Saturday, May 30, 2015

Greta: Be outraged! You just got rolled by the DOJ




Back Home Cartoon


Unions seek exemption from LA minimum wage law they helped pass


Union leaders in Los Angeles are being accused of hypocrisy after being caught trying to exempt themselves from a new minimum wage law they tried to impose on others. 
For months, organized labor went after companies like McDonalds and Walmart, shaming any business that paid the old minimum wage. Carrying signs saying, "We see greed" and "We are worth more," union members marched outside businesses and appeared at City Council meetings demanding Los Angeles raise the minimum wage from $9 to $15 by 2020.
"We say, 'Don't leave anybody out, don't cut anybody out, a wage raise for all workers!'" Mary Elena Durazo, the longtime leader of the 600,000-strong Los Angeles County Federation of Labor AFL-CIO, told a cheering crowd of supporters at a recent council meeting.
Yet after pushing through the new wage law, union officials are asking for a waiver that would allow any company that unionizes to avoid paying the minimum wage.
"It was a real surprise that in the 11th hour that labor was saying, 'well, we basically support a sub-minimum wage if a company decides to enter into collective bargaining,'" Los Angeles City Councilman Mitch O'Farrell said. "And that really is a complete contradiction to what they've been saying the last couple of months."
Councilmen Mike Bonin and O'Farrell are opposing the move.
"It is not acceptable to expect the L.A. City Council to become a vehicle for union organizing," said O'Farrell. "That is not what we were elected to do and that is not what I will engage in."
Bonin agreed, telling the Los Angeles Times, "For me, the point of the minimum wage in Los Angeles was to raise wages and lift [everyone] out of poverty."
What especially angered opponents was unions' attitude toward others who asked for waivers. Restaurants, nonprofits and businesses with fewer than 25 employees asked for a one-year delay. Unions opposed it, calling the 'loophole' unfair to the working poor.
Rusty Hicks -- current president of the L.A. Federation of Labor, who replaced Durazo after she left to head a casino-and-hotel worker union -- argued, "it is critical that no Angeleno, whether they're workers or owners of small businesses and nonprofits, is left behind."
But Wednesday night, Hicks changed his position, telling the council that workers who collectively bargain for wages below the minimum shouldn't be penalized. He and labor attorney Margo Feinberg say federal law protects workers who choose collective bargaining.
"This is a standard clause to protect basic worker rights," Hicks said in a statement.
He's right. Minimum wage ordinances in Chicago, Milwaukee, Oakland, San Francisco and San Jose contain provisions similar to the one labor sought in Los Angeles. The municipal code in San Jose says, "all or any portion of the (ordinance) may be waived in a bona fide collective bargaining agreement."
Business groups, however, claim it's a blatant double standard.
"When unions do something like this, it demonstrates that their rhetoric about low wages is hollow," said the National Federation of Independent Business' Andrew Wimer. "They seem perfectly willing to see workers paid less if it means getting more power for themselves."
"The unions are being too cute by half," added Jot Condie of the California Restaurant Association. "They spent the last few months table-pounding against any exemptions or mitigations to the minimum wage increase -- suggesting no one should get special treatment. Now it is clear they recognize the need for those mitigations and have asked for special treatment for themselves."
O'Farrell said the law is likely to go through without any exemptions, though unions are expected to try again. The local AFL-CIO declined to answer questions submitted by Fox News.

