In a move blasted by voting rights experts as an affront to transparency, the Alabama state Supreme Court granted local election officials permission not to preserve electronic ballot records less than 24 hours before polls opened – records that could form the basis of a recount.
The Alabama state Supreme Court’s ruling overturned an injunction issued by a lower court in Montgomery, the state capital, which had ordered election officials across the state to preserve digital images of the ballots cast in the Senate race between Republican Roy Moore and Democrat Doug Jones.
Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill appealed the lower court’s injunction to the state supreme court at 4:38 PM on Monday afternoon and the justices came back with their ruling at 5:18 PM – an usually quick turnaround time.
“It’s just unbelievable that they examined the pleadings and got eight judges to concur in half an hour on a Monday afternoon,” said Priscilla Duncan, an attorney representing the plaintiffs in the case.
Duncan expressed concern the voting machines could be compromised, “whether intentionally or through error,” indicating tests around the country have demonstrated sizable discrepancies.
“We have reason to believe those machines can be compromised. Whether intentionally or through error, there can be some false results, and there have been some tests around the country where there have been some rather sizeable discrepancies,” she said.
“There’s no legitimate reason not to preserve ballot images,” said Christopher Sautter, a Washington election lawyer who helped the plaintiffs in the case. “It’s neither expensive nor inconvenient. It amounts to flipping a switch.”
While some have noted Alabama officials could just count the original paper ballots in the event of a recount or court challenge, Alabama law does not provide for manual recounts – only a machine recount of the digital images that are taken at the time each ballot is cast.
“People think that when they mark the ballots and they go into the machine that that’s what counted,” Duncan noted. “But it’s not, the paper ballot is not what’s counted. That ballot is scanned and they destroy [the ballots] after the election … If there’s ever an election challenge you need to have what was actually counted.”
President Trump stands for the National Anthem before addressing graduates of the FBI Academy in Quantico, Va. (Photo: Screen grab/C-SPAN)
(CNSNews.com) – President Donald Trump stopped to speak to reporters on his way out of the White House on Friday, criticizing the FBI on his way to speak to graduates of the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia.
“It’s a shame what’s happened with the FBI,” Trump said. “Everybody, not me, everybody, the level of anger at what they’ve been witnessing with respect to the FBI is certainly very sad.”
Later, asked if he would consider a pardon for Michael Flynn, his former national security adviser, Trump replied:
“I don’t want to talk about pardons for Michael Flynn yet. We’ll see what happens. Let’s see. I can say this: When you look at what’s going on with the FBI and with the Justice Department, people are very, very angry.”
Trump was referring to press reports and recently revealed text messages showing a strong pro-Clinton/anti-Trump bias among certain FBI agents assigned at one time to the Trump-Russia investigation.
Republicans in Congress have raised numerous other conflict-of-issue concerns regarding Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Trump-Russia “coordination” investigation as well as former FBI Director James Comey’s apparent agreement to soften the language in his announcement regarding the non-prosecution of Hillary Clinton.
Trump addressed the collusion issue on Friday morning, too:
“There is absolutely no collusion,” the president insisted. “That has been proven. When you look at the committees, whether it’s the Senate or the House, everybody — my worst enemies — they walk out, they say, ‘There is no collusion but we’ll continue to look.
“They’re spending millions and millions of dollars; there is absolutely no collusion. I didn’t make a phone call to Russia, I have nothing to do with Russia. Everybody knows it. That was a Democrat hoax — it was an excuse for losing the election, and it should never have been this way. ”
Trump said it’s time to “get back to running a country.”
He also noted that the ongoing investigations have found evidence of a “rigged system” on the part of the Clinton team.
Senator Ron Johnson sends a letter to current FBI Director Christopher Wray questioning the surrounding investigative details about how the James Comey (July 5th, 2016) exoneration manuscript was changed and sculpted. (Full pdf below)
Within the letter Senator Johnson shares the changes that were made to the manuscript, and asks Wray if FBI officials are aware of who made the changes and why. Prior revelations from within an ongoing IG report showed FBI Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok participating in both the investigation of Hillary Clinton, and changing some of the manuscript to shape the narrative away from criminal conduct and toward Clinton’s favor.
