The Democrats' bungled assault on Rudy

Issue Date: www.insightmag.com - May 1-7, 2007, Posted On: 4/30/2007

The Democrats' bungled assault on Rudy

Commentary by William John Hagan

Apparently it has become obvious to Democrats that former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is the one man standing in the way of their recapturing the White House in 2008. Stricken with the realization that none of the current Republican candidates have much of a chance of defeating him in the GOP primaries, the Democratic Party and its leading presidential candidates have launched an absurdly misguided attack against “America’s Mayor.” The reason for the assault can only be explained by one factor: Giuliani is the man to beat. Despite their best efforts, it would be virtually impossible for either Hilary Clinton or Barack Obama to defeat Giuliani in a general election. Neither candidate could compete against Giuliani’s proven track record of successful executive leadership.

As mayor of New York, Giuliani was despised by the Democratic establishment for lowering taxes, declaring war on the systematic abuses by the city’s unions, combating welfare fraud, and almost eradicating violent crime through effective police management— despite union objections. As a result, the Democratic Party has turned its full munitions on the former mayor; while, almost completely ignoring the other current and potential slate of Republican candidates.

The most venal attacks on Giuliani have to do with his handling of the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York City. This calculated assault has come courtesy of that troika of temerity Howard Dean, Clinton and Obama, but it has been in development for months. The first trial balloon was likely orchestrated by a man named Harold Schaitberger. Schaitberger is a Democratic Party operative and the president of the International Association of Fire Fighters. He was an active participant in John Kerry’s failed 2004 presidential attempt, and his union’s Political Action Committee has already contributed thousands of dollars to the past campaigns of Clinton and Obama.

Schaitberger has used his position as union president to make patently false claims about Giuliani’s handling of 9/11, and is believed to be behind a series of protests by family members of fallen New York City firefighters who have criticized the mayor for communications equipment used on the day of the historic attacks. The mainstream media has taken great pleasure in reporting on these protests while failing to research the protestors’ political motivations. Media outlets have also generally failed to report on, or even explain, the support that Giuliani has from many New York firefighters such as retired New York firefighter Lee Ielpi, whose firefighter son Jonathan Lee Ielpi died on September 11. In an open letter, Ielpi denounced the political activities of the union’s leader by stating that he was “deeply disappointed and disheartened to learn of the recent partisan political activities” of the International Association of Fire Fighters.

This past week, however, the Democratic Party has taken the attacks against Giuliani to a new low when they responded to the mayor’s statement that America will be safer from a terrorist attack with a Republican president. In its wake, Dean’s spokeswoman Karen Finney was left to make the bizarre accusation that Giuliani had failed to prepare for the September 11 attacks—as if the mayor of New York should have been able to stop two planes hijacked in Boston from flying through federal air space into the World Trade Center. This nonsense by Finney leads one to think that Dean actually believes that Giuliani should have had military anti-aircraft batteries in place to shoot down commercial aircraft that threatened the city of New York. The troublesome reality is that the only person who could have prevented the September 11 attacks on New York was former President Bill Clinton.

In fact: In 1996 Osama bin Laden, the mastermind and financer of 9/11, was living in Sudan. Despite denials from former Clinton administration officials, Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir offered to turn over bin Laden to the United States government in exchange for an easing of sanctions against Sudan. This report was confirmed in 2001 by Mansoor Ijaz, the man who between 1996 and 1998 was responsible for negotiating with the Sudanese government on behalf of the Clinton administration. In addition to turning down Sudan’s offer to hand over bin Laden, the Clinton administration knowingly assisted the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in its independence struggle from the former Yugoslavia.

In fact: One might recall that then-President Clinton invaded the Serbian province of Kosovo during the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Clinton’s invasion of Serbia resulted in the KLA taking control of Kosovo under a United Nations mandate. However, what is rarely mentioned is the fact that the KLA, which is a European-based Islamic organization, was in part funded by bin Laden. Despite this inconvenient truth, former President Clinton helped this group take over power in Kosovo after bin Laden had already attacked two United States embassies in Africa and the USS Cole.

