Category Archives: Legislation

Yup, Even More on Hillary EmailGate

Posted on by

Oh…a housekeeping matter, check this out also:

“It’s time for the U.S. to start thinking of Iraq as a business opportunity.” – Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton has been outed by her right-hand lady, Huma Abedin. Emails from the assistant have revealed Clinton Foundation donors received special access to the State Department. Judicial Watch has published the documents. Check out just how bad this is.

Judicial Watch today released 725 pages of new State Department documents, including previously unreleased email exchanges in which former Hillary Clinton’s top aide Huma Abedin provided influential Clinton Foundation donors special, expedited access to the secretary of state. In many instances, the preferential treatment provided to donors was at the specific request of Clinton Foundation executive Douglas Band.

The new documents included 20 Hillary Clinton email exchanges not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date to 191 of new Clinton emails (not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over to the State Department).  These records further appear to contradict statements by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails were turned over to the State Department.

The Abedin emails reveal that the longtime Clinton aide apparently served as a conduit between Clinton Foundation donors and Hillary Clinton while Clinton served as secretary of state. In more than a dozen email exchanges, Abedin provided expedited, direct access to Clinton for donors who had contributed from $25,000 to $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. In many instances, Clinton Foundation top executive Doug Band, who worked with the Foundation throughout Hillary Clinton’s tenure at State, coordinated closely with Abedin. In Abedin’s June deposition to Judicial Watch, she conceded that part of her job at the State Department was taking care of “Clinton family matters.”

Included among the Abedin-Band emails is an exchange revealing that when Crown Prince Salman of Bahrain requested a meeting with Secretary of State Clinton, he was forced to go through the Clinton Foundation for an appointment. Abedin advised Band that when she went through “normal channels” at State, Clinton declined to meet. After Band intervened, however, the meeting was set up within forty-eight hours. According to the Clinton Foundation website, in 2005, Salman committed to establishing the Crown Prince’s International Scholarship Program (CPISP) for the Clinton Global Initiative. And by 2010, it had contributed $32 million to CGI. The Kingdom of Bahrain reportedly gave between $50,000 and $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation. And Bahrain Petroleum also gave an additional $25,000 to $50,000.

From: Doug Band

To: Huma Abedin

Sent: Tue Jun 23 1:29:42 2009

Subject:

Cp of Bahrain in tomorrow to Friday

Asking to see her

Good friend of ours

From: Huma Abedin

To: Doug Band

Sent: Tue Jun 23 4:12:46 2009

Subject: Re:

He asked to see hrc thurs and fri thru normal channels. I asked and she said she doesn’t want to commit to anything for thurs or fri until she knows how she will feel. Also she says that she may want to go to ny and doesn’t want to be committed to stuff in ny…

From: Huma Abedin [[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 10:35:15 AM

To: Doug Band

Subject:

Offering Bahrain cp 10 tomorrow for meeting woith [sic] hrc

If u see him, let him know

We have reached out thru official channels

Also included among the Abedin-Band emails is an exchange in which Band urged Abedin to get the Clinton State Department to intervene in order to obtain a visa for members of the Wolverhampton (UK) Football Club, one of whose members was apparently having difficulty because of a “criminal charge.” Band was acting at the behest of millionaire Hollywood sports entertainment executive and President of the Wasserman Foundation Casey Wasserman. Wasserman has donated between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation through the Wasserman Foundation.

From: Tim Hoy [VP Wasserman Media Group]

Date: Tue. 5 May 2009 10:45:55 – 0700

To: Casey Wasserman

Subject: [Redacted] Wolverhampton FC/visa matter

Casey: Paul Martin’s [popular English footballer] client [Redacted] needs to get an expedited appointment at the US Embassy in London this week and we have hit some road blocks. I am writing to ask for your help.

The Wolverhampton FC is coming to Las Vegas this Thursday for a “celebration break.” [Redacted] so he cannot get a visa to the US without first being “interviewed” in the visa section of the US Embassy in London …

I contacted Senator Boxer’s office in SF for help … They balked at the criminal charge and said they “couldn’t help.”

