White House Chris Dodd Petition Response, Comment
agree to only create petitions consistent with the limited
purpose of the We the People platform, which is to allow
individuals to petition the Administration to take action
on a range of issues — to address a problem, support
or oppose a proposal, or otherwise change or
continue federal government policy or actions.
To focus discussion, the platform is limited to a discrete set
of topics, which may be adjusted over time.
Chris Dodd's admission of using financial coercion for a specific
legislative gain is a problem that the American people care deeply
about. There should be no bribery, extortion, blackmail, coercions,
or any other illegal actions dictating our governing law.
This is a proposal to change or continue federal policy or actions
by petitioning the government to investigate a former congressmen
turned MPAA/CEO that publicly addressed the government and the
people on illegal grounds.
This email is to focus discussion on this issue and address the
response by the White House which was avoided over possible
technicality that I believe does not exist or coincides with this
Terms of Participation. At the very least, The White House could
comment on the process which is currently being acted upon
concerning this instance, without reveling needed to know
information for the purpose of investigating.
agree not to create petitions that fall outside
this limited purpose—for example, petitions that
advertise or call for the endorsement or purchase of
commercial goods or services, petitions that expressly
urge the support or opposition of candidates for
elected office, petitions that do not address the current
or potential actions or policies of the federal
government, or petitions that address a topic not included in We
the People at the time the petition was created.
The Chris Dodd petition doesn't fall outside the scope of the
limited purpose and intent of the petitioning platform. It does not
call for an endorsement or commercial purchase or action; it does
not urge support or opposition of candidates for government
election; it DOES address current and potential actions or policies
of the federal government, namely, the investigation of Chris Dodd
and government corruption. How else is the People suppose to ensure
that our government officials and government law isn't being abused,
or manipulated for illegal means?
This is deeply disheartening and encourages a lost of faith in our
government and their commitment to the People of the United States
of America. It is a slap in the face for anyone who respects the
process of petitioning and laws to not address this issue. Not
addressing this issue over a possible technicality, when a former
congressmen/current MPAA/CEO is concern, who has ties to government
law and an organization that does political lobbying, is suspicious.
also agree not to post threats of unlawful violence
or harm to any individual or group; obscene, vulgar, or
lewd material; defamatory or fraudulent statements; terms
commonly understood to constitute profanity or abusive or
degrading slurs or epithets; information invading an
individual’s privacy; and information that if published
would violate criminal law or give rise to civil liability.
These categories of material are inconsistent with the
limited purpose of We the People and the larger purpose
and function of the White House’s website.
I agreed and did not post threats or unlawful violence or harm to
any individual or group, nor did I sign any petition which would be
construed or constitute such a claim. I did not post any comments
which were vulgar, nor lewd, nor defamatory, nor fraudulent: the
words discussed are of Chris Dodd's own devising and were open to
public scrutiny; this is neither defamatory or fraudulent; this
neither constitutes profanity, nor is it abusive or slurs or
epithets. This information is not infringing on an individual's
privacy, as it was Chris Dodd/MPAA which opened the statements for
public scrutiny; it would not violate criminal law or give rise to
civil liability: in actuality, Chris Dodd/MPAA statements
constitutes civil unrest.
In conclusion, I find it suspicious that the White House declined to
respond, due to a possible technicality, instead of encouraging a
forum for discussion on this important matter. If Congress can't
comment or act on this matter, it should have been transferred to
the appropriate branch of government like the petitioning platform
suggests. Instead, the White House's response elicits concerns with
our governments bodies and civil unrest, and their commitment to
justice. This is especially true when concerning Chris Dodd, who is
closely tied to government policy, closely tied to a lobbying
organization which is pushing through legislative which infringes on
our rights, and the rights and freedoms on the internet; this is
suspicious when legislative gets pushed through the current process,
so fast that: the people almost had no way to respond and protest
such legislation without drastic means implemented by/and only could
have been through the internet. This is deeply reflective of our
governments commitment to justice, and the legitimacy of our
Therefore, I petition the government in this email to properly
addressed, through the respective branches, to handle the concerns
of the people about government coercion, Chris Dodd, and
manipulation of government law. This, indeed, should not be allowed
to continue and opens dangerous precedent for future incidents
concerning: bribery, extortion, blackmail, and coercion of the
government and law.