Who’s Calling the Shots in State Politics?

Posted on January 7, 2016January 7, 2016 by Denise Simon

Exactly what else do voters need to be aware of? Who is winning the liberal-progressive agendas at the state level? Do you pay attention to the language on ballot initiatives? Do you know the background and the money and players behind them?

Read on….

National liberal groups to push ‘record’ number of 2016 ballot measures

Efforts to circumvent legislative logjam counter grassroots origins

PublicIntegrity: Paul Spencer, a teacher and part-time pecan farmer in Arkansas, drafted a ballot measure for 2016 to reform the state’s campaign finance laws so his fellow voters could know who paid for election ads on TV.

But he and fellow activists there knew they couldn’t do it alone. They sought the help of national election-reform groups because in Arkansas, as in many other states, initiatives can cost millions of dollars to pass.

Liberal groups working at the national level are using state ballot initiatives as their weapon of choice for 2016, but given the costs, they’re carefully planning exactly where to push these measures. And Spencer’s Arkansas proposal didn’t make the cut for 2016.

That top-down approach seems ironic. The initiative process was put in place at the beginning of the 20th century as a way for local citizens such as Spencer to band together to pass laws. And voters on the ground may not be aware that national groups are helping fuel the ballot fights in their backyards.

Still, national liberal leaders see state ballot measures as their best option for winning on some issues. Dismayed at their prospects in Congress and in Republican-dominated state legislatures, national liberal groups plan to use ballot initiatives to push raising the minimum wage in Maine, legalizing marijuana in Massachusetts, closing gun sale loopholes in Nevada, guarding endangered species in Oregon — and other campaigns in at least eight additional states.

National conservative groups, meanwhile, seem poised to play defense, setting up a battle of outsiders on state playing fields. In March, Republican-linked politicos launched the Center for Conservative Initiatives in Washington, D.C., to counter the liberal ballot measures they anticipate will arrive in record numbers nationwide in 2016.

“Liberal groups have been forced to spend heavily on ballot initiatives in an effort to circumvent elected representatives because in states around the country the public has overwhelmingly rejected their out-of-touch candidates and messages,” said the Center’s leader, Matt Walter, in an email.

The push from outsiders to pass pet policies via the ballot has occurred before, on everything from land conservation in North Dakota to how to cage chickens in California, sometimes leading to big-money fights between corporations, advocacy groups and others.

“There’s this perception out there that the initiative process is all about the little guy,” said Jennie Bowser, a consultant who for many years studied ballot measures for the bipartisan National Conference of State Legislatures. “But the truth of the matter is that it’s a big business. It’s really well organized, and it’s really well funded. And it is very, very rarely a group of local citizens who get together and try to make a difference.”

Passing popular ideas

In 2014, when a Republican wave gave conservatives more U.S. Senate seats and governors’ mansions, left-leaning activists still managed to notch victories for the minimum wage, gun control and marijuana legalization through ballot measures in Nebraska, South Dakota, Illinois, Arkansas, Washington, Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia.

In 2015, they followed with wins for campaign-finance reform in Seattle and Maine.

Those successes, as well as the chance to draw more left-leaning voters to the polls, are encouraging liberal activists to push hard on the 2016 ballot.

Buckle up the POTUS at SOTU Address and Parolees

Posted on January 6, 2016January 6, 2016 by Denise Simon

Who does a YouTube commercial about his last year as president?

Politico: President Barack Obama plugs his own State of the Union address in a video trailer the White House is releasing Wednesday afternoon as part of an effort to set expectations for the president’s speech next Tuesday, which unlike previous addresses won’t include a new legislative agenda.

Going into his final year as president, Obama plans to focus more on the big themes that have defined his presidency and eschew a laundry list of policy proposals His explanation: he’s got bigger things in mind than Congress, according to details shared with POLITICO.

“What I want to focus on in this State of the Union,” Obama says in the video the White House will release late Wednesday, is “not just the remarkable progress we’ve made, not just what I want to get done in the year ahead, but what we all need to do together in the years to come: The big things that will guarantee an even stronger, better, more prosperous America for our kids. That’s what’s on my mind.”

Standing in front of his desk in the Oval Office, Obama offers a broad preview of what he’ll say: where things were when he came in, and how much progress he’s led since.

Not mentioned: the Republican majorities in the House and Senate who would have stopped any legislative agenda from moving – especially in an election year- with the possible exceptions of the Trans Pacific Partnership and criminal justice reform.