I’m now trying to get help from Sherrod Brown’s office but that’s not going well either. So do you have any ideas/contacts that could contact the US Embassy in London and ask that they see [Redacted] tomorrow?

From: Casey Wasserman

To: Doug Band; Trista Schroeder [Wasserman Media Group executive]

Sent: Tue May 05 2:23:50 2009 [PT]

Subject: FW [Redacted] Wolverhampton FC/visa matter

Can you help with the below [Hoy email], or maybe Huma??? I am copying trista as I am on the plane in case I lose connection … thx.

From: Doug Band

Sent: Tue May 05 7:08:21 2009 [ET]

To: Casey Wasserman; Trista Schroeder

Subject: Re: [Redacted] Wolverhampton FC/visa matter

Will email her.

From: Doug Band

To: Huma Abedin

Sent: Tue May 5 7:26:49 2009

Subject: Fw: [Redacted] Wolverhampton FC/visa matter

[As per subject line, Band apparently forwarded Abedin material sent to him by Casey.]

From: Huma Abedin [[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 7:39:38 PM

To: Doug Band

Subject: Re: [Redacted] Wolverhampton FC/visa matter

I doubt we can do anything but maybe we can help with an interview. I’ll ask.

From: Huma Abedin

To: Doug Band

Sent: Tue May 05 5:50:09 2009

Subject: Re: [Redacted] Wolverhampton FC/visa matter

I got this now, makes me nervous to get involved but I’ll ask.

From: Doug Band

To: Huma Abedin

Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 7:43:30 PM

Subject:  Re: [Redacted] Wolverhampton FC/visa matter

Then don’t

The Abedin emails also reveal that Slimfast tycoon S. Daniel Abraham was granted almost immediate access to then-Secretary of State Clinton, with Abedin serving as the facilitator. According to the Clinton Foundation website, Abraham, like the Wasserman Foundation, has given between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. The emails indicate that Abraham was granted almost immediate access to Clinton upon request:

From: Huma Abedin

To: H

Sent: Mon May 04 4:40:34 2009

Subject: Danny

Danny abraham called this morning. He is in dc today and tomorrow and asked for 15 min with you. Do u want me to try and fit him in tomorrow?

From: H

To Huma Abedin

Sent: Mon May 04 5:14:00 2009

Subject: Re: Danny

Will the plane wait if I can’t get there before 7-8?

From: Huma Abedin

Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 5:15:30 PM

Subject: Re: Danny

Yes of course

Additional Abedin emails in which the top Clinton aide intervenes with the State Department on behalf of Clinton Foundation donors include the following:

  • On Friday, June 26, 2009, Clinton confidant Kevin O’Keefe wrote to Clinton saying that “Kevin Conlon is trying to set up a meeting with you and a major client.” Clinton wrote to Abedin, “Can you help deliver these for Kevin?” Abedin responded, “I’ll look into it asap” Kevin O’Keefe donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Kevin Conlon is a Clinton presidential campaign “Hillblazer”who has raised more than $100,000 for the candidate.
  • On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, Ben Ringel wrote to Abedin, “I’m on shuttle w Avigdor Liberman. I called u back yesterday. I want to stop by to see hrc tonite for 10 mins.” Ringel donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
  • On Monday, July 6, 2009, Maureen White wrote to Abedin, “I am going to be in DC on Thursday. Would she have any time to spare?” Abedin responded, “Yes I’ll make it work.” White donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
  • In June 2009, prominent St. Louis political power broker Joyce Aboussie exchanged a series of insistent emails with Abedin concerning Aboussie’s efforts to set up a meeting between Clinton and Peabody Energy VP Cartan Sumner. Aboussie wrote, “Huma, I need your help now to intervene please. We need this meeting with Secretary Clinton, who has been there now for nearly six months. This is, by the way, my first request. I really would appreciate your help on this. It should go without saying that the Peabody folks came to Dick [Gephardt] and I because of our relationship with the Clinton’s.” After further notes from Aboussie, Abedin responded, “We are working on it and I hope we can make something work… we have to work through the beauracracy [sic] here.” Aboussie donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
  • On Saturday, May 16, 2009, mobile communications executive and political activist Jill Iscol wrote to Clinton, “Please advise to whom I should forward Jacqueline Novogratz’s request [for a meeting with the secretary of state]. I know you know her, but honestly, she is so far ahead of the curve and brilliant I believe she could be enormously helpful to your work.” Clinton subsequently sent an email to Abedin saying, “Pls print.” Jill and husband Ken Iscol donated between $500,000 and $1 million to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton subsequently appointed Novogratz to the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board.