The reality is that the presidential candidate today that bares the most responsibility for the 9/11 attacks on the United States is Hillary Clinton. Unlike prior first ladies, Hillary played a notably active, and once well advertised, role in the day-to-day operations of her husband’s presidency and is, therefore, justifiably open to scrutiny. The Clinton administration’s well-documented, but little discussed, failure to stop bin Laden before he attacked the United States on September 11th falls squarely in the Democrats’ lap and, by association, on presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. The Democratic Party might just want to ponder this fact before they continue to do violence to Giuliani’s heroic leadership on America’s darkest day.

- William John Hagan has most recently served as Communications Director for former Congressman Mac Collins. His editorial work has appeared in Insight, the Providence Journal, the Houston Home Journal, the Canada Free Press, World Net Daily, Freedom Today Magazine (U.K.), and in other publications. He can be reached at: William_Hagan@excite.com.

Obama is leaving himself open to an assassination attempt

Issue Date: www.insightmag.com - April 24-30, 2007, Posted On: 4/23/2007

Hagan: Obama is leaving himself open to an assassination attempt

Commentary by William John Hagan

As communications director to a high profile congressional campaign during the 2006 midterm elections, I had the rare opportunity to catch a behind the scenes glimpse of our United States Secret Service in action. On two occasions, President Bush visited Georgia in support of former Congressman Mac Collins. For reasons of national security, I will not go into some of the finer details of our Presidential Protection. However, I will say that some of their tools might have come out of a Tom Clancy novel. I walked away from both presidential visits with a profound respect for the men and women who protect our leaders. Our system is relentless in protecting our leaders from harm.

The system only works, however, if a candidate is willing to engage it. This is clearly not happening in the case of our current presidential front-runners, one of whom will likely be our next president—and I don’t mean Hillary Rodham Clinton who, as former first lady, is afforded some level of Secret Service protection for the remainder of her natural life. At a recent appearance in Atlanta, Sen. Barack Obama drew a crowd of 20,000 supporters to hear him speak at an open air venue. As the first African-American in history to have a real chance at winning our presidency, Obama is tempting fate as a high profile assassination target for numerous individuals.

Despite his high visibility, during his speech in Atlanta most of the cardinal rules of VIP security were violated. First, he spoke to a crowd of 20,000 people who had not been screened for weapons. Next, he spoke on a field which was surrounded by buildings that were a perfect vantage point for any sniper. It is likely that Obama has private security and it is also apparent that they don’t have a clue as to what they are doing. The nation received a clear lesson in the failure of private security protecting presidential candidates when Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated after declining police protection in 1968. Like Kennedy, Obama could easily be targeted by an individual who, for whatever deranged reason, might want to see him off the ticket for good, and his current lack of security is almost courting this tragic, and historically predictable, result.

The question is: Who is to blame for this lack of security? There is no doubt who would be the first to be called to task if tragedy befell Obama. Every pundit in the nation would point their sharpened swords at the United States Secret Service. However, the Secret Service would not be to blame. Candidate Obama, despite being a clear potential target for assassination, has ignored his own personal security. Presidential front-runners like Obama can obtain Secret Service protection after meeting some minor requirements, but first they must ask for that protection; it cannot be forced upon them. As of Monday April 16th, Obama’s campaign had not requested Secret Service protection.

Obama has already made some major freshman mistakes during his run for the presidency. But this is one risk that no man can afford to miscalculate. The time has come for Obama to realize that his team is in over its head when it comes to protecting his safety. One watches in abject disbelief at the careless mistakes that are made. The United States Secret Service is the finest protective agency in the world and it is time for Obama to put aside his pride, or bravado, and ask for the protection he requires. The last thing this nation needs is another remarkable martyr.

- William John Hagan has most recently served as Communications Director for former Congressman Mac Collins. His editorial work has appeared in Insight, the Providence Journal, the Houston Home Journal, the Canada Free Press, World Net Daily, Freedom Today Magazine (U.K.), and in other publications. He can be reached at: William_Hagan@excite.com.

The ghosts of Vietnam continue to haunt McCain

Published in the April 17th edition of the Washington Times’ Insight Magazine

Hagan: The ghosts of Vietnam continue to haunt McCain
Commentary by William John Hagan


Sen. John McCain’s life story should make him the darling of the Republican Party. Instead, he is a man whom the GOP’s leadership and grassroots view as a traitor due to his unabashed cooperation with the Democratic Party. His supporters would claim that these relationships make him all the more electable in a general election but, in the primary phase, they have severely damaged his ability to raise money and likely have, ultimately, rendered him unelectable.