In an email that will also be distributed on Wednesday, Obama chief-of-staff Denis McDonough echoes Obama’s more-optimistic-than-ever theme and lists some of what’s likely to be on Obama’s brag list: December’s budget agreement, the Iran nuclear deal, increased domestic oil production together with new environmental regulations, a peak in high school graduation rates and health insurance coverage, a drop in unemployment, crime and incarceration rates.

“What we have left to do is bigger than any one policy initiative or new bill in Congress. This is about who we are, where we’re headed, and what kind of country we want to be,” McDonough writes.

McDonough finishes with a plug for his new Twitter account, @Denis44, also inaugurated on Wednesday. His first tweet: “New Year’s Resolution: Join Twitter âœ“And just in time for @POTUS’ final State of the Union,” with a link to the Obama video.

Oh, one more thing and it is a big one.

Obama Admin Boosting Staff for Massive Criminal Pardon Effort

Experts: End of presidency bid could free up to 20,000 convicted criminals

FreeBeacon: The Obama administration is seeking to significantly boost the number of staffers in the Department of Justice’s pardon office, leading some to speculate that the president is getting set for an end-of-administration effort to grant clemency to a range of criminals.

The Justice Department recently posted on its website a job listing seeking 16 lawyers for new spots in its Office of the Pardon Attorney, which codifies petitions for clemency and makes recommendations to the attorney general for clemency.

The new lawyers will assist “the President in the exercise of executive clemency,” according to the job description.

The department’s move to beef up staff in the pardon office has prompted speculation that President Obama will pursue a final term effort to grant clemency to a range of criminals, particularly drug offenders.

The Justice Department has been working for more than a year now on a new clemency initiative that outside organizations predict could free up to 20,000 convicted inmates from federal prisons. The effort has been described in news reports as “an unprecedented use of clemency power.”

The department says the new pardon office lawyers will work on this initiative and focus only on non-violent offenders.

“The Justice Department announced a new clemency initiative to encourage appropriate candidates to petition for executive clemency in order to have their sentences commuted by the President,” the job listing states. “The Initiative invites petitions for commutation of sentence from non-violent inmates who are serving a federal sentence, who by operation of law, likely would have received a substantially lower sentence if convicted of the same offense today.”

Thus far, “thousands of inmates” have filed petitions to have their sentences commuted and “more are likely to do so,” according to the Justice Department. “Evaluating these petitions for recommendations to the President is a high priority for the Justice Department.”

The attorneys will “review and evaluate petitions” submitted by prisoners and confer with Justice Department officials, as well as other administration agencies, to decide who meets the criteria to receive a pardon, according to the job description.

Government oversight organizations and experts are questioning the administration about the possibility that it could release those in the country illegally or those who have committed major drug offenses.

One congressional source familiar with the effort criticized Obama for abusing the presidential right to grant pardons.

“This fits perfectly with the administration’s two-term agenda of eroding the rule of law in America,” the source told the Washington Free Beacon. “While the president certainly has the constitutional power to pardon, I shudder thinking about how he plans to use it, given his determination to release dangerous criminals.”

Judicial Watch, a legal organization that has sought disclosure on the issue, petitioned the Justice Department in July through a Freedom of Information Act request to release all records discussing the clemency project.

Judicial Watch has predicted that the major clemency initiative “would empower President Obama to grant mass clemency to as many as 20,000 convicted felons now serving time for drug-related sentences.”

The clemency program is just one “part of the Obama administration’s effort to end alleged racial discrimination in drug-related sentences,” according to Judicial Watch.

Republican lawmakers also have expressed concern over the initiative.

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, accused Obama at the time of “abusing his authority” under the Constitution to pardon prisoners.

“This is an example of the imperial presidency at its worst, and the American people have a right to know who is behind his errant usurpation of power,” Fitton said in a statement at the time.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for more information on the initiative.

2 Gitmo Detainees Transferred to Ghana, Why?

Posted on January 6, 2016January 6, 2016 by Denise Simon

From the Department of Defense:

The Department of Defense announced today the transfer of Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay to the Government of Ghana. As directed by the president’s Jan. 22, 2009, executive order, the interagency Guantanamo Review Task Force conducted a comprehensive review of these cases. As a result of those reviews, which examined a number of factors, including security issues, Atef and Al-Dhuby were unanimously approved for transfer by the six departments and agencies comprising the task force. In accordance with statutory requirements, the secretary of defense informed Congress of the United States’ intent to transfer these individuals and of his determination that these transfers meet the statutory standard. The United States is grateful to the Government of Ghana for its humanitarian gesture and willingness to support ongoing U.S. efforts to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. The United States coordinated with the Government of Ghana to ensure these transfers took place consistent with appropriate security and humane treatment measures. Today, 105 detainees remain at Guantanamo Bay.

