Saturday, January 21, 2017

The Only Way to Stop Donald Trump Is to Join Him, Not Resist Him

The Only Way to Stop Donald Trump Is to Join Him, Not Resist Him

In his inaugural address yesterday, President Trump said he wanted to return the government to the people. He wants to give it back. The problem for the American left is that they have bought into the notion that the federal government should be all encompassing and all powerful. As they see now, that is a bad idea. They were fine with Barack Obama having that power, but now Donald Trump has it. The good news for them is Donald Trump wants to reduce the power of Washington. Liberals should want to hold him to this. It is a good thing for us all.

A government big enough to give us everything is big enough to take it all away. Right now, the American left has visions of it all being taken away. Government should have never done much of it in the first place. Government should not be the provider of our health care or an expansive safety net — at least the federal government should not be. If you want it in your state, go for it. But the federal government has no business doing these things.

The American left should take Donald Trump at his word and take back their government. They should embrace a limited federal government and expansive state governments. They can have their abortions, transgender bathrooms, and Obamacare in their states and leave the other states alone. Let Washington just focus on the basics of printing currency, providing for the common defense, and ensuring fair play between the states.

The next four years promise to be a nightmare for anyone and everyone who wants a super powerful government, but does not want Donald Trump in charge of it. The only way to get through this nightmare is to embrace Donald Trump’s promise to give the government back and reduce the power of Washington.

Resist him all you want. He will just dig in his heels. Encourage him to really devolve power back to the states and people and you will put the Presidency and Washington back into their proper spheres and have far less to worry about from a Trump Administration.



Sent from my iPhone

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Expert on human trafficking speaks at UGA

Expert on human trafficking speaks at UGA

A nationally known expert on human trafficking — whether for sex, labor or other purposes — says the issue has gone from being one that attracted attention largely at the federal level to becoming a local issue affecting many communities in the nation, including Athens.

“This is a local problem,” said Laura Lederer of the Global Centurion Foundation, a Virginia-based nonprofit organization that works against human trafficking from what Lederer called “the demand side” — the people who exploit and use other human beings for everything from forced labor to commercial sex.

As human trafficking was first being recognized as an issue in this country, it mostly involved people from outside the country bringing other foreign people into the country for illicit purposes, Lederer explained. Over time, though, authorities began to see people within this country becoming involved directly in human trafficking, bringing people here to be exploited for labor, for sex, or for any of the number of other purposes, including debt bondage, recognized as human trafficking by the U.S. Department of State, Lederer said.

The internet and other forms of digital communication added yet another layer to the world of human trafficking, Lederer said.

Lederer, who has worked on the issue for years — in academia, government and now through Global Centurion — spoke at a Tuesday seminar at the University of Georgia’s Fanning Institute for Leadership Development, addressing medical professionals and others who might come into contact with victims of trafficking.

Her appearance in Athens was part of Georgia Public Service Commissioner Tim Echols’ work against trafficking, which includes helping to arrange tours of parts of Atlanta notorious for human trafficking.

Trafficking isn’t just a big-city problem, Lederer said in an interview prior to her presentation at the Fanning Institute. In fact, she said, as law-enforcement officials in larger cities crack down on trafficking offenses, that activity routinely moves to smaller nearby towns.

Athens hasn’t been immune to human trafficking, Lederer said.

“I think it’s going on in every town now,” she said.

And while she didn’t have specific statistics for Athens readily available Tuesday, Lederer did say that there have been hundreds of state- and federal-level prosecutions for human trafficking in Georgia in recent years.

According to some statistics, as many as 46.5 million people worldwide have been victimized by human trafficking, Lederer said. The State Department cites a lower figure, but still puts the number at more than 20 million, according to Lederer.

The focus on human trafficking as a local problem began about 10 years ago, Lederer said, when the federal Department of Justice contacted its U.S. attorneys’ offices around the country and asked them to bring together local police and other emergency service providers to educate them on recognizing and dealing with human trafficking.

In the intervening years, there has been “a great response” from local authorities in terms of recognizing and dealing with human trafficking on the local level, Lederer said, with those authorities exhibiting “a very quick learning curve” on the issue.

But, Lederer said, effectively addressing human trafficking on the local level means that communities must be proactive.

“Everybody has to have their antenna up,” she said.

If, however, there is one institution that could be doing more to help communities determine whether human trafficking is an issue, and to help communities address it, it is the schools.

