At least some of the protesters who looted, rioted, burned buildings and overturned police cars in Ferguson, Missouri, last year were promised payment of up to $5,000 per month to join the protests.
However, when the Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (MORE), the successor group to the now-bankrupt St. Louis branch of ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), stiffed the protesters, they launched a sit-in protest at the headquarters of MORE and created a Twitter page to demand their money, the Washington Times reports.
Former U.S. Rep. Allen B. West noted on his website, “Instead of being thankful for getting off the unemployment line for a few weeks and having a little fun protesting, the paid rioters who tore up Ferguson, MO, are protesting again.
Deep into the seventh year of his tenure, Barack Obama is thinking about his post-presidential legacy. We know this because he’s telling us so.
In an interview this week with The Atlantic about the potential deal with Iran regarding its nuclear program, the president sought to use the fact of his relative youth and his consciousness about how history might judge him to his advantage: “Look, 20 years from now, I’m still going to be around, God willing. If Iran has a nuclear weapon, it’s my name on this. I think it’s fair to say that in addition to our profound national-security interests, I have a personal interest in locking this down.”
In one sense, this is what we want presidents to worry about. We want them to be restrained by the cautionary examples provided by history and by the fact that history will judge them.
But what if the desire to tip the scales of history’s judgment in his favor leads a president to take dangerous risks?
There’s a REASON they’re hiding it from PUBLIC view — Obama’s Fast-track Trade Promotion Authority – a terrible law at the worst possible time – allows the president to GO AROUND Congress, undermine U.S. interests, and subject America to INTERNATIONAL laws antithetical to the United States Constitution!!
REUTERS/Jonathan Bachman
by CAROLINE MAY20 May 2015463
With the Senate poised to vote to end debate on Obama’s fast-track trade legislation,
Wednesday, Sessions took on arguments for the trade deal with a series of what he office says are “myths” versus “truths” about the trade deal under consideration in Congress.
In the myth buster account, Sessions’ office says not only will fast-track erode congressional power over the trade process but the trade agreements implemented under that authority will trump U.S. law.
Myth: Trade agreements implemented under fast-track will not supersede existing U.S. law.
Truth: Every trade agreement negotiated by the President and foreign governments is accompanied by implementing legislation which necessarily supersedes existing law. Proponents of fast-track are relying on semantics: the trade agreement itself will not supersede existing law, but the “fast-tracked” legislation implementing the trade agreement will. What’s more, the Trans-Pacific Partnership—which would be fast-tracked by TPA—will give jurisdiction to international tribunals to settle disputes between parties to the agreement.
Myth: Congress will have more control over the trade process under fast-track.
Truth: If Congress gives the Executive six-year fast-track authority, the Senate will cede its ability to amend any future legislation implementing any yet-unseen global trade and regulatory pact; cede its ability to control debate over that pact; and cede its ability to subject that pact to the 67-vote threshold required for treaties, as well as the 60-vote threshold required for important legislation. Proponents of fast-track suggest the negotiating objectives somehow bind the Administration; this is false. The negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership are nearly complete and have been ongoing for years, long before any negotiating objectives will have been suggested. Moreover, the negotiating objectives are vague and lack any meaningful enforcement mechanisms—particularly enforcement from Senators and Representatives not on the revenue committees. Congress will be giving up the only leverage it has: the ability to amend legislation or to refuse to cut-off debate. No fast-tracked deal has ever been defeated, regardless of whether fast-track “objectives” have been ignored, overlooked, or violated by the Executive.
Myth: Congress is ceding no institutional powers under fast-track.
Truth: By eliminating its own powers of review and amendment, Congress would dramatically shift the carefully calibrated balance of power between Congress and the President. Fast-track would ensure that the President has complete discretion over the drafting of international agreements Congress has never even seen.
The myth busters continue to attack the idea that Congress can simply block a deal the president negotiates but that it does not like. In fact, the office argues, history belies that assertion.
Myth: If the President ignores the negotiating objectives, Congress can simply block the deal.
Truth: A fast-tracked trade deal has never been blocked. By denying members any opportunity to slow debate, mobilize the public by seeking extra time, amend the deal, or seek a better deal, fast-tracked legislation is always ratified no matter how flawed. The train will have left the station once fast-track is adopted. Without any possibility of a 60-vote, let alone 67-vote, threshold in the Senate, this final check will have been removed. Additionally, the revenues and rules committees have exclusive control over enforcement, eliminating the ability of rank-and-file members to hold the Administration accountable for violations. Those saying Congress can just vote down a bad trade deal ignore the unbroken cycle of history.