So who is Doug Band? Per his own website:

Douglas J. Band Douglas J. Band

President, Teneo Holdings

Douglas J. Band is a co-founder and President of Teneo.

Mr. Band began working in the White House in 1995, serving in the White House Counsel’s office for four years and later in the Oval Office as the President’s Aide. In 1999, he was appointed by President Clinton as a Special Assistant to the President before he was made one of the youngest Deputy Assistants ever to serve a President.

Mr. Band served as President Clinton’s chief advisor from 2002 until 2012, advising him as the Counselor to the President, and was the key architect of Clinton’s post-Presidency. He created and built the Clinton Global Initiative, which to date, has raised $69 billion for 2,100 philanthropic initiatives around the world and impacted over 400 million people in 180 countries. On March 1, 2012, President Clinton said of Doug: “I couldn’t have achieved half of what I have in my post-presidency without Doug Band. Doug is my Counselor and a board member of the Clinton Global Initiative, which was created at his suggestion. He tirelessly works to support the expansion of CGI’s activities and my other foundation work around the world. In our first ten years, Doug’s strategic vision and fund-raising made it possible for the foundation to survive and thrive. I hope and believe he will continue to advise me and build CGI for another decade.”

Mr. Band has traveled to 125 countries and to over 2,000 cities. In the Summer of 2009, he traveled to North Korea with President Clinton to orchestrate and secure the release of two American journalists.

Additionally, he has been involved in other negotiations to free and help Americans held around the world. He has assisted in the rebuilding of nations and regions after some of the worst natural disasters in the past two decades, including New Orleans, Haiti, Southeast Asia, and Gujarat, India.

Mr. Band has advised several heads of state, governors and mayors transition out of public office into private life. He was part of the negotiation team that handled all aspects of Hillary Clinton’s becoming Secretary of State. He continues to serve his country in assisting various domestic agencies and advising foreign governments on nation-building, infrastructure creation and democratic governance structure.

Doug Band graduated from the University of Florida in 1995 and while working at the White House for six years, he simultaneously obtained a masters and a law degree from Georgetown University by attending both programs in the evenings.

Doug lives in New York City with his wife Lily and their three children, Max (5), Sophie (4) and Elle (2).

Great Legal Decision on Obama’s Genderless Bathrooms

Posted on by

Post from: Washington Blade, America’s Leading LGBT News Source

Judge blocks guidance on bathroom access for trans students

A federal judge has blocked the enforcement of guidance from the Obama administration prohibiting schools from discriminating against transgender students, including denying them access to public restrooms consistent with their gender identity.

U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, issued the preliminary injunction late Sunday in response to a lawsuit filed in May by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on behalf of 12 states and two school districts.

In the 38-page order, O’Connor writes the case “presents the difficult issue of balancing” the rights of transgender students and privacy concerns, but he nonetheless sides with states suing the Obama administration.

“The sensitivity to this matter is heightened because defendants’ actions apply to the youngest child attending school and continues for every year throughout each child’s educational career,” O’Connor writes. “The resolution of this difficult policy issue is not, however, the subject of this order. Instead, the Constitution assigns these policy choices to the appropriate elected and appointed officials, who must follow the proper legal procedure.”