Earlier information showed, via text messages with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, the scope of FBI Agent Strzok’s partisan efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election due to his personal political bias. Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe appeared to be coordinating together on the Clinton investigation toward a united outcome. Director James Comey delivered that outcome to the American electorate.
Essentially today Senator Johnson is asking current FBI Director Wray if he is aware of any further FBI officials that would have also participated in this coordinated effort; and what measures Director Wray is taking to look into the ‘matter’:
WASHINGTON – Newly released documents obtained by Fox News reveal that then-FBI Director James Comey’s draft statement on the Hillary Clinton email probe was edited numerous times before his public announcement, in ways that seemed to water down the bureau’s findings considerably.
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, sent a letter to the FBI on Thursday that shows the multiple edits to Comey’s highly scrutinized statement.
In an early draft, Comey said it was “reasonably likely” that “hostile actors” gained access to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email account. That was changed later to say the scenario was merely “possible.”
Another edit showed language was changed to describe the actions of Clinton and her colleagues as “extremely careless” as opposed to “grossly negligent.” This is a key legal distinction.
Johnson, writing about his concerns in a letter Thursday to FBI Director Christopher Wray, said the original “could be read as a finding of criminality in Secretary Clinton’s handling of classified material.” (read more)
♦Release #2 outlined the depth of FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page’s specific history in the 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton to include the changing of the wording [“grossly negligent” to “extremely careless”] of the probe outcome delivered by FBI Director James Comey.
♦Release #5 was the specific communication between FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page. The 10,000 text messages that included evidence of them both meeting with Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to discuss the “insurance policy” against candidate Donald Trump in August of 2016.
August 15, 2016, FBI Agent Strzok tells FBI Lawyer Lisa Page:
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
What do you think the odds are that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe will not show up next week in front of the House Judiciary Committee?
If he does indeed show up, that’s probably the one congressional hearing this year that will be well worth watching live.
Laura Ingraham: Unless Investigated, Mueller’s ‘Irreparably Tainted’ Russia Probe ‘Will and Should’ Collapse
15 Dec 2017 by John Nolte
Laura Ingraham ripped into the “irreparably tainted” Mueller investigation into Russian collusion with the claim that it is now an example of “how big government can end up becoming a threat to a representative democracy.”
On her Thursday night edition of The Ingraham Angle, Fox News’s latest primetime star opened with a blistering breakdown of the gobsmacking corruption and conflict of interest that has fueled, not only Hillary Clinton’s exoneration over her email scandal, but Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation into Russian collusion.
Specifically, Ingraham pointed to text messages written by FBI Agent Peter Strzok in August of 2016 that read: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
Strzok is referring to what was obviously a political meeting in FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s office.
Worse still, earlier that same month, Lisa Page (a key player in Mueller’s Russia probe) texted to Strzok: “Maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace [Trump].”
“I can protect our country at many levels,” Strzok replied.
This exchange occurred in the heart of the 2016 presidential election, and these texts relate directly to the idea of stopping Donald Trump from becoming president, to an “insurance policy” if he is elected, to an FBI Agent promising to “protect our country” from Trump on “many levels.”
This is stuff of banana republics and their secret police.
Strzok would go on to play a key role in aiding and abetting former FBI Director James Comey’s inexplicable exoneration of Hillary Clinton. Moreover, at this point, Clinton had spent millions to put together the phony Russia dossier that was almost certainly used by the FBI and the Obama administration to obtain the warrants necessary to spy on their political opponents in the Trump campaign.
Strzok then, inexplicably, became a top investigator for Mueller’s Russia probe, and Mueller only became a special prosecutor after Comey illegally leaked confidential notes to the news media in the hopes the appointment of a special prosecutor would be the result. Another conflict of interest is that Mueller and Comey are close friends.
If that is not bad enough, in 2015, when FBI Deputy Director McCabe’s wife ran for state senate in Virginia, longtime Clintonista Terry McAuliffe funneled some $675, 000 into her campaign. The following year, Strzok watered down the language that exonerated Hillary for her prosecutable email crimes.
And if that is not bad enough, Bruce Ohr, a top Justice Department official, is married to Nellie Ohr, who worked for Fusion GPS to put together the discredited Russian dossier.
Hovering over all of this is the number of Hillary Clinton donors hired by Mueller to investigate the man who beat her.