Hey, well why Ghana? It seems this small country is awash in major corruption and for the most part cannot survive without the financial assistance of USAID? Below, the text is clear as it was published only a day ago. What is worse, this gives us clues that the Obama administration likely pledged to increase financial aid and perhaps even some political payoffs to accept 2 Gitmo detainees. This is not a proven fact however, the questions need to asked.

ModernGhana: Corruption in Ghana is more dangerous and cunning than terrorism, which currently threatens Ghana and has already overwhelmed Nigeria, Mali, Niger, Kenya, Somalia, Tunisia, and Egypt. This is because corruption corrodes society to its core; it erodes trust, honesty, good values, and builds mistrust and suspicion among a country’s population. To quote Dr. Kwesi Aning, corruption and its proceeds “undermine the state, through weakening its institutions, its local communities, and its social fabric”. Because corruption is parasitic in nature, it erodes the ability of the state to develop economically, transform itself socially and culturally, and move forward politically. It seriously undermines a country’s security and hence its ability to protect and defend itself against her enemies.

Corruption undermines a country’s security. It breeds terrorists and terrorism. One of the Ghanaians (Nazir Nortei Alema, the 25-year-old graduate of the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology), who joined the terror group Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in 2015 cited corruption in Ghana as one of his reasons for joining the group. Corruption allows terrorists, cyber criminals and other enemies of the state to infiltrate key state institutions such as the military, police, immigration, and the customs. Corruption particularly in the military undermines morale and the ability of the armed forces to fight. In Nigeria, Boko Haram continues to dominate North-eastern Nigeria and the threat the group poses to Nigeria and West and Central African regions persists because junior soldiers would not fight them. They would not fight the terrorists because corrupt senior officers pocketed their salaries, and used the military’s budget for personal gain.

Ghana is awash with cocaine, heroin, and guns because the criminals have been able to buy airport, harbour, immigration, police and other officials of the security establishment. There is also rampant armed robbery in the country because of co-operation between the robbers and some agents of the state. This immoral relationship between officials and the actors of the criminal underworld makes it difficult for the state to fight organised crime. It strengthens the hands of criminals against the state and its security establishment. It particularly weakens institutions of the state and makes it easy for terrorists, drug lords, illegal weapons traders, pirates, human traffickers, and armed robbers to operate their parallel economy in the country without fear of reprisals from the state.

Corruption allows enemies of the state to exploit the country and opens the country to all kinds of attacks. Particularly, it allows unfriendly foreign governments, their spy and intelligence agencies to scheme against the state and undermines its interests and its ability to protect and defend herself. For example, hackers, intelligence agencies, corporations and other entities can easily steal state secretes and gain access to sensitive national information by bribing corrupt officials. Corruption creates a broken glass syndrome. It creates the feeling that no one cares about the country, a situation that allows the vultures of impunity to carry out their illegal activities against the state.

Federal Prisons, Incubation Centers for Militant Islam

Posted on January 6, 2016January 6, 2016 by Denise Simon

Mandatory sentencing is a topic that the White House is manipulating with Judges across the country using the Justice Department to do it. This takes away sentencing that have been rendered and Obama lets prisoners out before the sentence is complete. The reason is prison over-crowding. While that is the case, Districts Attorneys even reduce charges all the time. Result is there are few consequences for violent criminal acts. What is worse, is what actually goes on in prison and who is at the core of radicalizing prisoners. It is important to know Islamic organizations in America have postured themselves to be the source of religious training and sessions with inmates. Then they later have their sentences commuted or get out early and the rest is a growing threat to our homeland.

Ripe for radicalization: Federal prisons ‘breeding ground’ for terrorists, say experts

FNC: America’s federal prisons have become a “breeding ground” for radical Islam, warn critics, who say imprisoned terrorists are more likely to spread their beliefs than renounce them.

As law enforcement authorities lock up more home-grown terrorists, experts are warning the success could turn sour if jailhouse jihadists are allowed to infect fellow inmates. Prisons have long been criticized for a culture that can make some inmates more dangerous than when they entered, but the possibility that typical felons could become lone wolf terrorists upon earning parole is a disturbing new wrinkle.