The day President Bush's tears spilled onto a Marine's face at Walter Reed


Editor's note: The following column is excerpted from Fox News anchor and political analyst Dana Perino's new book, "And the Good News Is... Lessons and Advice from the Bright Side" (Twelve, April 21, 2015).
News of America’s military men and women [who] were wounded and killed in Iraq and Afghanistan almost overwhelmed me on some days. I may have sounded strong when I was talking to the press, but sometimes I had to push my feelings way down in order to get any words out of my mouth to make statements and answer questions.
The hardest days were when President Bush went to visit the wounded or families of the fallen. If it was tough for me, you can only imagine what it was like for the families and for a president who knew that his decisions led his troops into battles where they fought valiantly but were severely injured or lost their lives.
He regularly visited patients at Walter Reed military hospital near the White House. These stops were unannounced because of security concerns and hassles for the hospital staff that come with a full blown presidential visit.
One morning in 2005, Scott McClellan sent me in his place to visit the wounded warriors. It was my first time for that particular assignment, and I was nervous about how the visits would go.
The president was scheduled to see 25 patients at Walter Reed. Many of them had traumatic brain injuries and were in very serious, sometimes critical, condition. Despite getting the best treatment available in the world, we knew that some would not survive.
We started in the intensive care unit. The chief of naval operations (CNO) briefed the president on our way into the hospital about the first patient we’d see. He was a young Marine who had been injured when his Humvee was hit by a roadside bomb. After his rescue, he was flown to Landstuhl U.S. Air Force Base in Kaiserslautern, Germany. At his bedside were his parents, wife, and five-year-old son.
“What’s his prognosis?” the president asked.
“Well, we don’t know sir, because he’s not opened his eyes since he arrived, so we haven’t been able to communicate with him. But no matter what, Mr. President, he has a long road ahead of him,” said the CNO.
The Marine’s young child tugged on the president’s jacket and asked, “What’s a Purple Heart?” The president got down on one knee and pulled the little boy closer to him. He said, “It’s an award for your dad, because he is very brave and courageous, and because he loves his country so much. And I hope you know how much he loves you and your mom, too.”
We had to wear masks because of the risk of infection to the patient. I watched carefully to see how the family would react to President Bush, and I was worried that they might be mad at him and blame him for their loved one’s situation. But I was wrong.
The family was so excited the president had come. They gave him big hugs and thanked him over and over. Then they wanted to get a photo. So he gathered them all in front of Eric Draper, the White House photographer.
President Bush asked, “Is everybody smiling?” But they all had ICU masks on. A light chuckle ran through the room as everyone got the joke.
The Marine was intubated. The president talked quietly with the family at the foot of the patient’s bed. I looked up at the ceiling so that I could hold back tears.
After he visited with them for a bit, the president turned to the military aide and said, “Okay, let’s do the presentation.” The wounded warrior was being awarded the Purple Heart, given to troops that suffer wounds in combat.
Everyone stood silently while the military aide in a low and steady voice presented the award. At the end of it, the Marine’s young child tugged on the president’s jacket and asked, “What’s a Purple Heart?”
The president got down on one knee and pulled the little boy closer to him. He said, “It’s an award for your dad, because he is very brave and courageous, and because he loves his country so much. And I hope you know how much he loves you and your mom, too.”
As they hugged, there was a commotion from the medical staff as they moved toward the bed.
The Marine had just opened his eyes. I could see him from where I stood.
The CNO held the medical team back and said, “Hold on, guys. I think he wants the president.”
The president jumped up and rushed over to the side of the bed. He cupped the Marine’s face in his hands. They locked eyes, and after a couple of moments the president, without breaking eye contact, said to the military aide, “Read it again.”
So we stood silently as the military aide presented the Marine with the award for a second time. The president had tears dripping from his eyes onto the Marine’s face. As the presentation ended, the president rested his forehead on the wounded warrior's for a moment.
Now everyone was crying, and for so many reasons: the sacrifice; the pain and suffering; the love of country; the belief in the mission; and the witnessing of a relationship between a soldier and his Commander in Chief that the rest of us could never fully grasp. (In writing this book, I contacted several military aides who helped me track down the name of the Marine. I hoped for news that he had survived. He did not. He died during surgery six days after the president’s visit. He is buried at Arlington Cemetery and is survived by his wife and their three children.)
And that was just the first patient we saw. For the rest of the visit to the hospital that day, almost every family had the same reaction of joy when they saw the president.
But there were exceptions. One mom and dad of a dying soldier from the Caribbean were devastated, the mom beside herself with grief. She yelled at the president, wanting to know why it was her child and not his who lay in that hospital bed.
Her husband tried to calm her and I noticed the president wasn’t in a hurry to leave—he tried offering comfort but then just stood and took it, like he expected and needed to hear the anguish, to try to soak up some of her suffering if he could.
Later as we rode back on Marine One to the White House, no one spoke.
But as the helicopter took off, the president looked at me and said, “That mama sure was mad at me.” Then he turned to look out the window of the helicopter. “And I don’t blame her a bit.”
 One tear slipped out the side of his eye and down his face. He didn’t wipe it away, and we flew back to the White House.