They further contend that even if Congress were to preempt history and block an agreement, there would still be an agreement in the balance.
Myth: If, for the first time ever, Congress somehow did manage to block a fast-tracked deal, there is no further threat to U.S sovereignty.
Truth: Even if Congress declines to implement a trade agreement, the President’s signature will already be on it, opening the U.S. up to judgments before an international arbitration body known as the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), or perhaps even before the WTO. An offshoot of the World Bank, ICSID exists to hear disputes between international companies and foreign governments, at all levels. Congress ratified a 1965 treaty which stipulated that any ICSID awards will be binding as if awarded by a U.S. court, and the Vienna Convention—which the State Department generally considers “customary international law”—states that the President’s signature on the agreement obligates the U.S. not to “frustrate the purpose” of a trade agreement. As such, the President’s signature alone could put many U.S. industries and localities at risk, not to mention binding Congress’ ability to pass future laws without significant international consequences.
The office continues to warn about the effects not only on U.S. sovereignty, but also on U.S. immigration laws.
Myth: Fast-track has protections for U.S. sovereignty.
Truth: Fast-track offers no protection against delegations of power or authority to international tribunals should Congress adopt the implementing legislation of any future fast-tracked deal. This is particularly relevant when considering the TPP, which has promised to set up an international commission to make changes to the TPP in the future. The “Living Agreement” section of TPP calls for the creation of this new body, known as the “Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission,” and TPP’s implementing legislation could well cede important congressional power to this new international body as it did with the WTO. The overview of the TPP provided to members of Congress when they view the TPP’s text states that the amendment and accession processes will be similar to those of the WTO, suggesting that Congress will indeed be removed from the process after the agreement’s initial implementation. The Ministerial Conference of the WTO, for instance, has the power to amend the agreement or to add new countries to the agreement simply with a two-thirds vote (not a unanimous one), and the WTO’s implementing legislation makes these changes binding on the U.S. without any additional congressional approval. At the very least, Congress will not know the truth until it has seen the TPP’s implementing legislation—which will not happen until Congress has already promised to fast-track TPP.
Myth: Trade agreements negotiated under TPA cannot be used to bypass U.S. immigration laws.
Truth: Fast-track includes negotiating objectives to remove barriers to services that could easily be used by the Administration to justify the expansion of foreign worker programs. There is also an entire chapter on “Temporary Entry” in TPP, which could be used to facilitate the admission of more temporary foreign workers into the United States. Even if immigration or temporary entry prohibitions were included in fast-track, the negotiating objectives laid out by fast-track are not binding on the Administration. If any future trade deal, TPP or otherwise, contains language that paves the way for more foreign workers, members will be powerless to strike the offending provision. Additionally, the “living agreement” provision allows for subsequent amendments to the trade agreement after its initial implementation, creating an altogether new avenue for changes to foreign worker programs. Finally, the President has refused to foreclose the possibility of using executive actions or side agreements to facilitate foreign worker expansions, as he did with South Korea as part of the recent South Korean trade deal. In short, fast-track creates broad new avenues for the White House to bring in more foreign workers—whether in the light of day, or behind closed doors no one can open—while giving up for six years the meaningful ability of Congress to do anything about it.
109,930,090 Americans participated in overlapping programs
BY: Elizabeth Harrington
May 20, 2015 3:02 pm
The federal government spent $100 billion providing food assistance to Americans last year, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
The lion’s share of spending comes from the food stamp program, which gave benefits to an average 46 million Americans in 2014, at a cost of $74.6 billion, according to atestimony from the GAO’s Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security Kay E. Brown before the House Subcommittee on Nutrition Wednesday.
The national school lunch program was second, costing $11.3 billion, followed by the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) at $7.1 billion.
Other spending included $1.9 billion for nutrition assistance for Puerto Rico, and $10.7 million for the “Special Milk Program.”
Six years after the recession ended, many U.S. states are hard pressed to balance budgets because of a sluggish recovery and their own policy decisions. The fiscal fragility raises questions about how they will weather the next economic downturn.