“Over the years, our Federal prisons have become a breeding ground for radicalization.”

– Rep. Stephen Fincher, R-Tenn.

“If we continue to downplay the threat, we do so at our own peril,” said Patrick Dunleavy, author of “The Fertile Soil of Jihad: Terrorism’s Prison Connection.”

The aggressive recruitment of Americans by ISIS has resulted in a spike in domestic terror-related convictions. Some 71 people are imprisoned in the U.S. on ISIS-related charges, including 56 individuals arrested in 2015, the most terrorism arrests in a single year since September 2001, according to George Washington University’s Program on Extremism.

(Alton Nolen, who is accused of beheading a former co-worker at a food processing plant in Oklahoma, is believed to have converted to Islam while doing time.)

In addition, the FBI has said it is currently conducting more than 900 investigations into ISIS-linked radicalization, including cases in all 50 states.

There are hundreds more federal inmates serving time for terrorist activities related to other terror groups. An estimated 100 are scheduled for release in the next five years, according to the Congressional Research Service. Still more terror suspects could be transferred to U.S. prisons from Guantanamo Bay in the coming months.

Terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay could soon be transferred to U.S. prisons, where critics say they could influence other inmates. (Associated Press)

“We have never been faced with such a large number of terror inmates before,” said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., during a recent Homeland Security Committee hearing on countering violent extremism in prison.

King and others say the federal Bureau of Prisons must do a better job of monitoring and, if necessary, isolating inmates who could radicalize others behind bars.

Dunleavy, a retired deputy inspector in the criminal intelligence unit of the New York Department of Correctional Services, said criminals have been radicalized in prisons for years, and predicted it will only get worse. He cited Chicago gang member Jose Padilla, who converted to radical Islam while doing time in jail in the 1980s, and was later accused of plotting to set off a radiological “dirty bomb” in the U.S. He is now serving a 21-year sentence for conspiring to commit acts of terror overseas.

More recently, ex-convict Alton Nolen was arrested in a September, 2014 attack at his former place of employment, a food processing plant in the Oklahoma City suburb of Moore. Nolen, who is awaiting trial, allegedly beheaded a 54-year-old female worker while yelling Islamic slogans. Dunleavy believes Nolen converted to Islam while serving time in an Oklahoma prison after attacking a police officer in 2010.

In between Padilla and Nolen, Dunleavy says there were “scores of others” who became radicalized in state and federal prisons, either by listening to fellow inmates or hearing sermons on contraband devices smuggled into prisons and shared.

Kevin James, who while serving time at Sacramento’s New Folsom Prison on robbery charges in 2004, founded his own jihadist movement and recruited fellow inmate Levar Washington to join his cause. Upon Washington’s release in 2005, he plotted to attack Los Angeles-area synagogues, the Israeli Consulate, the Los Angeles airport and U.S. military recruiting offices. James, remained in federal prison, where some critics fear he could be radicalizing more inmates to his cause.

Tens of thousands of federal prison inmates have converted to Islam while serving time, and many others have found other religions. Most do not subscribe to a violent interpretation of the faith, but it takes only a few to create a threat, according to Mark Hamm, a professor at Indiana State University who specializes in the field of prison radicalization.

“It is not the sheer number of prisoners following extremist interpretations of religious doctrines that poses a threat,” Hamm told FoxNews.com. “Rather, it is the potential for the single individual to become radicalized.”

Estimates of the number of terrorists behind bars could be too low because some could be serving time on weapons-related crimes, rather than terror-related. Those suspects are especially dangerous, Dunleavy said, because their involvement in terror plots may not be disclosed to prison officials who might otherwise be able to monitor them.

As far back as 2010, well before ISIS was formed, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee issued a report that identified three dozen U.S. citizens who had converted to Islam while in U.S. prisons, and then traveled to Yemen to train at Al Qaeda camps upon being released.

According to the FBI, radicalized inmates are of concern for a number of reasons, including the possibility they could urge other prisoners to attend radical mosques upon their release from prison; could pose a risk to prison security inciting violence; and could pass on skills used in terrorism activities.

King, who has had several hearings on Islamic radicalization, said lapses in how prisoners are monitored and how religious service providers are vetted continue despite numerous oversight reports.