In May, the Departments of Justice and Education said schools are barred from discriminating against transgender students, including in bathroom use, under the prohibition of gender bias in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. That means schools refusing to allow transgender students to use the restroom consistent with their gender identity are at risk of losing federal funds.

The court order doesn’t devote significant discussion to why transgender students should be subjected to schools barring them from restroom use consistent with their gender identity, but cites the intent of Congress in passing Title IX and portions of the law that allow schools to segregate students by gender.

“Without question, permitting educational institutions to provide separate housing to male and female students, and separate educational instruction concerning human sexuality, was to protect students’ personal privacy, or discussion of their personal privacy, while in the presence of members of the opposite biological sex,” O’Connor writes.

Critics say Paxton and the states he represents lacked standing to sue the Obama administration over the guidance, but O’Connor writes they’re able to sue because the guidance is “clearly designed to target plaintiffs’ conduct.”

“Guidelines will force plaintiffs to consider ways to build or reconstruct restrooms, and how to accommodate students who may seek to use private single person facilities, as other school districts and employers who have been subjected to Defendants’ enforcement actions have had to do,” O’Connor writes. “That the guidelines spur this added regulatory compliance analysis satisfies the injury in fact requirement.”

O’Connor writes the injunction “should apply nationwide” and states that don’t wish to comply with the order “can easily avoid doing so by state law that recognizes the permissive nature.” The injunction, O’Connor writes, shouldn’t interfere with similar cases pending before federal courts on transgender bathroom use and “parties should file a pleading describing those cases so the court can appropriately narrow the scope if appropriate.”

Kasey Suffredini, chief program officer for Freedom for All Americans, called the ruling a “step back for transgender protections,” criticizing O’Connor for the decision and refusing to hear from a single transgender student during court proceedings.

“It is shameful that opponents of equality have forced this lawsuit forward in an attempt to make transgender Americans pawns in a political game; but this ruling will not stand the test of time,” Suffredini said. “All transgender Americans – particularly transgender youth – deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. No singular court ruling negates the right of all Americans to receive equal treatment under the law – that’s one of our nation’s founding values.”

Paxton in a statement after the ruling said the plaintiff states are “pleased” with the decision and it restricts “the Obama administration’s latest illegal federal overreach.”

“This president is attempting to rewrite the laws enacted by the elected representatives of the people, and is threatening to take away federal funding from schools to force them to conform,” Paxton said. “That cannot be allowed to continue, which is why we took action to protect states and school districts, who are charged under state law to establish a safe and disciplined environment conducive to student learning.”

Dena Iverson, a spokesperson for the U.S. Justice Department, said the Obama administration is considering the order and whether to appeal to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“The department is disappointed in the court’s decision, and we are reviewing our options,” Iverson said.

Given the broad nature of the litigation — which sought not only to bar enforcement of the Obama administration guidance, but general enforcement of federal laws against gender discrimination to protect transgender people — the nature of the injunction is sweeping and one that defies years of legal precedent establishing transgender discrimination amounts to gender discrimination.

Five civil rights organizations that had submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in the lawsuit – Lambda Legal, American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Texas, National Center for Lesbian Rights, Transgender Law Center and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders — issued a joint statement in the aftermath of the injunction saying nothing has changed.

“A ruling by a single judge in one circuit cannot and does not undo the years of clear legal precedent nationwide establishing that transgender students have the right to go to school without being singled out for discrimination,” the statement says. “This unfortunate and premature ruling may, however, confuse school districts that are simply trying to support their students, including their transgender students. So let us make it clear to those districts: your obligations under the law have not changed, and you are still not only allowed but required to treat transgender students fairly.”

The statement also criticizes O’Connor for a decision the organizations say “targets a small, vulnerable group of young people – transgender elementary and high school students – for potential continued harassment, stigma and abuse.”

This ruling isn’t the first anti-LGBT decision made by O’Connor. Prior to the U.S. Supreme Court decision last year in favor of same-sex marriage nationwide, O’Connor issued an injunction allowing married same-sex couples to access benefits under the Family & Medical Leave Act in states without marriage equality.