McCain’s test by fire as a POW during the Vietnam War should have insulated him from almost any attack, but it appears his actions during that war have been of little benefit. On the surface, his early life story is what legends are made of. By now all of the United States knows his story well. In 1967, John McCain’s A-4 Skyhawk was shot down by enemy anti-aircraft fire. He ejected from his plane, suffering two broken arms and a broken leg. He was then captured by Vietnamese civilians who beat the living hell out of a man who could not defend himself. His treatment at the hands of the civilians was a walk in the park compared to his later treatment by the first Vietnamese soldiers who took him into captivity. The Vietcong pierced his left foot and groin with a bayonet before crushing his shoulder with a rifle butt. The defenseless McCain was fortunate that these monsters that lacked any respect for the rules of civilized warfare did not kill him on the spot.

McCain survived his capture and was taken off to the Hanoi Hilton or hell on earth for lack of a better word. Likely, resigned to his fate, McCain at first stood up to torture and refused to cooperate with his captors. However, shortly after his arrival in Hanoi, it was discovered that McCain’s father was Admiral John Sidney McCain, Jr., the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command. McCain was offered early release in an attempt to embarrass his father and the United States Navy. McCain boldly refused the Vietnamese offer of freedom and remained a POW for another five years. By any definition this was a true act of valor.

Despite these facts, many of McCain’s fellow Vietnam veterans do not look at him as a hero. His detractors openly question both his conduct as a POW and his later effort to prevent inquires into the possibility that POWs remained prisoners of the Vietnamese long after the end of the war. McCain has freely admitted that he disclosed military information to the Vietnamese in exchange for medical treatment for the wounds he had suffered during his capture. McCain claims that the information was little more then the name of his ship and the target of his mission. This revelation by McCain, however, naturally raises a red flag about what other possible information he disclosed.

The Vietnamese have never revealed his level of cooperation with the enemy so the only source of information we have is John McCain himself. Furthermore in 1969, according to UPI, McCain participated in a radio broadcast where he admitted bombing civilian targets. During this broadcast, McCain also praised the medical treatment he had received. One thing for certain is that McCain violated the Code of Conduct that a POW is expected to follow. This is something he readily admits and claims to regret. It is likely that history will never know the true impact of McCain’s collaboration with the enemy.

McCain further angered Vietnam veterans during Senate hearings on POWs allegedly left behind after the Vietnam War. McCain regularly engaged in verbal combat with the families of missing soldiers who simply wanted to know if it was possible that their family members were still being held by the Vietnamese. After five and a half years as a POW, one would think that McCain would have been on the front line seeking the truth about the whereabouts of fellow POWs and MIAs. Instead, he denied that Vietnam was still holding any American soldiers. The question must be asked: Why would he come to the defense of a people who held him prisoner for over five years? In light of his actions, the question must also be asked: Is John McCain afraid of the Vietnamese government and the information they could reveal? And, if this is the case, Republicans must wonder—fairly or unfairly—who owns John McCain and, after such a traumatic ordeal, is he really capable of leading our country without compromise.

- William John Hagan has most recently served as Communications Director for former Congressman Mac Collins. His editorial work has appeared in Insight, the Providence Journal, the Houston Home Journal, the Canada Free Press, World Net Daily, Freedom Today Magazine (U.K.), and in other publications. He can be reached at: William_Hagan@excite.com.

The Hagan Report 01/23/2007

Published in the January 23rd edition of the Washington Times’ Insight Magazine

Issue Date: www.insightmag.com - Jan. 23-29, 2007, Posted On: 1/23/2007

Hagan: Barack Hussein Obama's religious problem
Commentary by William John Hagan

Barack Hussein Obama is the flavor of the month for the Democratic Party. Unlike the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mr. Obama has no substantial track record on which to judge him. Ms. Clinton is respectively loved or hated for the views she holds, and even if they are ever-changing she does have a record on which she can be judged. Until now, the primary criticism from the right-wing is that Mr. Obama’s father and stepfather were both Muslims, although this fact has been called into question by some liberal pundits but never denied by Senator Obama. However the fact remains that despite his inconvenient middle name, which he has conveniently omitted from his official Senate biography, Obama is not a Muslim but a member of the United Church of Christ.