A majority of states are making cuts, tapping reserves or facing shortfalls despite an improving national economy and stock markets at record levels, according to Standard & Poors and the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government. State revenue hasn’t rebounded to a prerecession peak adjusted for inflation, and other factors are putting pressure on budgets.
Alaska, Oklahoma and energy-producing states saw receipts fall with global oil prices. Kansas overestimated revenue after tax cuts, while New Jersey faces a shortfall thanks to unfunded pensions. Even some Republican governors have championed tax increases to avoid further diminishing services curtailed during the 18-month recession, the deepest downturn since the Great Depression.
“The extent of the weakness is really impressive,” said Donald Boyd, who tracks state finances at the Rockefeller Institute in Albany, New York. “There’s a lot of pressure on governors and legislators.”
Thirty-two states faced budget gaps in fiscal 2015 or 2016 or both, according to an April 27 report by Standard & Poors. The fiscal year ends June 30 in all but four states.
Demonstrators demanding their just rewards for raising hell on the streets of Ferguson turned out in force last week for another demonstration to get money they said they were owed by the George Soros-funded activist group Missourians for Reform and Empowerment, according to Twitter postings collected by the conservative news aggregate site Weasel Zippers.
And things got a little noisy in MORE’s St. Louis office during the May 14 confrontation.
According to WZ, the white guy the demonstrators say they’ll “f*ck up” is Jeff Ordower, MORE’s founder and a guy with leftist credentials so impeccable he’s got a Huffington post bio that shows he’s not only a graduate of the AFL-CIO Institute and a former Service Employees International Union organizer, he’s also openly gay and an LGBT activist to boot. (Sorry, ladies.)
Fall of Ramadi Raises Questions About Obama’s Strategy to Defeat ISIS in Iraq
James Phillips / May 19, 2015
The seizure of the city of Ramadi by the Islamic State (or ISIS) on Sunday was a major setback for the Iraqi government and for the Obama administration.
Although U.S. officials downplayed the significance of the defeat, saying that Ramadi was not “strategic” in a military sense, Ramadi is a very important political symbol because it is the capital of Anbar province, the predominantly Sunni Arab western province that has been a stronghold for the Islamic State and its predecessor organizations, ISIS and al-Qaeda in Iraq.
The panicked retreat of Iraqi police and security forces from Ramadi underscores the continued weakness of the Iraqi army and police. It also raises questions about the viability of the Obama administration’s strategy to defeat the Islamic State in Iraq.
The fact that the Baghdad government now is considering moving Shiite militias to Ramadi, a predominantly Sunni city, suggests that Iraq’s central government still lacks adequate support from Iraq’s Sunni Arabs to defeat the Islamic State, a Sunni revolutionary movement. This spells trouble for Iraqi and American plans to defeat the Islamic State.
Those plans included the building of an inclusive ruling coalition in Baghdad that would unite Iraq’s Shiite majority with the Kurdish and Sunni Arab minorities, who would contribute militia fighters to aid the Shiite-dominated Iraqi army.
Earlier this month, the first 1,000 Sunni recruits joined a pro-government Sunni tribal militia that is slated to grow to 6,000. But the arming of Sunni militias in Anbar province has been delayedby the opposition of Shiite political leaders who doubt the loyalty of many Sunni Iraqis in an increasingly polarized sectarian atmosphere.
The fall of Ramadi also has weakened Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, who became Iraq’s top leader last year with strong backing from the United States.
Abadi, a Shiite political leader who promised to lead a more inclusive government, reached a deal on sharing oil revenues with Iraqi Kurds and pushed for arming Sunni tribesman to fight against the Islamic State. But Abadi’s plans to arm Sunni militias have been trimmed back by rival Shiite leaders backed by Iran, who favor the ruthless employment of Iranian-trained Shiite militias.
Now Iran’s preferred militias are building up in preparation to retake Ramadi. Their presence is likely to further exacerbate sectarian tensions which the Islamic State has exploited to gain support from Iraqi Sunnis fearful of Shiite domination.
A military victory for Iran’s surrogate militias in Ramadi would amount to a political defeat for the United States and for Iraqi Prime Minister Abadi. And such a victory could trigger a Sunni backlash that could boost the Islamic State and prolong, rather than shorten, Iraq’s civil war.