Focusing specifically on the Strzok’s “insurance policy” reassurance to Lisa Page, and calling this text a “smoking gun,” Ingraham broke down exactly how that “insurance” has manifested itself over the last 18 months.
They were intent on preventing him from being elected by any means necessary. And if that meant applying for a FISA warrant based on a phony dossier in order to spy on the campaign, maybe they’d do it. And if it meant deploying the entire mainstream media apparatus into Defcon 1 mode; hyper-ventilating about Russian collusion 24/7, they’d do it.
Ingraham then moved into what this “insurance policy” looks like today as a means to stop Trump from governing.
And today, if it means floating a specious story alleging that the president has early on-set dementia, they’ll do that too. Or maybe spreading damaging falsehoods with anonymous sources that are later parroted and then retracted by major news organizations. Yeah, they’ll do that too. … Whatever it takes. As former Mueller investigator Peter Strzok put it, they needed an “insurance policy” to stop Trump.
With only an hour show, Ingraham could not hit on everything, but this “insurance policy” has also manifested itself through inexcusable leaks of President Trump’s phone calls with foreign leaders and Mueller’s apparent desire to derail the (successful) Senate vote on tax reform by announcing, on the morning of the vote, his plea bargain (for a process crime) with Michael Flynn, Trump’s former National Security Adviser.
“The Founders never envisioned that a separate office inside the executive branch could hire a bunch of agenda-driven investigators, in search of a crime, by the head of the executive branch [Trump],” Ingraham said, and then called on FBI Deputy Director McCabe to be fired over many things, including his apparent role in planning to “subvert Trump’s campaign, or if elected, his ability to lead the government as president of the United States.”
Although she said she is tempted, Ingraham did not call for Mueller to be fired, but did say his investigation is “irreparably tainted” and needs to be investigated. If not, she believes his investigation “will and should” collapse over these “endless revelations of bias.”
Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.
Billionaire left-wing globalist George Soros is at it again, this time wielding his financial heft to advance the narrative that President Trump is guilty of sexual harassment and assault.
InfoWars reports that Soros’ Open Society Foundations and Media Matters for America funds Brave New Films, an allegedly non-partisan, non-profit organization that released a film entitled “16 women and Donald Trump,” which detailed the accounts of 16 women who claim to have been sexually harassed and assaulted by the president.
Brave New Films then hosted a press conference on December 11, which proved a forum for the women to share their firsthand accounts of their experiences being harassed by President Trump. The women claimed that they had been forcibly kissed and groped by President Trump before he came to office.
While Brave New Films claims that they do not “expressly advocate for the election or defeat of candidates for public office,” their videos tell a different story:
Stand Up, Senate! The President-elect is a hypocrite.
Protect Public Education — Stop Betsy DeVos!
Indivisible: A Practical Guide For Resisting The Trump Agenda
GETTING DONALD TRUMP OFF NBC’S SNL
A statement by CBS announcing the press conference stated that the conference would call for accountability and “an investigation by Congress of sexual misconduct by the president.” CBS’ statement left little room to question the news outlet’s bias: “These brave women have all spoken out individually.” It sounds like CBS has already made up its mind about the accusations.
But despite the media firestorm against Trump over the allegations, there has not been substantial evidence to corroborate the women’s claims or prove the accusers’ credibility. One accuser, Rachel Crooks, who claimed that Trump tried to kiss her on an elevator in 2005, claimed she felt intimidated when Trump asked for her number and begrudgingly gave it to him. Crooks was a public supporter and donor to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Another accuser, Jessica Leeds, said she was groped by Trump on a plane, though her story was disputed by an eyewitness. Anthony Gilberthorpe said he was seated across the aisle from Trump and Leeds when the alleged incident took place. Gilberthorpe claimed that Leeds was in fact the “one being flirtatious” and that the event did not unfold as she detailed. He states that when Trump went to the restroom on the plane, Leeds turned and confided in him that “she wanted to marry [Mr Trump].”
Leeds also accused Trump of calling her a c—, which, though distasteful, is not sexual assault.
President Trump has denied the allegations against him, and contends that Democrats are resurrecting the accusations because they have been unable to prove the Russian collusion story. “Despite thousands of hours wasted and many millions of dollars spent, the Democrats have been unable to show any collusion with Russia,” he states. “Now they are moving on to the false accusations and fabricated stories of women who I don’t know and/or have never met.”