In theory, the view that a man’s religious beliefs should not disqualify him from serving as president is widely accepted. The reality is far different. At this time in our nation’s history a member of the Muslim faith could never be elected to the presidency. Right or wrong that is just a fact. Soon we will see a behind-the-scenes effort by the left-wing media to attack the Church of Latter Day Saints in an effort to derail Mitt Romney’s presidential aspirations. Despite the fact that the Mormons are some of the most decent and ethical people in American society their beliefs differ widely from mainstream America. It will take little effort on the part of the left-wing media to tarnish a Mormon presidency as unacceptable. However, Mr. Obama, on the surface, should not face these problems as he presents himself as a member of a mainstream Christian church and, despite some claims to the contrary, he maintains that he is not a Muslim. In fact his Muslim father abandoned the family when he was about two years of age, so it is unlikely he had that much influence on the young Obama.

Surprisingly Barack Obama’s Achilles Heel might very well be his choice of Christian churches. Despite its mainstream name the "United Church of Christ" holds many beliefs that many Americans would find highly questionable. The United Church of Christ was formed in 1957 and is estimated to have approximately 1.2 million members. The Church itself gives local congregations a great deal of control over individual doctrines. Mr. Obama and his family belong to Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. It is always refreshing to see a politician who is active in his local church; however, in Mr. Obama’s case his choice of congregations might raise some eyebrows.

Trinity United Church of Christ is a church which seems on the surface to exclude people based on race. In short, Trinity United Church of Christ is segregationist. The Church’s Web site declares, "We are a congregation which is unashamedly Black…We are an African people, and remain ‘true to our native land,’ the mother continent, the cradle of civilization." In this declaration of belief Mr. Obama’s church seems to make it very clear that they are not welcoming of other Christians based solely on their race. If a white politician were a member of a church which declared itself to be “unashamedly white” he would be rightfully run out of public service.

The United Church of Christ is also the largest American denomination to accept the concept of gay marriage. A resolution adopted by 80 percent of the church’s delegates at its General Synod in 2005 urged its local churches “to consider adopting Wedding Policies that do not discriminate against couples based on gender.” Homosexual unions or marriages are overwhelmingly opposed by the vast majority of Americans and Senator Obama will certainly be confronted with this question in the near future.

Homosexual marriage is not the only politically sensitive subjects that his church has seemed eager to confront. The United Church of Christ also requires the Church’s “Corporate Social Responsibility Ministry to begin the process of divestment from companies involved with Israel’s illegal… occupations of the West Bank and Gaza, the building of the ‘security fence,’ and the Israeli settlements within Palestinian Territory” (Twenty-fourth General Synod XV held in Atlanta, Georgia). Mr. Obama’s affiliation with a church that actively supports the terrorist government in the Palestinian Territory should be the nail in his political coffin. The Simon Wiesenthal Center stated in 2005 that the church’s policy was “functionally anti-Semitic”; while, the Anti-Defamation League called the policy “deeply troubling.” Mr. Obama’s failure to distance himself from these church policies will likely severely harm his electoral chances with Jewish voters and members of fundamentalist Christian churches which have become ardent supporters of Israel in recent years.

As Mr. Obama’s popularity grows, it is predictable that Hillary Clinton’s supporters in the mainstream media might begin to report on some of the more disturbing beliefs of Senator Obama. In short, Senator Obama’s lack of a track record which may seem so beneficial this early in the campaign may become his undoing when the American public and rational voters begin to feel the heat and teach Mr. Obama a lesson in real world politics.

- William John Hagan has most recently served as Communications Director for former Congressman Mac Collins. His editorial work has appeared in the Providence Journal, the Houston Home Journal, the Canada Free Press, World Net Daily, Freedom Today Magazine (U.K.), and in other publications. He can be reached at: William_Hagan@excite.com.