Editors Note : No Mr President Camden is not an example of hope , its just another example of policies put in place by the Democrat Party that have totally destroyed a city and an example policies that are totally destroying a country ! Camden , like Detroit and Baltimore is another warning of what not to do ! Camden is the future if we don’t change our ways .
Is the media really going to pretend Camden is anything but a dump , a disastrous failure and a warning?
PBA Prez Colligan to Camden-touring Obama: ‘You are being misled’
In a letter today to the Camden-touring President of the United States, the State Policemen’s Benevolent Association told Barack Obama that he has been misled to believe “PR spin” that the Camden County Metro Police Department is a success in battling violent crime that besets the waterfront south state city. (Pizarro/PolitickerNJ)
A stalemate in the Senate would leave the FBI and National Security Agency (NSA) without powers they have used to track terrorists for years, say supporters of the Patriot Act.
Without action by the end of the month, key provisions of the Patriot Act will expire, which Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) argues would put the United States at a pre September 11, 2001-footing.
ADVERTISEMENT
Yet McConnell has no definite path to extend those provisions.
He and other hawkish senators are pressing for an extension of the key Patriot Act measures, but they are opposed by other senators, the White House and a majority of House lawmakers in both parties.
The House voted last week to approve reforms to the NSA provisions in an overwhelming 338-88 vote.
McConnell filed a short-term extension of existing law just 24 hours later, signaling his determination to move in a different direction.
Observers say it’s increasingly looking like the standoff could result in no action by Congress, which would mean the Patriot Act provisions would lapse.
That would be a worst-case scenario for the NSA, but a pipe dream for ardent civil libertarians who have been rooting for such a result.
“Right now that we’re down to the wire… it’s just not clear to me how you get authorization through the Senate and the House,” said Neema Singh Guliani, a lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union and critic of the law.
Defenders of the NSA say that would be disastrous for national security.
“Congress must act to reauthorize” the provisions, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) — two hawkish members of their respective Intelligence Committees — warned in an op-ed for Fox News on Friday. “The alternative is too dangerous.”
At issue is Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which allows the federal government to collect “any tangible things” that are “relevant” to an investigation into terrorist or foreign intelligence activity.
The NSA has used that to collect millions of people’s phone call “metadata” — which include information about the numbers involved in a call and when the call occurred, but not people’s actual conversations — without a warrant. Supporters say that’s a crucial tool that has allowed the government to connect the dots between possible terrorist suspects.
If Congress doesn’t act, the program would end, the White House has said. The NSA would simply stop collecting the records.
The number of cops killed in the line of duty during violent acts has almost doubled in the past year, the FBI said.
In 2014, 51 cops were killed in a felony crime — up from just 27 the year before, which marked a 35-year low,according to preliminary data released Monday by the FBI.
By region, eight cops were killed during the commission of a crime in the Northeast, 17 in the South, 14 in the West, eight in the Midwest and four in Puerto Rico.
An average of 64 officers were killed per year nationwide from 1980 to 2014 in felony cases, the FBI said.
The data come amid spiking tensions between law enforcement and minority communities after deaths of unarmed black men and boys at the hands of cops in Baltimore, Staten Island and Ferguson, Mo.
The recent turmoil also has shed light on the dangers faced by cops across the country.
Among the 51 slain cops, 46 were shot at with handguns, rifles and shotguns; four were run over by vehicles; and one was killed with the offender’s bare hands, the FBI said.
They faced a variety of situations, including 11 who responded to disturbance calls, 10 who were conducting traffic pursuits or stops, eight who were ambushed and six who were investigating suspicious people or situations.
The fact is that our recent college graduates are already costing our country billions of dollars every year. Not long ago, the average tenure for an entry-level worker was five years. Now, that average is below two years.
U.S. companies report that the average cost of replacing a single entry-level worker is $20,000 (lost productivity, recruitment, training, and other costs). Amortized over five years, that’s an annual overhead of $4,000. Amortized over just two years, however, it soars to $10,000 per year.
Our young workers have a hair-trigger when it comes to changing jobs, or even just quitting a job without a replacement in hand. This is costing our country $6,000 more per year per new entry-level worker. That’s money that could be much better spent on creating new jobs or paying higher salaries.
Our high schools and colleges need to start paying more attention to the “soft” career skills that our young workers need to land and keep good jobs after graduation.