Senator: IRS paying private lawyers $1,000 an hour, despite ‘underfunding’ complaints


Despite repeated cries of agency poverty from IRS leaders, a top Republican senator says the nation's chief revenue collector is paying private attorneys more than $1,000 an hour to help conduct a high-profile audit. 
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, fired off a letter to IRS Commissioner John Koskinen airing his concerns earlier this month. Hatch questioned not only the cost of the contract, but the decision to use an outside contractor for an investigation involving potentially sensitive tax information.
"In my experience as chairman, I know that both the IRS Office of Chief Counsel and Justice Department employ excellent attorneys who should be more than able to conduct an examination without turning over interviews and document requests to private contractors," Hatch wrote.
His letter said the contract inked last year with law firm Quinn Emanuel is worth $2.2 million, and allows for attorneys to reap over $1,000 an hour "to carry out functions that are more properly carried out by Treasury officials."
The contract reportedly is to help audit Microsoft. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that investigators are looking at whether Microsoft used improper tactics to shift profits offshore and reduce taxes -- and the IRS might have turned to the private firm to turn up the pressure.
But Hatch said in his letter that taxpayer examinations can only be conducted by Treasury officials unless Congress says otherwise.
Hatch wrote that Congress created "safeguards" around confidential taxpayer information by prohibiting U.S. officials from disclosing it in most cases -- it follows, he argued, "that certain revenue functions may be carried out only by specified officers of the Treasury Department and that taxpayer data can only be disclosed in limited circumstances."
The Quinn Emanuel contract, he wrote, "marks the first time, to the Committee's knowledge, that the agency has hired a private contractor to take such an involved role in an examination."
Hatch noted the Treasury Department and IRS issued a "temporary regulation" after retaining the firm allowing contractors to take "compulsory, sworn testimony" for IRS investigations, and to get access to confidential taxpayer information.
Hatch called this an "unprecedented expansion of the role of outside contractors in the examination process, and one that violates" federal provisions.
He wrote: "The IRS's hiring of a private contractor to conduct an examination of a taxpayer raises concerns because the action: 1) appears to violate federal law and the express will of the Congress; 2) removes taxpayer protections by allowing the performance of inherently governmental functions by private contractors; and 3) calls into question the IRS's use of its limited resources."
The hourly fee was reported earlier in The Daily Caller.
Leaders at the IRS, which has faced intense congressional scrutiny ever since it was revealed that conservative groups seeking nonprofit status were targeted for additional scrutiny, have maintained their agency is struggling with declining budgets.
Commissioner Koskinen said in February that cuts have "deeply eroded our ability to provide critical services for taxpayers."
In March, he called "underfunding" the biggest challenge facing the IRS.



The roots of IRS go back to the Civil War when President Lincoln and Congress, in 1862, created the position of commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacted an income tax to pay war expenses. The income tax was repealed 10 years later.Nov 4, 2014

Brief History of IRS

www.irs.gov/uac/Brief-History-of-IRSInternal Revenue Service

I.R.S. :
For The Real Facts      http://www.afn.org/~govern/IRSkinny.html

Hundreds of protesters gather outside Phoenix mosque under close police watch




Nearly 500 protesters gathered outside a Phoenix mosque Friday as police divided the two groups sparring about Islam.
A Phoenix man who says he is a former Marine who fought in the Iraq war organized the event and believes Islam is a violent religion. He led about 250 people who carried pistols, assault rifles, American flags and drawings of the Prophet Muhammad to the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix.
The group was met by another group of similar size, some holding signs promoting love and peace, who came to show their support for the Mosque and Muslim community.
As the two sides argued and yelled at each other, dozens of police officers formed a line separating the groups. There were no reports of injuries or arrests at the protests, which lasted a few hours and gained attention around the country on social media. Phoenix police estimate about 500 protesters showed up, roughly 250 on each side.
The protest came about a month after a shootout outside a Prophet Muhammad cartoon-drawing contest in a Dallas suburb. Two Phoenix men showed up at the Dallas event with assault rifles and were killed by police. The men formerly worshipped at the Phoenix mosque where Friday’s protest was held.