“This is a place where I think so much more needs to be done,” she said, explaining that in addition to teaching school personnel how to recognize signs of human trafficking and reporting it to authorities, schools could educate students, in age-appropriate ways, on human trafficking to keep them on guard against it.



Sent from my iPhone

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

The NPE Toolkit: Stop Betsy DeVos

The NPE Toolkit: Stop Betsy DeVos

profits-over-children-final-1

The more we learn, the more we are certain that Betsy DeVos is bad for public schools and for kids.

When De Vos has to choose between quality schools and “the free market,” she chooses “the free market” of privatized choice every time. The best interests of children take a back seat.

And we know the DeVos endgame–shut down our neighborhood public schools, and replace them with a patchwork of charters, private schools and online learning.

We can’t let that happen and we need your help. Present and future generations of children are depending on us to act now.  We now know that some Senators have grave doubts. It is our job to make those doubts grow into active resistance to DeVos. Our senators are in district offices from 12/17 – 1/2.

Here are our three toolkits to help you do your part.

Toolkit 1. Call your senators’ offices. The toolkit with numbers and a phone script can be found here. It includes a link to phone numbers.

Toolkit 2. Send a letter to the editor of your local newspaper. You can find a model here.

Toolkit 3. Visit your senators’ offices. If you cannot get an appointment, hand deliver a letter. Our toolkit, which you can find here has a model to use, and directions to find local offices. If you cannot hand deliver it, send your letter in the mail.

When you go into the toolkits and commit to an action, we have a simple form that lets us know what you did. As a thank you, you will receive a special badge for your Facebook page or Twitter account each time you complete an action, and you will be entered into our drawing for a copy of Reign of Error signed by Diane Ravitch.

The drawing will be held on January 5th, so please begin your actions today. Share this link on your Facebook page and Twitter account, or email it to a friend.

We thank you for all that you do. Sadly, our nation’s children need you to do more.

american-schools-not-for-sale-2



Sent from my iPhone

A Guide to Basic Differences Between Left and Right

A Guide to Basic Differences Between Left and Right

Source of Human Rights

Left: government

Right: the Creator

Human Nature

Left: basically good (Therefore, society is primarily responsible for evil.)

Right: not basically good (Therefore, the individual is primarily responsible for evil.)

Economic Goal

Left: equality

Right: prosperity

Primary Role of the State

Left: increase and protect equality

Right: increase and protect liberty

Government

Left: as large as possible

Right: as small as possible

Family Ideal

Left: any loving unit of people

Right: a married father and mother, and children

Guiding Trinity

Left: race, gender and class

Right: liberty, In God We Trust and e pluribus unum

Good and Evil

Left: relative to individual and/or society

Right: based on universal absolutes

Humanity's Primary Division(s)

Left: rich and poor; strong and weak

Right: good and evil

Ideal Primary Identity of an American

Left: world citizen

Right: American citizen

How to Make a Good Society

Left: abolish inequality

Right: develop each citizen's moral character

View of America

Left: profoundly morally flawed; inferior to any number of European countries

Right: greatest force for good among nations in world history

Gender

Left: a social construct 

Right: male and female 

Most Important Trait to Cultivate in a Child

Left: self-esteem

Right: self-control

Worth of the Human Fetus

Left: determined by the mother

Right: determined by society rooted in Judeo-Christian values

Primary Source of Crime

Left: poverty, racism and other societal flaws

Right: the criminal's malfunctioning conscience 

Place of God and Religion in America

Left: secular government and secular society

Right: secular government and religious society

American Exceptionalism

Left: chauvinistic doctrine

Right: historical reality

Greatest Threat to the World

Left: environmental catastrophe (currently global warming)

Right: evil (currently radical Islamist violence)

International Ideal

Left: world governed by the United Nations, and no single country is dominant

Right: world in which America is the single strongest entity

Primary Reason for Lack of Peace in Middle East

Left: Israeli settlements in the West Bank

Right: Palestinian, Arab and Muslim denial of Jewish state's right to exist

Purpose of Art

Left: challenge status quo and bourgeois sensibilities

Right: produce works of beauty and profundity to elevate the individual and society

Guns 

Left: ideally universally abolished, except for use by police, the armed forces and registered sportsmen

Right: ideally widely owned by responsible individuals for self-protection and the protection of others