The White House released a statement early Monday denying the claims of the women at the press conference: “These false claims, totally disputed in most cases by eyewitness accounts, were addressed at length during last year’s campaign, and the American people voiced their judgment by delivering a decisive victory,” a White House spokesperson said in a statement. “The timing and absurdity of these false claims speaks volumes and the publicity tour that has begun only further confirms the political motives behind them.”
But the mainstream media continues to provide Trump’s accusers an outlet in this new post-Weinstein era in which the accused are guilty until proven innocent.
Critics note that the media has not always been so vigilant on this subject, however. Michael Snyder, a Republican candidate for Congress in Idaho’s First Congressional District, points out the mainstream media’s choosy reporting of sexual misconduct claims: “It is funny how the mainstream media never even wanted to address the very serious allegations of sexual misconduct against Bill and Hillary Clinton that kept arising, and yet anyone with any sort of a claim against Trump gets front page coverage.”
Official Conducting House Ethics Investigations Charged with Sexual Misconduct
15 Dec 2017 by Penny Starr
A top official with the Office of Congressional Ethics is now among the growing number of men accused of sexual misconduct with women and for using his powerful position in the unethical ways that his committee investigates when claims are made against House lawmakers.
Omar Ashmawy, staff director and chief counsel at the ethics office, is named in an ongoing lawsuit being litigated in a Pennsylvania federal court, according to a Foreign Policyreport.
The report said charges in the lawsuit include verbal and physical assault against women in a late-night brawl on Valentine’s Day in 2015.
According to FP, three women at the bar that night, including the bartender, have accused Ashmawy of harassing them verbally and physically.
Ashmawy was never charged or arrested, according to the report, but two months later, three men were arrested for assaulting him. He was the only one who suffered injuries that night, according to FP.
In September, one of the men charged with assaulting Ashmawy, Greg Martucci, filed a lawsuit against Ashmawy related to the 2015 event. His suit was filed in federal court in Pennsylvania.
In his lawsuit, Martucci accuses Ashmawy of using his political power and position with the Office of Congressional Ethics to pressure the police and the district attorney into not arresting him for assaulting the women. Martucci also alleges that Ashmawy threatened federal investigation of local government and police if they did not press charges against those accusing him of assault.
For his part, Ashmawy denies the charges in the original lawsuit, according to a statement he provided to FP.
“To be clear, I did not harass anyone that evening, physically or verbally,” Ashmawy said in the statement. “To the contrary, I was the victim of a wholly unprovoked assault for which those responsible were investigated, arrested and charged. Any allegation to the contrary is unequivocally false.”
Ashmawy has previously filed a motion to dismiss, and on December 6, he filed a brief in support of that motion to dismiss, saying he was the victim that night, according to FP.
The Milford Borough and its police chief have filed similar motions to dismiss, and a conference with attorneys for all parties to the lawsuit is scheduled before a judge on January 5, 2018, FP reported.
FB also reported on some of the cases Ashmawy’s office has been involved in:
According to the website of the Office of Congressional Ethics, it has pursued investigations into Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.) and Del. Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam), whose cases, like that of Conyers, began under Ashmawy and were referred to the ethics committee for further investigation. The New York Times this week reported that Republicans are citing a 2015 decision by the Office of Congressional Ethics clearing Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas), who has also been accused of sexual harassment.
Meanwhile, FP could be facing problems over its reporting.
“Please be advised that the official response on behalf of Milford Borough and Chief DaSilva is ‘No comment during the course of pending litigation,’” Sheryl L. Brown, an attorney with the firm Siana Bellwoar, wrote FP in response to queries.
“We reserve the right to subpoena unprivileged portions of your files considering you assert you are in possession of ‘police statements from witnesses,’” Brown wrote.
Net Neutrality is dead. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted 3-2 Thursday to dismantle the scheme. And while its supporters are busily running around like Chicken Little, claiming the sky is falling, the simple truth is that the death of the Obama-era regulation of the Internet is a very good thing.
When the FCC voted on February 26, 2015 to reclassify the Internet as a public utility under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, then-Chairman Tom Wheeler promised that so-called Net Neutrality would usher in an era of a “free and open” Internet. Never mind that the entire scheme was built on one lie after another. For instance, the first big lie is that the Internet needed government regulations to make it free and open. Here is a tip for those who want to know: government regulations are the opposite of free and open.