Murder capital: Baltimore’s homicide explosion in wake of Freddie Gray case dwarfs rate of similar cities








The double murder Thursday of a young mother and her 7-year-old boy brought Baltimore's bloody monthly homicide tally to 38, a figure that dwarfs that of similar-sized cities and even exceeds the total for the same period in New York.
Jennifer Jeffery-Browne, 31, and her son, Kester, were found shot to death in their southwest Baltimore home, leaving friends and family heartbroken and city officials scrambling to reverse a tide of carnage that began following the racially-charged death of a black man in police custody. Police say the way City Hall and the local prosecutor handled the Gray case, which sparked several days of rioting and looting and led to the indictments of six cops, has handcuffed them and emboldened criminals.
"Criminals feel empowered now. There is no respect. Police are under siege in every quarter. They are more afraid of going to jail for doing their jobs properly than they are of getting shot on duty."
- Lt. Gene Ryan, President of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 3
“The criminals are taking advantage of the situation in Baltimore since the unrest,” Lt. Gene Ryan, President of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 3, which represents officers in Baltimore, said in a statement provided to FoxNews.com. “Criminals feel empowered now. There is no respect. Police are under siege in every quarter. They are more afraid of going to jail for doing their jobs properly than they are of getting shot on duty."
With two days remaining in the month of May, the 38 homicides seen in Baltimore, whose population is about 622,000, is cause for alarm. Year-to-date homicides stand at 111, up from 71 for the same period last year, and this year on pace to be the Charm City’s deadliest since 2007. If May's pace cannot be slowed, all bets are off.
Compared to other U.S. cities of similar size, the May homicide rate is truly staggering, according to data compiled by FoxNews.com. Nashville, Tenn., with a population of about 658,000, has only seen six homicides this month and 21 for the year so far. Louisville, Ky., whose population is about 20,000 less than Baltimore's, has only had three homicides for the month and 28 for the year.
Las Vegas (603,488) has recorded 12 homicides in May 2015 and 41 for the year; Denver, Colo., (663,862) has logged just two homicides this month and its yearly total matches Baltimore's monthly tally.
Boston, which has a population 645,966, has had just one homicide for the month of May and 15 for year-to date.
The largest city in the country, New York, has seen 30 homicides for the month as of May 28, and at 8.5 million, its population is nearly 14 times that of Baltimore.
Law enforcement experts say police cannot be proactive if they believe politicians and prosecutors are treating them unfairly. In Gray's case, the career criminal suffered fatal injuries while being transported in a police van. Baltimore City State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby, in announcing indictments that included murder charges against one of the of six police officers involved in the case, struck a tone that many in the police department considered anti-cop.
“This is going to be a fairly routine occurrence – double digit shootings, high homicide rates over the course of the next three months,” said one Baltimore police officer, speaking on condition of anonymity to Fox News Channel's Sean Hannity earlier this week. "It’s a definitely direct result of the indictment of the six officers. When you have officers out there… and those that are doing their jobs are indicted for murder… you couldn’t help but have repercussions where police are afraid to go out there, that they are apprehensive about putting their hands on people…”
Police morale across the nation has reeled in the wake of several racially-charged incidents, including the shooting of an unarmed black man, Michael Brown, last August in Ferguson, Mo., followed by a grand jury's decision not to indict an NYPD cop in the death of Eric Garner and most recently the death of Gray.
“In case people ever needed a reminder, the increase in Baltimore’s murder rate shows how important police are," John Lott, president of Crime Prevention Research Centerand a Fox News contributor said. “As police are worried about being called criminals themselves, the sudden increase stands in sharp contrast to how murder rates are changing in the rest of the country."
 Baltimore City State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby
 (Miss Goofy)

CartoonsTrashyDemsRinos