 

The Authority of the Internet is Turned Over in 2 Months

Posted on by

This is surrender of the one place in the world where there is some freedom, the internet. The transfer date is September 30, 2016. Is this a big deal? Yes…..China and Russia don’t have a 1st amendment and it appears only one senator is waging the war to stop the transfer, Ted Cruz.

“From the very first days of the internet, the American government has maintained domain names and ensured equal access to everyone with no censorship whatsoever,” Cruz says in the video. “Obama wants to give that power away.”

That move poses a “great threat” to national security, Cruz said. Starting on the transfer date of Sept. 30, ICANN control could allow foreign governments to prohibit speech that they don’t agree with, he added.

Cruz has added an amendment to the Senate’s Highway Bill that would require an up-or-down vote on the administration’s plan to give ICANN control over names and numbers. And Cruz’s Protecting Internet Freedom Act, proposed with Republican Rep. Sean Duffy (Wis.), would prevent the transfer of authority to the global group. More from The Blaze.

*****

Twenty-five advocacy groups and some individuals have told leaders in the Senate and the House of Representatives that key issues about the transition are “not expected to be fully resolved until summer 2017.”

“Without robust safeguards, Internet governance could fall under the sway of governments hostile to freedoms protected by the First Amendment,” wrote the groups, which include TechFreedom, Heritage Action for America and Taxpayers Protection Alliance. “Ominously, governments will gain a formal voting role in ICANN for the first time when the new bylaws are implemented.” Read more here from PCWorld.

America to hand off Internet in under two months

WashingtonExaminer: The Department of Commerce is set to hand off the final vestiges of American control over the Internet to international authorities in less than two months, officials have confirmed.

The department will finalize the transition effective October 1, Assistant Secretary Lawrence Strickling wrote on Tuesday, barring what he called “any significant impediment.”

The move means the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, which is responsible for interpreting numerical addresses on the Web to a readable language, will move from U.S. control to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a multistakeholder body that includes countries like China and Russia.

Critics of the move, most prominently Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, have pointed out the agency could be used by totalitarian governments to shut down the Web around the globe, either in whole or in part.

Opponents similarly made the case that Congress has passed legislation to prohibit the federal government from using tax dollars to allow the transition, and pointed out that the feds are constitutionally prohibited from transferring federal property without approval from Congress. A coalition of 25 advocacy groups like Americans for Tax Reform, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Heritage Action sent a letter to Congress making those points last week.

While those issues could, in theory, lead to a legal challenge being filed in the days following the transfer, the administration has expressed a desire to finish it before the president leaves office, a position that Strickling reiterated.

“This multistakeholder model is the key reason why the Internet has grown and thrived as a dynamic platform for innovation, economic growth and free expression,” Strickling wrote. “We appreciate the hard work and dedication of all the stakeholders involved in this effort and look forward to their continuing engagement.”

The Larger Covert Actions by Soros, Access, Policy, Chaos

Posted on by
Go here for communications regarding the United States.  Go here for global actions by Soros.
The manipulation is epic as is his influence on policy, money and mandates. His access to powerbrokers can never fully be known or understood. Bottom-line is chaos. Below should help.
Full list of Soros NGOs manipulating elections in all EU member states

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here it Comes, Another Sin Tax, Sodas

Posted on by

Ballot measures are slated for just about everyday and they range from the sublime to the ridiculous…have you paid any attention?

Just in case you need an overview:

Who’s backing 2016 ballot measures?

CPI:  National advocacy groups are gearing up to push state ballot measures in 2016 on topics ranging from the minimum wage to marijuana legalization. Below is a sampling of groups and their plans.

For a sampling some of the work and in sight has already been provided such that you should be on alert by going here.

Soda tax battle brewing at 2016 ballot box

June 8, 2016: Opponents of a proposed sugary drink tax demonstrate outside City Hall in Philadelphia. June 8, 2016: Opponents of a proposed sugary drink tax demonstrate outside City Hall in Philadelphia. (AP)

FNC: Local governments are always thirsty for revenue – and their taste for a soda tax keeps getting stronger, fueling a new battle this fall with America’s beverage industry.

