to combat skyrocketing gun violence in their cities. As a people, we were living for today, and not tomorrow. And, we were holding our breath everyday in the hope that we would not get fired from our jobs at companies we do not own. This was the sad state of black America ten years ago. On January 15, 2023, I published an article titled, " The Sad State of Black America in 2023 ." Everything I observed in 2013 is true today. However, we are worse off today because of (a) the rise of Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans throughout the country and (b) the complete absence of strong, effective, visionary, and courageous black political leadership, nationwide. As was the case in 2013, we are desperately looking for somebody to do something to help us come out of this miserable state of being. Nobody will. The cavalry is not coming. We have reached a place where we must act to save ourselves. How will we do it? We must empower ourselves on a personal, familial and communal level. We have the ability to do this; we just don’t realize it, and we rarely use it. We empowered ourselves once in Tulsa, Oklahoma during the early 1900s, and it was called "Black Wall Street." For over a century, this chapter in black history was never taught in public schools. Now, we know why. Here is a Practical Guide to Economic Empowerment for Blacks: Empowerment takes focus, determination, discipline, and hard work. It is not for the weak or faint of heart. We cannot sprint to a state of empowerment; it is a long marathon run to this destination. This may not be a particularly hard feat (given our current state of being), but it is certainly a different way of thinking for us. Where do we start? We start with the realization that money is power. The more money we amass and control, the more power and influence we can wield. Can we realistically amass significant amounts of money and wealth in our current state of being? Yes, we are one of the largest and most loyal consumer groups in America. Too often, however, our loyalty is to the wrong people, companies, and things. Can we amass enough money and wealth to make a difference in our lifetime? Yes, we have a long and distinguished track-record of spending money in larger amounts during a much shorter period of time than other Americans. How is this empowerment possible when we seem to be barely getting by each month? We must start by living below our means. Too often, we get caught up on spending money on non-income producing things like a house that’s too large, over-the-top furniture, a luxury car or two, designer clothes, high-end watches, expensive purses, etc., all just to dazzle and impress others. These things cost a lot of money, but rarely produce significant wealth. An extravagant lifestyle may feel good, but this spending habit is not an empowerment tool. After we finish this spending spree, we have no cash left. Next, we must give our children a head start in life. Rather than wasting our hard-earned money on must-have gadgets, shoes and clothes, we should give our children and grandchildren a savings account and fund it regularly with the “throw away” money we can save from reigned-in frivolous spending. Gadgets, shoes and clothes come and go, but money will always be fashionable and hip. We also need to focus our kids on owning businesses , as opposed to becoming a permanent class of job seekers. We must break the generational cycle of shying away from the opportunities, responsibilities, and difficulties of business ownership. We have to think about creating jobs, not simply applying for them. Additionally, we must expand the definition of success beyond our focus on professional athletes and entertainers . Only 5,000 or so of the more than 34 million blacks in America will find financial success as professional athletes and entertainers. Even then, very few of these individuals possess the requisite knowledge, skills and abilities to properly control, protect, leverage, and grow their money and other tangible assets. We must create our own wealth to be respected and treated fairly. People of color around the world are doing it. African-Americans can do it too. Now is the time for us to start controlling our economic destiny . We have to move from a population of unappreciated consumers to an army of valued business producers. Then, and only then, can we train and hire a workforce that mirrors us, provide major vendor opportunities for others in our business alliance network, contribute to and reinvest in the growth and stability of our neighborhoods, and get the attention of others who hold power. The money we put in our children’s and grandchildren’s savings accounts will eventually become the working capital they need to launch their businesses and give them a meaningful chance in the new empowerment paradigm. So, the next time you are tempted to buy another pair of red-bottoms or a Gucci purse, stop yourself and place that money in your child’s savings account. As for the money you would spend while pontificating about the lives of reality TV stars, rappers, and professional athletes on a bar stool during happy hour—put that in their savings accounts too. Many of us need to rethink all of the money we are spending on private school education (grades 1-12) for our kids and grandchildren . Will this tuition money be more useful to our children in an interest-bearing savings account reserved for a future business venture (after college) than it will be for them to rub shoulders with a bunch of rich kids from the suburbs? Which financial choice will give our children the best footings in life? Self-employment and the high self-esteem that comes from business ownership, or a daytime association with suburbanite kids who, like Florida governor Ron DeSantis and their parents, believe African American history programs lack educational value? If you struggle with the answer to this question, you are lost in the fog of a self-induced inferiority complex. Epilogue I believe that African-Americans must invest in ourselves and in each other. Every ethnic group in America has found empowerment and success this way. We must follow suit and harness our economic power. Once we start producing money and wealth for ourselves, America will pay attention to us. We must also treat each other with dignity and respect. When this occurs, we will be treated with dignity and respect by other ethnic groups. In the final analysis, we must become our own cavalry. There is no "savior" in the political world who will protect us and advance our cause for economic empowerment and financial independence. We must create, advance, and protect our own economic security.