Staff photo with the President: Ryan Shannon, Bill Hagan, Laurie Barton, President George W. Bush, Joannah Hollis, and Chris Perkins

The Hagan Report 11/23/2006

The Hagan Report:

Published by The Canada Free Press and America’s News Source

War strategy: righting our ship of state

By William John Hagan

November 23, 2006

The newly Democratic controlled Congress has not even been seated and the word on the street is that the United States can not win the war in Iraq. This revelation has been amplified by such senior statesmen as former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and United States Senator John McCain, and must come as a great relief to Usama bin Laden and Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In concert with Kissinger’s statements, Presidential hopeful Senator John McCain of Arizona said American troops in Iraq were “fighting and dying for a failed policy.” Kissinger is even calling upon the United States to enter into talks with our enemies, Iran and Syria. Kissinger’s suggestions are vaguely reminiscent of the negotiations that resulted in the United States losing the Vietnam War; meanwhile, McCain’s plan- or lack thereof - seems to be little more than an attempt to advance his Presidential ambitions.

There is no question that the new political climate in Washington will require the Bush administration to reevaluate their policies for victory in Iraq. The new Democratic Congress will attempt to cut funding for the war and bog down the administration in redundant and fruitless investigations into past actions. This will truly be a defining moment for the Bush Presidency. If Bush follows a path of defiance and strength then he may go down in history as the savior of the Western World; while, even the slightest misstep will result in him being painted as a modern day Nero.

There is no question that the Bush Administration’s accelerated plan of nation building in Iraq has been a well intentioned failure. It appears that President Bush’s high moral convictions and Biblical beliefs in good versus evil have allowed him to follow a path that has done little to bring the Iraqi war to a conclusion. The administration has wasted billions of dollars and countless man hours attempting to rebuild the infrastructure of a country still under siege. It is not the job of the military to replace sewer lines, build schools, or construct state of the art hospitals. The job of our military is simply to fight and win wars. Our mistake, an honorable but distorted relic of the Marshall Plan, was to confuse military victory with nation building. Rebuilding the nation of an enemy comes only after their complete and utter surrender.

In order to win in Iraq, the United States must consider removing its troops from that country’s population centers. Urban warfare is the talisman of the terrorist and the bane of civilized nations. Only the most malicious and backward enemy uses it cities, teeming with civilians, as a defense shield for its military objectives. The Iraqi government must take control of its cities. American troops should be used to protect the vital oil fields of Iraq as well as its ports and pipelines. In addition, our troops should be used to secure Iraq’s vast borders with Iran and Syria in an effort to prevent the further influx of weapons and mercenaries into Iraq for the benefit al-Qaeda. It would also be wise for Iraq’s own government to consider moving out of the Green Zone in Baghdad to a more secure location far from the major cities in which al-Qaeda’s terrorist cells seem to feel free to operate.

It will take years for the Iraqi government and the United States to finally defeat the enemy but we will not be able to even begin without major adjustments to the way we fight today’s urban war. The United States can no longer afford to fight wars based on some fabricated rules of civilized warfare. If an Iraqi city falls to al-Qaeda, after our troops are repositioned, then that city must be made an example for the entire world to observe. The first city in Iraq to fall into the hands of al-Qaeda terrorists should be obliterated as a testament to our United States’ airpower and artillery might. The scorched earth should then be left as a permanent reminder of what happens to those who defy the will of the United States of America.

William John Hagan has most recently served as Communications Director for former Congressman Mac Collins. His editorial work has appeared in the Providence Journal, the Houston Home Journal, the Canada Free Press, World Net Daily, Freedom Today Magazine (U.K.), and in other publications. He can be reached at: William_Hagan@excite.com.

The Hagan Report

Published by:

The Canada Free Press and America's News Source

The Worst of Times
By William John Hagan

Thursday, November 16, 2006

These were the best of times. The United States was attacked by an enemy that was committed to destroying the Judeo-Christian foundation of our nation. Rather then allow the Islamic fundamentalist enemy to fight a war on our soil, the President and Congress took this war to the heart of the Middle East. They not only succeeded in protecting the people of the United States but, in a time of war, they fostered a time of record economic growth and one of the lowest periods of unemployment in our history. Therefore, it made complete sense, that on Election Day the American people rewarded the efforts of their leaders by turning over both Houses of Congress to a Democratic Party led by individuals who are determined to dismantle every policy that has kept the United States secure and prosperous since the attacks of September 11th 2001.