In June, the federal Bureau of Prisons disclosed in a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, that it failed to complete a background check on a religious services contractor who had a well-documented past of advocating violence against critics of Islamic extremism.

While monitoring prisoners is potentially more difficult, lawmakers believe the government could at least minimize the risk of radical clerics being invited into prisons to proselytize – and radicalize.

“Over the years, our Federal prisons have become a breeding ground for radicalization,” said Rep. Stephen Fincher, R-Tenn., who introduced a measure that would compel the BOP to study prison radicalization and beef up background checks for clergy and other workers allowed access to inmates. “By allowing volunteers to enter the system without first having to undergo a comprehensive background check, some of the most vulnerable members of society have become susceptible to radicalization.”

Obama Released Felons, They Killed with Illegal Guns

Posted on January 6, 2016January 6, 2016 by Denise Simon

Obama’s America: Lock up Guns, Release Violent Gun Felons

CR, Horowitz: Isn’t it sadly ironic that the man who wants to flood the country with Islamic refugees and criminal aliens is concerned about expanded background checks on law abiding gun owners?

As Mark Levin pointed out last night, Obama has protected sanctuary cities and dangerous criminals, yet claims to be concerned about the public safety threats of an inanimate object. In addition, one of the critical agenda items for this president’s final year is the release of thousands of violent drug and firearms felons from federal prison. Among some of the recent prison releases were criminals convicted for armed robbery and firearms violations.

Unfortunately, Republicans in Congress are pushing legislation that will help promote Obama’s dangerous and hypocritical agenda by retroactively releasing a number of felons who committed crimes with firearms and had a relatively long rap sheet.

What happens when you release hardened criminals, especially from federal prison?

On November 2, U.S. District Judge Eleanor Ross (Obama appointee) gave just one-year of probation to a defendant who admitted buying a gun for her felon boyfriend in a straw purchase, which he later used to shoot and kill Omaha Police Officer Kerrie Orozco.

Consider the case of Raleigh Sizemore, who recently murdered Richmond, Kentucky police officer Daniel Ellis, by shooting him in the head in the course of attempting to rob a gas station. Prior to this, Ellis had been convicted of operating a meth lab—which caught fire—and criminal mischief, and was sentenced to 10 years but made parole in April of this year, after serving just over three years. A week before he killed Officer Ellis, a warrant was issued for his arrest for violating his parole. This is exactly the type of person Obama and some Republicans want to release with more regularity.

The appalling hypocrisy of Obama as it relates to violent criminals juxtaposed to peaceful gun owners is best illustrated by a narrative the president himself used in his speech today. In the irony of all ironies, Obama invoked the act of Zaevion Dobson, a high school football player in Tennessee who shielded three girls from death with his own body during a drive-by shooting, to exhort Congress into passing gun control.

So who were the shooters in the Dobson case?

Brandon Perry had a couple of minor drug charges, along with a charge for “unlawful possession of a weapon” and for “alteration of distinguishing numbers.” He was back on the streets in no time and soon after killed Zaevion Dobson in cold blood. He himself was killed later that night in retaliation for the murder.

While Obama is busy violating separation of powers to impose more laws on peaceful gun owners, he is releasing the very sort of violent gun felons who killed Dobson

Perry’s accomplice in the Dobson murder, Christopher Bassett, was arrested along with two others a year prior to the shooting when police stopped his car for a busted taillight. He got out of the car and ran, as did one other passenger. They were both caught, and the police found three bags of marijuana and a digital scale in the car and on the suspects. They also seized “a small amount of white pills.” Bassett was let out on probation and was a part of the murder on that fateful night in December.

Brandon Perry and Christopher Bassett are exactly the sort of “low level” criminals, charged with drug and firearms violations, that Obama and congressional Republicans want to release from prison. But these people barely measure up to the profile of those Obama is releasing, and yet they still went on to commit murder. These two kids were never placed in the federal system. As I’ve noted many times, you have to be a big time drug dealer in order to actually serve hard time in a federal prison. Furthermore, it is these types of violent criminals, who commit many of their crimes as juveniles, that Obama and the Senate bill would retroactively release.

Hence, while Obama is busy violating separation of powers to impose more laws on peaceful gun owners, he is releasing the very sort of violent gun felons who killed Dobson, the very hero with which Obama used to promote this political agenda.

Only a coward would focus on the inanimate object, while ignoring the people who have used those objects to harm others. Yet, this powerful juxtaposition sums up Obama’s America and the moral bankruptcy of modern day liberalism.