To illustrate that, let’s take a moment to remember that the architects and supporters of Net Neutrality promised that there would be no rate regulation (similar enough to Obama’s promises of no premium increases with the misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act). And yet, in April 2016, Wheeler testified before Congress that a bill to keep the FCC from regulating Internet rates would kill Net Neutrality and prevent the commission from enforcing its rules. Because the power to set rates was part of the plan all along, just like with ObamaCare.
Even without the threat of the FCC regulating both rates and content, Net Neutrality was the bane of freedom and openness. As this writer explained in detail when Net Neutrality was just taking effect, the rules against blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization were really rules against a free market Internet. Those so-called “bright-line” rules were also mere window dressing for what Wheeler called a “catch-all standard.” That “catch-all standard” was the “general conduct rule” which Wheeler described by writing:
The bright-line bans on blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization will go a long way to preserve the virtuous cycle. But not all the way. Gatekeeper power can be exercised through a variety of technical and economic means, and without a catch-all standard, it would be that, as Benjamin Franklin said, “A little neglect may breed great mischief.”
“Thus,” Wheeler noted, “the Order adopts the following standard”:
Any person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably disadvantage (i) end users’ ability to select, access, and use broadband Internet access service or the lawful Internet content, applications, services, or devices of their choice, or (ii) edge providers’ ability to make lawful content, applications, services, or devices available to end users. Reasonable network management shall not be considered a violation of this rule.
Given that latitude, there would be little the FCC could not regulate about the Internet. Given the propensity of government to expand its own power, it is easy to see how Net Neutrality was a threat to the freedom and openness of the Internet.
Now, those concerns are a thing of the past. Net Neutrality — passed by a 3-2 vote — has been dismantled by a 3-2 vote.
One thing that really stands out in this is that government regulations — no matter how bad — are so rarely repealed. Take ObamaCare as an example. In the few years it has been in force, it has already become engraved in the American psyche to the point that Republicans who railed against it when it passed are now trying to figure out how to repeal and replace, rather than just repeal. In another comparison, it matters little how broken the Social Security scheme is; few will ever talk about jettisoning it.
As such, there was a very narrow window of opportunity to kill Net Neutrality before it killed the free and open Internet it claimed to protect. The election of Donald Trump and his appointment of Ajit Pai — an outspoken opponent of Net Neutrality — to replace Wheeler as FCC chairman served to mark the beginning of the end of government regulation of the Internet.
That end — long predicted — came Thursday with firm finality. The vote removed not only Net Neutrality, per se, but also the faulty logic on which it rested: Title II reclassification. Now that the Internet is no longer considered what it never was — a public utility — the FCC lacks the authority to regulate it. Period.
Because the Internet — like the rest of the free market — does better in the absence of government regulation.
And while the doomsday prophets on the Left are already predicting the Dark Ages of the Internet with people unable to access content and communicate freely, the reality is that — as Ajit Pai said after Thursday’s vote — “The internet wasn’t broken in 2015. We were not living in some digital dystopia.” In fact, even supporters of Net Neutrality seem to realize that, even if they don’t know they realize it.
For instance, The Verge — an avid apologist for Net Neutrality — accidentally expressed that principle in an article that seems designed to create a sense of fear and dread at the death of Net Neutrality. The article — under the headline, “What public libraries will lose without net neutrality” — begins, “The FCC will vote on a measure today that would repeal net neutrality and pave the way for the end of the free, open internet as we’ve always known it.” Always? If we have always known a free, open Internet and Net Neutrality has been around only since 2015, then it can’t be the cause of a free, open Internet. In other words, Pai is correct, “The internet wasn’t broken in 2015.” And it didn’t need to be fixed.
Now that this backward scheme has been relegated to the trash heap of history, the Internet will continue to be free and open.
YouTube Temporarily Suspends Ajit Pai’s Parody Video on Copyright Grounds
15 Dec 2017 by Allum Bokhari
YouTube took down a Daily Caller video featuring FCC chairman Ajit Pai making the case for Title II (commonly described as “Net Neutrality”) repeal earlier today, only to restore it several hours later.