There is no question that last week’s shift in congressional power was a direct result of the War in Iraq. The media and innumerable individuals such as Cindy Sheehan, Nancy Pelosi, John Conyers, John Kerry, Jack Murtha, and the remaining propagandists of the left, successfully painted a distorted picture of our nation’s mission in the Middle East. The result was the brainwashing of the American electorate and a Democratic victory in both houses of Congress. Incredibly, the Democrats have succeeded in convincing the public that our soliders are fighting a war without purpose that the United States can never win. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Since the beginning of the war just over 3,000 Allied troops have been killed; by comparison the Allies lost almost 8,000 troops on D-Day during the Second World War. The loss of approximately 3,000 lives during the current prolonged conflict in the Middle East is, in reality, a sign of our success and a reasonable price to pay for domestic security. The arguments over Weapons of Mass Destruction and Saddam Hussein’s ties to al-Qaeda are meaningless. The reality is that the War in the Middle East is a war of containment. We are fighting radical Islam on its own territory rather than in the United States and Europe.

The success of the Democrats in last Tuesday’s elections will likely bring an end to this war of containment. It is highly unlikely that President Bush will be able to continue to sustain prolonged military might in the Middle East when the funding for our military is now in the hands of a Democratic Party which is determined to follow a policy of cutting and running in Iraq. The shining victory by the Democrats last week will result in the darkest of days for these United States.

The inevitable withdrawal of United States troops from the Middle East will free up the resources of al-Qaeda. There is also no doubt that without the support of the United States military that the democratically elected Government of Iraq will collapse. This result will be a clear victory for radical Islam who will soon control the oil wealth of Iraq. Control of Iraq’s oil proceeds by al-Qaeda is a stunning turn of events. It will give the forces of terror almost infinite resources to direct against the United States, our Middle East Allies, Great Britain, and Israel.

By electing a Democratic Congress determined to follow a policy of appeasement towards al-Qaeda; the American people have tragically miscalculated. What was a relatively small regional conflict in Iraq will now be left unchecked by the leaders of the Democratic Party and the President, without the backing of Congress, will be powerless to control the situation. With United States troops inevitably removed from the Iraqi theater the Islamic Revolution will continue to grow and an Islamic Caliphate will be formed from the nations that will fall to al-Qaeda. The Islamic world will continue to attack the West and, likely, cut off our access to their oil. The end result of our Election Day vote for peace will be a catastrophic World War which could have been avoided had the American people simply had the common sense to support a war of containment rather than the fantasy of appeasement.

William John Hagan has most recently served as Communications Director for former Congressman Mac Collins. His editorial work has appeared in the Providence Journal, the Houston Home Journal, the Canada Free Press, World Net Daily, Freedom Today Magazine (U.K.), and in other publications. He can be reached at: William_Hagan@excite.com.

Bill Hagan and Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, in Warner Robins Georgia




Bill Hagan and Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney outside of Boston




Bill Hagan and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IL) in Moultrie Georgia




Bill Hagan and Ralph Reed in Warner Robins Georgia




Bill Hagan and United States Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D - NY) in New York

Congressman Mac Collins, Bill Hagan, and Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman listen to Dr. Lee Hall speak at Macon Georgia’s Bibb County GOP Headquarters during a rally for Congressman Collins.

Bill Hagan and United States Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) at Atlanta’s Buckhead Club where Georgia’s business leaders gathered to support Bill’s friend Congressman Mac Collins (Ret R-GA)

A Vietnam era helicopter carrying Bill Hagan leaves a political event south of Atlanta.

Bill Hagan and Congressman Mac Collins in Tifton Georgia

Congressman Mac Collins (Ret. R-GA), Bill Hagan, and United States Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)

General Rick Goddard, Congressman Mac Collins, Bill Hagan, and Governor Sonny Perdue

Georgia's Governor Sonny Perdue and Bill Hagan

Joannah Hollis, Bill Hagan, Congressman John Boehner (the House Majority Leader), and Kelly Earley after dinner at the Houston Lake Country Club

Bill Hagan prior to a charity motorcycle ride for the children of police officers killed in the line of duty