Race

Left: intrinsically significant

Right: intrinsically insignificant

Racial, Ethnic and Gender Diversity at Universities

Left: most important

Right: far less important than ideological diversity

Black America's Primary Problem

Left: racism

Right: lack of fathers

Greatest Playwright

Left: entirely subjective; there is no greatest playwright

Right: Shakespeare

War

Left: not the answer

Right: sometimes the only answer

Hate

Left: wrong, except when directed at the political 

Right: wrong, except when directed at evil

Cultures

Left: all equal

Right: some are better than others

America's Founding Fathers

Left: rich white male slave owners

Right: great men who founded the greatest society

Purpose of Judges

Left: pursue social justice

Right: pursue justice

National Borders

Left: a relic of the past

Right: indispensable for national survival

View of Illegal Immigrants

Left: welcomed guests

Right: illegal immigrants

Nature

Left: intrinsically valuable

Right: made for man



Sent from my iPhone

Sunday, January 15, 2017

Controversial Clinton Global Initiative closing its doors for good

Controversial Clinton Global Initiative closing its doors for good

Controversial Clinton Global Initiative closing its doors for good

In a fitting end, The Clinton Global Initiative will shutter operations at their main office in New York City for good on Tax Day, April 15, 2017.

A WARN filing with the Department of Labor indicates that the 22 remaining employees employed there will be terminated on that date and that the official reason given for the layoffs is a “discontinuation of the Clinton Global Initative.”

The CGI came under scrutiny during the 2016 election. The many foreign government donors and wealthy benefactors the organization claimed contributed to the belief that the organization was a “pay-to-play” operation designed to enrich the Clintons by trading on their political influence, and by using the speaking circuit as a way to elevate the “Clinton” brand while Hillary Clinton campaigned for president.

Clinton defenders countered those allegations by citing the many charitable organizations the CGI funded around the world.

However, as a report from the New York Observer notes, the criticisms began to reemerge in the wake of Clinton’s electoral loss to now President-elect Donald Trump due to the nearly immediate decision by those same wealthy and foreign donors to distance themselves from the foundation — or  fundraising — arm of the initiative:

[A]s soon as Clinton lost the election, many of the criticisms directed toward the Clinton Foundation were reaffirmed. Foreign governments began pulling out of annual donations, signaling the organization’s clout was predicated on donor access to the Clintons, rather than its philanthropic work. In November, the Australian government confirmed it “has not renewed any of its partnerships with the scandal-plagued Clinton Foundation, effectively ending 10 years of taxpayer-funded contributions worth more than $88 million.” The government of Norway also drastically reduced their annual donations, which reached $20 million a year in 2015.

The CGI was founded in 2005 to supplement the Clinton Foundation and serve as a networking apparatus to help in fundraising efforts. However, as the Observer notes, the language used to define the goal of the initiative was unclear. “Rather than directly implementing projects, CGI facilitates action by helping members connect, collaborate, and make effective and measurable Commitments to Action—plans for addressing significant global challenges,” the CGI website states.

Clinton was dogged during the waning days of the 2016 election by allegations stemming from an email exchange detailing a memo made public by WikiLeaks in October that the Clinton Foundation was running a scheme to amass a fortune using the Clintons’ political influence:

From the Post:

The memo from [top Clinton aide and Clinton Foundation employee] Douglas Band, made public Wednesday by the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks, lays out the aggressive strategy behind lining up the consulting contracts and paid speaking engagements for Bill Clinton that added tens of millions of dollars to the family’s fortune, including during the years that Hillary Clinton led the State Department. It describes how Band helped run what he called “Bill Clinton Inc.,” obtaining “in-kind services for the President and his family — for personal travel, hospitality, vacation and the like.”

The alleged abuses of the Clinton Foundation and the CGI are also detailed in the book, “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” by Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute.



Sent from my iPhone

FBI: Major Cities Hit by 21.6 Percent Spike in Murders

FBI: Major Cities Hit by 21.6 Percent Spike in Murders

AP Photo

The Associated Press

by Katie McHugh13 Jan 2017601

Violent crime, including murder, continued its rise across the country during the first half of 2016, and the largest cities seeing a 21.6 percent increase in murders, says a new FBI report.

Comparing the first six months of 2015 to the first six months of 2016, the FBI found murders rose 5.2 percent, aggravated assaults rose 6.5 percent, robbery rose 3.2 percent, and rapes under both the “legacy” and “revised” definitions increased 4.4 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The report was issued days after President Barack Obama publicly denied the rising tide of crime. “There is no growing crime wave,” Obama insisted in an essay for the Harvard law Review, published Jan. 5.