The video was taken down on the basis of a copyright claim based on an 11-second clip featuring the FCC chairman dancing to the song “Harlem Shake” along with Daily Caller staffers.
“Harlem Shake” is one of the most parodied tracks in existence. After becoming an internet meme in 2013, thousands of people have uploaded videos of themselves dancing along to short clips of the song. At one point in 2013, uploads of Harlem Shake videos on YouTube reached 4,000 per day.
The producer of the song, DJ and musician Baauer, did not make attempts to take down the flood of parody videos, instead opting to claim ad revenue on them from YouTube. Most of the parodies are still online to this day.
In a statement about Pai’s video, Baauer said “My team and I are currently exploring every single avenue available to get it taken down. I support net neutrality like the vast majority of this country and am appalled to be associated with its repeal in anyway.” “Harlem Shake” was produced using samples from other artists without permission, leading the copyright claim to be met with skepticism in some quarters.
The use of copyrighted material for the purposes of parody is legally protected under the U.S. fair use doctrine. Fair use claims are also strengthened if only a small amount of copyrighted material (say, 11 seconds of a 3-minute song!) is used.
Title II regulations on ISPs, which are portrayed by defenders as synonymous with “Net Neutrality” (the idea that all online data should be treated equally), were repealed in a 3 – 2 vote by the FCC yesterday, triggering outrage and panic from many on the left.
Much of the argument over Net Neutrality revolves around the concern that content could be blocked or removed from the internet. Perhaps ironically, Baauer has chosen to respond by trying to remove content from the internet.
On the same day that DoLS reports unemployment claims are at their lowest level in 45 years; and on the same day when Reuters economist panel admits that wages are indeed going up quickly now; well, the November holiday sales results are being reviewed and the results are stunning.
(Reuters) U.S. retail sales increased more than expected in November as the holiday shopping season got off to a brisk start, pointing to sustained strength in the economy.
[…] The Commerce Department said retail sales rose 0.8 percent last month, with households buying a range of goods even as they cut back on purchases of motor vehicles. Data for October was revised to show sales gaining 0.5 percent instead of the previously reported 0.2 percent increase.
Retail sales accelerated 5.8 percent on an annual basis. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast retail sales increasing only 0.3 percent in November. (link)
5.8% growth over last year is BIGLY yuge. We’re talking about massive numbers. To move them almost 6% is bigly. Remember, retail sales account for approximately two-thirds of all U.S. economic activity within our GDP valuation. We are the world’s largest market economy.
In a separate report, the Labor Department said initial claims for state unemployment benefits dropped 11,000 to a seasonally adjusted 225,000 for the week ended Dec. 9. That was the lowest reading since mid-October when claims dropped to 223,000, a level not seen since March 1973.
[…] Last month’s increase in core retail sales suggested a strong pace of consumer spending in the fourth quarter. Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic activity, is being supported by steady wage gains as the labor market tightens. (read full article)
Trump Opens Up 80,000 White-Collar Jobs to Americans
15 Dec 2017 by Neil Munro
The administration’s decision to reverse President Barack Obama’s expansion of the H-1B program has been met with criticism by advocates for cheap foreign white-collar labor.
The pro-American decision by President Donald Trump’s deputies will launch a lengthy regulatory process which will open up roughly 80,000 jobs to Americans graduates over the next two years.
In 2015, Obama’s deputies began awarding H4 work permits to the spouses of H-1B guest-workers who manage to get into the line for residency and green cards. The H4 program did not have any approval from Congress but was one part of Obama’s pro-immigration strategy.
Most of the H4 recipients are Indians because the per-country annual caps for green cards ensure that the many Indians in line must wait for several years while jumping from the H-1B program to green cards.
Todd Schulte, the director of Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us lobbying group, Tweeted his opposition to the promised change:
Horrible decision to strip work authorization away from the spouses of high-skilled immigrants on H1-Bs. Rougbly 200,000 people living in the US (~85% women) will be barred from contributing to the economy. https://t.co/kqdOnB5qg7
The spouses of highly skilled foreign workers would no longer be able to work legally in the U.S. under a regulatory change proposed by the Trump administration on Thursday …
“This announcement places into jeopardy thousands of hardworking, contributing individuals who have started their own businesses—and often have U.S. citizen children—who will needlessly be forced to revert to a status of inactivity,” said Leon Fresco, an immigration attorney who worked for the Obama administration.
