Today we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking documents pertaining to the prosecution of Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) on bribery and related charges, and the Justice Department decision not to retry him. Menendez was tried once but that trial ended in a mistrial on November 16, 2017.
Why did the Justice Department let Menendez escape after pouring so many resources into the investigation, prosecution, and trial? One possible explanation is that political influence was exercised on Menendez’ behalf. Menendez’ lawyer is Abbe Lowell, who also represents Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law. Kushner and his family are longtime donors to Democratic politicians in New Jersey, including Menendez. Someone made the decision to save Menendez’ career and possibly keep him out of prison. We want to know who made the decision and on what basis.
The Justice Department announcement was made in a terse statement on January 31, citing … Read More ➡
Last week Google apparently reversed course on availability its powerful search engine, which based on “principle” had withdrawn from China in 2010, after it refused to comply with the government’s wishes for it to self-censor content sensitive to its freedom-hating leaders. Now, under a program called “Dragonfly,” Google is said to be developing a version of its search engine that would comply with Chinese demands.
Search is where Google generates huge profits, and missing out on the massive market in Asia clearly bugs them in Silicon Valley.
“Google is waking up to smell the coffee,” said Andy Mok, founder and president of Beijing-based consultancy … Read More ➡
Once upon a time, during a period known as the Eighties and the Nineties, Al Sharpton – preacher, civil rights activist, media personality, inciter of crowds, and celebrant of all things black – routinely answered to words such as “loud,” “flamboyant” and “crazy.” But for the last decade and a half, the man known as Reverend Al goes by words such as “pragmatic,” “respectable,” “sensible” and “powerful.” Times change, and not necessarily for the better. On the issue of immigration amnesty, that’s especially true.
Al Sharpton, a man who has perfected the art of extracting money and other things of value from the pillars of American society, no longer has to kick down doors to get what he wants. The doors have been opened for him. And many of the people admitting him are those who formerly avoided him as radioactive. As my book, Sharpton: A Demagogue’s Rise, describes, … Read More ➡
It has been reported that the idea of former CEO Howard Schultz running as a Democrat for the presidency is giving Starbucks investors, financial analysts, and company officials cause for concern.
It’s apparently not far-fetched. When he finally announced his long-anticipated departure from the company on June 26, Schultz told employees he would think “about a range of options for myself, from philanthropy to public service, but I’m a long way from knowing what the future holds.”
According to Politico, a person (whose identity was not disclosed by the site) close to the company’s current leaders said, “They don’t want him, as a retired founder, running for office. It’s a huge headache.”
Should it be difficult to believe that those who are responsible for the company bottom line would dread at least a two-year campaign by Schultz, which would link Starbucks with the Democratic Party … Read More ➡
Today, NLPC filed a Complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) violated federal election law in a transaction related to her so-called slate mailer during her last re-election campaign.
The transaction was a payment to Waters’ campaign fund from the Democratic State Central Committee of California (DSCCC) in the amount of $35,000 for the inclusion of then-Senate candidate, and now Senator Kamala Harris, on Waters’ slate mailer. Whereas candidates like Harris may legally pay Waters’ campaign for the proportional costs of their inclusion on her slate mailer, it is not legal for such payment to be made by a third party like the DSCCC.
Waters’ slate mailers have been a matter of controversy for years. They resemble a sample ballot distributed by political parties before and during elections, but contain Waters’ personal endorsements. She pioneered a new way to use slate mailers by seeking an … Read More ➡
What did Jim Jordan know and when did he know it? Lots of people are asking this question about the six-term Ohio Republican congressman’s connection, if any, to a scandal that occurred long ago and far outside the confines of Congress. Some are seeking answers. On July 9, Norm Eisen and Fred Wertheimer, respectively, ethics czar for the Obama administration and president of the nonprofit Democracy 21, filed a request with the Office of Congressional Ethics to conduct a probe into whether Jordan, while as an assistant coach for the Ohio State University wrestling team during 1987-95, willfully ignored evidence of sexual misconduct. The request was prompted by recent statements by certain ex-wrestlers. Yet the accusations may be politically motivated, especially given that Jordan may become the next House Speaker.
The National Education Association thinks Colin Kaepernick is an ideal role model. Many members, however, may take their loyalty elsewhere. And frankly, they should. On July 1, the NEA honored Kaepernick, along with several other persons and organizations, with a “Human and Civil Rights” award in recognition of the former pro-football star’s campaign “to fight racial oppression through education and social justice activism.” The born-again political revolutionary, who these last couple years has been peddling the idea that police are conducting a nationwide pogrom against innocent blacks, accepted the honor with predictable melodrama. “To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way,” he said. “There are bodies in the streets.”
If not necessarily as a pro-football player, then as an activist, Colin Kaepernick has come of age. By initiating the now-common pregame kneel-down, fist-in-the-air ritual during the playing of … Read More ➡
Now we have another reason why corporations should welcome – and even seek – ideological diversity among their employees.
Because now the workers are telling their bosses who they can and cannot do business with.
In this case it is a number of companies in the largely leftist Silicon Valley tech industry, where many of the rank-and-file – who have been encouraged to speak their minds (if they are liberal, that is) – are complaining that the fruits of their labor benefit what they view as the odious U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and yes, the despicable Trump administration.
The employees’ outcry has been over the “inhumane” separation of illegal immigrant children from the adults they came to the U.S. border with, despite the fact that many – if not most – arrived with criminals, traffickers, or illegitimate asylum seekers who are … Read More ➡
Few things are more dangerous than a bad idea on a roll. And there is no better current example than the bandwagon of public opinion demanding that Congress abolish U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This view, until recently limited to the radical fringes, suddenly has gone mainstream. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and other lawmakers have announced their desire to open our borders and block deportations. Two House members are preparing a bill to abolish ICE. Like the street activists pressuring them, these people believe that controlling immigration is wrong. America, they insist, is a global sanctuary, not a sovereign nation. That’s why they see President Trump, who governs as if America were a nation, as embodying evil.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, is the agency guarding our borders and removing people who lack authorization to be here. Established … Read More ➡
Public-sector unions, long accustomed to getting their way, received a rude awakening this morning. By 5-4, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 that nonmember state and local government employees are not required to pay partial dues (“agency fees”) to a union representing them. The decision overturns over 40 years of union monopoly power now practiced in nearly two dozen states. In so doing, it will hamper the ability of public-employee unions to route dues collections toward political activism. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, stated, “States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees.” Union officials fear that millions of workers now will be able to choose whether or not to pay dues. Frankly, such a prospect should be welcomed, not feared.