Regardless of Obama’s statements, crime rates rose nationwide, the FBI report shows:

Violent crime increased in all city groupings. Among cities, violent crime rose the most over the previous year (9.7 percent) in those with populations of 1,000,000 and over. In cities with populations from 500,000 to 999,999, violent crime increased 5.2 percent, and in cities with 250,000 to 499,999 inhabitants, violent crime was up 4.3 percent.

Violent crime increased 6.3 percent in metropolitan counties and rose 1.6 percent in nonmetropolitan counties.

Violent crime increased in all four regions of the nation. These crimes were up 6.4 percent in the West, 5.9 percent in both the Midwest and in the South, and 1.2 percent in the Northeast

U.S. cities with populations of one million or more people include New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, and Dallas.

The largest cities saw shocking increases in violent crime compared to the first half of 2015: Overall, violent crime increased 9.7 percent. Murders spiked 21.6 percent. Rapes under the revised definition—defined as “penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim”—rose 11.3 percent. Robbery increased 6.3 percent. Aggravated assault rose 11.4 percent. Burglary declined by 5.4 percent, while motor vehicle thefts rose 5.9 percent and larceny rose 3.3 percent. Arson rose 5.3 percent.

While property crimes declined overall at 0.6 percent, they rose in the largest U.S. cities by 2.1 percent.

As Breitbart News previously reported, the FBI’s 2015 crime report revealed a 10.8 percent increase in murders from 2014 to 2015—the largest increase in a single year since 1971—and a 3.9 percent increase in violent crime overall.

Chicago’s gun crime death toll is so high it’s distorting national murder figures. TheWall Street Journal reports  “37 of the 65 largest police agencies” counted homicide increases in 2016.

Obama claimed in his Harvard essay that “there is no growing crime wave.” That claim ignores the dramatic murder wave that took place under his watch, and allows him to ignore the bodies of at least 1,500 additional dead Americans to declare that crime remains “near historic lows.”

Under Obama, the nation is seeing the sudden reversal of a decades-long decline in violent crime. The reversal began in 2014, after the Ferguson race riot and as he launched his “stigmatize-and-federalize” campaign against state and local police.

The FBI was quick to see the reversal. In October 2015, FBI Director James Comey said “part of the explanation” for rising crime “is a chill wind blowing through American law enforcement over the last year,” implicitly criticizing Obama’s strategy of using left-wing activist groups and his Justice Department’s law enforcement regulations to reshape local policing.

The reversal also comes as Obama releases more criminals from prison.

Obama has also boasted of that he will be the “first president in decades to leave office with a federal prison population lower than when I took office.”

That’s true, according to a vocal critic of Obama’s free-the-prisoners attitude towards incarceration rates: Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton says the administration used revised sentencing guidelines to release 30,000 felons from federal prison, bringing the total number of federal prisoners to fewer than 200,000.

And Obama has continued to commute the sentences of drug traffickers as drugs kill more Americans.  In 2014, more than 47,000 people died from drug-induced deaths. Thanks to Obama’s commutations, former armed drug traffickers will be back in American communities as early as March.



Sent from my iPhone

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

The Senate’s Role in Confirming Trump’s Cabinet, Explained

The Senate’s Role in Confirming Trump’s Cabinet, Explained

Senate committees are about to examine the Cabinet picks of President-elect Donald Trump, here speaking to reporters Jan. 9 in the lobby of Trump Tower. (Photo: Albin Lohr-Jones/UPI/ Newscom)

Donald Trump won’t be inaugurated as president until Jan. 20, but his Cabinet choices begin to face confirmation hearings in the Senate this week.

First up for a committee hearing Tuesday is Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Trump’s choice for attorney general.

Those scheduled to follow in rapid succession include retired Marine Gen. John Kelly for secretary of homeland security, philanthropist Betsy DeVos for secretary of education, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao to head the Transportation Department, retired Marine Gen. James Mattis for defense secretary, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson for secretary of housing and urban development, and businessman-investor Wilbur Ross for commerce secretary.

The process for Senate confirmation of top presidential appointees is outlined briefly in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, which guides lawmakers’ examination and approval or rejection of a president’s nominees.

The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.  We’ll respect your inbox and keep you informed. 