Finally me & Abinav have agreed on something. I have H4 & EAD permit to work full time till Sept 2020, will concentrate on PhD part time from Sept! Trying for a full time Lecturer job in New Jersey for next 3 yrs! Let us see how it goes with PR in #EB1 etc. 🙂
The promised change was revealed in Donald Trump’s report on planned regulatory changes.
The end of the H4 program will nudge down the annual award of “Employment Authorization Document” work permits to roughly 2 million foreigners. In combination with Trump’s decision to close Obama’s DACA program, the 2018 number may drop down to 1.5 million.
However, some observers criticize the move as too slow, and too limited.
Four million Americans turn 18 each year and begin looking for good jobs in the free market.
But the federal government inflates the supply of new labor by annually accepting 1 million new legal immigrants, by providing work-permits to roughly 3 million resident foreigners, and by doing little to block the employment of roughly 8 million illegal immigrants.
The cheap-labor policy has also reduced investment and job creation in many interior states because the coastal cities have a surplus of imported labor. For example, almost 27 percent of zip codes in Missouri had fewer jobs or businesses in 2015 than in 2000, according to a new report by the Economic Innovation Group. In Kansas, almost 29 percent of zip codes had fewer jobs and businesses in 2015 compared to 2000, which was a two-decade period of massive cheap-labor immigration.
Because of the successful cheap-labor strategy, wages for men have remained flat since 1973, and a large percentage of the nation’s annual income has shifted to investors and away from employees.
A real soldier's view of WW II
I have a story to tell about my fathers WWII days and someone suggested that I start a blog. So here I am with no idea of what the heck I am doing. I have pictures of my fathers time overseas. I also have a suitcase full of letters. The first letter is f
Act For America
ACT for America is committed to recruiting, training, and mobilizing citizens community by community to help protect and preserve American culture and to keep this nation safe.
Alex Jones' Infowars
Because there is a war on for your mind this website provides information you may not see elsewhere. Information is what we all need to have.
I Have Vanished
The goal of this website is to focus on both runaway juveniles and individuals who are missing against their will primarily within the United States. Reasons people go missing include being abducted, incapacitated or injured, a victim of a catastrophe, a
Islam 101 is meant to help people become better educated about the fundamentals of Islam and to help the more knowledgeable better convey the facts to others
Karen Hudes a well know World Bank Whistleblower
Karen Hudes worked in the US Export Import Bank of the US from 1980-1985 and in the Legal Department of the World Bank from 1986-2007. She has been exposing the WORLD Bank, the IMF, and the Fed for many years
Oath Keepers – Guardian of the Republic
Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like minded citizens who take an Oath to sta
PAVE Shattering the Silence of Sexual Assault
Promoting Awareness | Victim Empowerment (PAVE) is the only national nonprofit that works both to shatter the silence and prevent sexual violence through social advocacy, education and survivor support.
The Manhattan Declaration
A CALL OF CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.
THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD A Special Report
This Special Report aims to analyze the Muslim Brotherhood organization as a global movement, in particular their ideology and the key players involved in the movement as well as charting the extent of their global reach.
U.S. Terror History Map
There are three sections: “Court Cases”, “Radical Activities”, and Mosques and Islamic centers listed at one time were home to radical clerics or to conspirators in a terrorism-related investigations
Understanding The Threat
UTT is the only organization in America which is training leaders, elected officials, law enforcement, military personnel, and citizens, about the Global Islamic Movement and the jihadi networks in communities around the nation
Veterans For A Stronger America
America is safe – when America is strong.Veterans for a Strong America is a non-partisan action organization dedicated to educating the public, members of Congress and the Executive Branch about our 5 Step Mission to make America Strong:
Veterans For Child Rescue
The organization’s primary objectives are to educate and increase public awareness, assist law enforcement and other legal entities to prevent and reduce pedophilia, human sex trafficking and child sexual abuse.
Presenting America’s Forgotten History and Heroes with an Emphasis on our moral, religious, and Constitutional heritage
WikiLeaks Hillary Clinton Email Archive
On March 16, 2016 WikiLeaks launched a searchable archive for 30,322 emails & email attachments sent to and from Hillary Clinton’s private email server while she was Secretary of State
Most of their published documents which were leaked to them can be found at this link