Boosted in part by anti-soda warrior and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, proponents are trying to get a tax on sugary drinks approved at the ballot box in at least four more municipalities.

The initiatives mark a resurgence of sorts for the soda tax crusade. According to the American Beverage Association, voters have rejected 43 such measures in the past eight years. But in a major win for the movement, the Philadelphia City Council approved a 1.5-cents-per-ounce soda tax this past June.

Now, three California municipalities – San Francisco, Oakland and Albany – are slated to vote on a soda tax of a penny per ounce. Boulder, Colo., could double that, if voters OK a 2-cents-per-ounce tax. The initiatives, which have been approved for the ballot, target both sugary drinks and diet drinks.

Advocates cite health benefits in pushing the proposals. “The goal of taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages is to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, which science has proven to be directly correlated to detrimental health impacts such as diabetes, obesity and heart diseases,” San Francisco Board of Supervisors member Malia Cohen told FoxNews.com.

Bloomberg, often ridiculed for his efforts to ban the big gulp in his home city, spent $1.6 million to advocate for the passage of the Philadelphia tax and reportedly will be bankrolling efforts in San Francisco and Oakland as well.

But the American Beverage Association is staunchly opposed. ABA spokeswoman Lauren Kane said the Philadelphia tax is highly unpopular and shouldn’t be a model for any other city.

“This is a regressive tax, it raises the price of groceries and it’s discriminatory because it singles out a single product in the grocery cart,” Kane told FoxNews.com. “Once the government reaches into the grocery cart, everything else is vulnerable.”

The beverage association contends that soda consumption is at a 30-year low, yet obesity has continued to climb in recent years. Further, it notes West Virginia, Arkansas and Tennessee all imposed some soda tax, but rank among the most obese states in the nation.

“There is no single product that is responsible for obesity,” Kane said.

So far, only Berkeley, Calif., has enacted such a tax with voter approval, OK’ing a 1-cent-per-ounce tax in the 2014 election.

If a city the size of San Francisco adopts a tax at the ballot box, it could be a model for others, advocates hope.

“San Francisco has always been a pioneer in landmark legislation and I have no doubt the passage of a sugary beverage tax in San Francisco will encourage other municipalities to seriously consider implementing a similar tax,” said Cohen, who led the effort to have the measure placed on the ballot.

San Francisco would appear the most likely to adopt the measure since 56 percent of voters backed a proposed 2 percent tax increase in 2014. It needed a two-thirds majority to pass because the tax revenue was dedicated for a specific purpose. This year, it’s a proposed 1 percent tax that requires only a simple majority, since the revenue would be going to the general fund. If approved, the tax is projected to bring in $14.4 million annually – money supposedly to be used for health and nutrition programs.

Therein lies another concern. Kane said the revenue would be going into the general budget “with no strings attached” – so voters wouldn’t even know if the revenue would be used “to fight obesity.”

The ABA has a formidable foe in Bloomberg. He telegraphed his plans in a statement issued after the Philadelphia tax victory.

“In November, voters in three California cities will take up the issue, and it may also come before voters in Boulder, Colorado,” Bloomberg said. “When cities lead the way, solutions that were once considered non-starters can quickly catch fire and spread around the world. It would not be the first revolution Philadelphia has sparked.”

The issue even worked its way into presidential politics this year. After eventual Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton said she was “very supportive” of the Philadelphia proposal in April, her opponent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders wrote an op-ed for Philadelphia Magazine calling it a “regressive grocery tax that would disproportionately affect low-income and middle-class Americans.”

Cohen objects to the charge of a regressive tax.

“What this assumption ignores is the fact Type 2 Diabetes is a regressive disease,” Cohen told FoxNews.com. “At today’s rate, 50 percent of African American youth vs. 25 percent White youth will contract Type II Diabetes in their lifetime. This is not a coincidence and we must do something today to address this crisis.”