This section of the Constitution famously requires that a president obtain “the Advice and Consent of the Senate” in making top government appointments. U.S. law and Senate rules also apply to the process.

Here are some general questions and answers about the process, based largely on multiple detailed reports (especially in 2012 and 2015) by the Congressional Research Service, which provides exclusive policy and legal analysis to Congress.

Who begins the confirmation process?

The president—or in this case, the president-elect—chooses individuals to fill Cabinet positions and other top posts in the executive branch.

Besides the vice president, an elected official who requires no confirmation, the White House identifies Cabinet members as the attorney general, who heads the Justice Department, and the heads of 14 other executive departments: Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs.

>>> Democrats Target Trump Nominees, Unlike Republicans’ Speedy OK of Obama Cabinet

The heads of other agencies also enjoy Cabinet rank and must be confirmed by the Senate along with hundreds of other top executive branch officials (detailed here). They include the ambassador to the United Nations and the U.S. trade representative, as well as the heads of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Office of Management and Budget, the Council of Economic Advisers, and the Small Business Administration.

Members of the House and Senate may suggest possible candidates for the president or president-elect’s consideration, but such recommendations generally have no official weight.

Who screens candidates for these top positions?

In preliminary screening of potential nominees, a sitting president benefits from White House offices such as Presidential Personnel and Counsel to the President.

However, an executive branch agency, the Office of Government Ethics, offers an array of services and publications to assist a presidential transition team such as Trump’s—as well as individual nominees.

The FBI and the Internal Revenue Service also review a potential or formal candidate’s personal, political, and financial backgrounds.

The FBI typically does a background investigation and submits a report. The Office of Government Ethics, along with an ethics official from the relevant agency, reviews financial disclosures. If they find conflicts of interest, they may work with the candidate to “mitigate” the conflicts.

What happens in the Senate?

The Senate’s executive clerk refers the president or president-elect’s formal choice to the appropriate committee (sometimes committees) overseeing the executive branch department in question, such as State or Defense.

In the Congressional Research Service’s 2012 report, author Maeve Carey characterizes this as a crucial step:

The decision by a committee to report a nomination is critical: To be considered on the Senate floor, the nomination must have been reported from the committee of jurisdiction or all senators must agree to its consideration.

Committee members and staff review the various forms sent along with the candidate’s name and gather more in-depth information as they choose.

Opponents and supporters of the nominee often submit letters summarizing their views to the committee. The committee chairman schedules a hearing, during which each member of the panel may ask questions or make points.

For a committee to vote on reporting the nominee to the full Senate for a confirmation vote, a majority of members must be “physically present.”

A committee may decline to act on a nomination at several points—after receiving it, after investigating the nominee, or after holding one or more hearings.

The committee has three options in voting to send a nomination to the full Senate: Report it favorably, unfavorably, or without recommendation.

Once a nominee clears a committee, with or without a recommendation, the Senate majority leader may schedule a confirmation vote on the chamber’s executive calendar.

If a committee declines to report a nomination, it is still possible in certain cases for the Senate to bring the nomination to the floor for a vote.

How many votes does it take to confirm?

“Most presidential appointees are confirmed routinely by the Senate, without public debate,” Carey and Henry Hogue write in the 2015 report from the Congressional Research Service, adding:

Other appointees receive more attention from Congress and the media through hearings, investigations, and floor debate. Historically, the Senate has shown particular interest in the nominee’s views and how they are likely to affect public policy.

Opposition from one or more senators may prevent a floor vote on a nomination that has come out of committee, because the rules require “unanimous consent” to consider and confirm a nomination.

If a nominee faces substantial opposition, the Senate majority leader may wish to end debate through a procedure called cloture. Under it, a simple majority of senators voting—normally 51—is able to limit debate to 30 hours and advance the nominee to a floor vote.

After the Nov. 8 elections, when they lost two seats, Republicans now have 52 seats in the Senate to the Democrats’ 46 (two Independents caucus with the Democrats).

It used to require 60 votes, not 51, to proceed to a floor vote until Senate Democrats changed the rules in 2013, except in cases of nominations to the Supreme Court.

A simple majority vote also is required to confirm, or approve, the nomination.

The confirmation process is fluid and open to adjustments, the Congressional Research Service notes. For a change to be adopted, however, a senator must propose it and the chamber must unanimously agree.

Sarah Sleem contributed to this report.

 


Sent from my iPhone