Americans Not In The Labor Force Rise To Record 93,194,000
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/08/2015 08:57 -0400
In what was an “unambiguously” unpleasant April jobs payrolls report, with a March revision dragging that month’s job gain to the lowest level since June of 2012, the fact that the number of Americans not in the labor force rose once again, this time to 93,194K from 93,175K, with the result being a participation rate of 69.45 or just above the lowest percentage since 1977, will merely catalyze even more upside to the so called “market” which continues to reflect nothing but central bank liquidity, and thus – the accelerating deterioration of the broader economy.
File this one in the category of “do as we say, not as we do.”
The Internal Revenue Service over one decade tolerated “willful tax noncompliance” from 1,589 employees without consistent or clear procedures for addressing individual cases, according to a report released Wednesday by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.
In 60 percent of the cases, the watchdog found, the tax agency mitigated proposed terminations of employees found to have committed, as defined by regulation, a “voluntary intentional violation of a known legal duty (timely filing of a tax return or accurate reporting of a tax obligation) for which there is no reasonable cause.” Instead of being fired, the employees received lesser penalties such as suspensions, reprimands, or counseling.
“Given its critical role in federal tax administration, the IRS must ensure that its employees comply with the tax law in order to maintain the public’s confidence,” TIGTA J. Russell George said. “Willful violation of the law by IRS employees should not be taken lightly, and the IRS commissioner should fully document decisions made to retain employees whom management has proposed be terminated.”
The study of employee disciplinary cases from fiscal 2004-13 found that only 620 employees (39 percent) of those committing willful tax noncompliance were terminated, resigned or retired. In some case, TIGTA said, employees with similar violations received different discipline. And among cases that were mitigated, files included mitigating factors as well as evidence that violations of tax law were willful, but the documents did not make clear the basis for the commissioner’s decisions to mitigate.
U.S. Split Along Racial Lines on Backlash Against Police, Poll Finds
By JANET HOOK
Americans are bracing for a summer of racial disturbances around the country, such as those that have wracked Baltimore, with African Americans and whites deeply divided about why the urban violence has occurred, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll has found.
A resounding 96% of adults surveyed said it was likely there would be additional racial disturbances this summer, a signal that Americans believe Baltimore’s recent problems aren’t a local phenomenon but instead are symptomatic of broader national problems.
When asked to explain recent events in Baltimore and other cities that have seen confrontations between police and members of the African-American community, blacks and whites viewed the situation differently.
Asked to choose between two possible explanations for recent events, 60% of blacks said they reflected “long-standing frustrations about police mistreatment of African Americans.” Some 27% of black respondents said the disturbances were caused by people who used protests over an African American man dying in police custody “as an excused to engage in looting and violence.”
But among whites, the balance of opinion flipped: 58% said people were seizing an excuse to loot, while 32% said the events reflected long-standing frustrations with police.
While most people in the survey predicted further racial disturbances this summer, a smaller share expected them to hit close to home. The poll found that 53% of whites and 46% of African Americans said it was likely there would be a racial disturbance in the metropolitan area nearest to them.
Full results of the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, including public opinion of the 2016 presidential contenders, will be released on Monday evening.
Obama’s Brother Joins Hamas, Says ‘Jerusalem Is Ours; We Are Coming’
by Shoebat Foundation on January 28, 2014 in Malik Obama
By Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack
While in Sanaa, Yemein in 2010, President Barack Obama’s brother Malik Obama was at an event billed as the Orphans Development Fund (ODF) Conference. It’s quite the ironic title considering a group photo Malik is in that he has posted to his website. In the photo, he can be seen wearing a Hamas scarf (keffiyeh) that bears a well-known Palestinian slogan – ‘Jerusalem is ours – WE ARE COMING!’ It also includes a map of Palestine that says, ‘From the River to the Sea!’ In other words, Malik is saying, THERE IS NO ISRAEL.
Here is Malik Obama’s boss (Malik works for him officially in his capacity as IDO Executive Secretary), Suar al-Dahab during a visit to Gaza last year at a Hamas event with the group’s Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Notice he’s wearing a similar keffiyeh at a conference entitled, ‘Aiding Jerusalem and Gaza”:
Here is Malik in 2010, with al-Dahab in Khartoum, Sudan during the Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO) conference, presided over by Sudan’s terrorist leader Omar al-Bashir, who belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood and is wanted for crimes against humanity:
