Official Forensics Report Confirms Altercation Between Brown and Wilson Inside Police Car

Via UPI:

ST. LOUIS COUNTY, Mo., Oct. 22 (UPI) – Details from the official autopsy of Michael Brown lend credence to reports from witnesses and from police officer Darren Wilson that a struggle occurred inside Wilson’s patrol car.

Most of the details from the autopsy, conducted by St. Louis County Medical Examiner investigator Wendell Payne and pathologist Gershom Norfleet, matched those from the private autopsy conducted at the behest of Brown’s family.

Brown had gunshot wounds from six bullets: in the top of the head, above his right eye, his upper right chest, the right side of the chest, his upper right arm, lower right arm, and graze wounds on his right bicep and one on his right thumb. The report also found Brown had THC, the chemical compound found in marijuana, in his blood and urine.

The shot to the top of the head, which indicated Brown was either lunging or falling forward, was instantly fatal.

The thumb injury, which does not show stippling but did show signs of gunpowder residue or smoke, shows a bullet traveled from the tip of Brown’s right thumb up towards his wrist, from close range.

The injury to his forearm, which traveled from the outer forearm to the inner forearm could not have occurred when — or if — Brown had his hands up in a surrender position, as witness reports have described.

That injury, along with forensic findings of Brown’s blood on the gun and inside Wilson’s car, appear to align with Wilson’s account of the moments before Brown died.

Wilson reportedly told investigators Brown pushed him back inside his vehicle as he attempted to exit, pinning him down and attempting to reach Wilson’s gun.

A number of eyewitnesses say they saw a struggle, but believe Wilson had grabbed Brown and Brown was trying to get away.

Tens of Thousands of Federal Employees Being Paid to Stay at Home for Administrative Leave

Via the Washington Post:

Tens of thousands of federal workers are being kept on paid leave for at least a month — and often for longer stretches that can reach a year or more — while they wait to be punished for misbehavior or cleared and allowed to return to work, government records show.

During a three-year period that ended last fall, more than 57,000 employees were sent home for a month or longer. The tab for these workers exceeded $775 million in salary alone.

The extensive use of so-called administrative leave continues despite government personnel rules that limit paid leave for employees facing discipline to “rare circumstances” in which the employee is considered a threat. The long-standing rules were written in an effort to curb waste and deal quickly with workers accused of misconduct.

And the comptroller general, the top federal official responsible for auditing government finances and practices, has repeatedly ruled that federal workers should not be sidelined for long periods for any reason.

But a forthcoming report by the Government Accountability Office found that 53,000 civilian employees were kept home for one to three months during the three fiscal years that ended in September 2013. About 4,000 more were kept off the job for three months to a year and several hundred for one to three years. The study represents the first time auditors have calculated the scope and cost of administrative leave.

[...]

Continue Reading

 

Obama Regime Already Quietly Preparing to Issue Millions of IDs to Illegal Aliens

Via Breitbart:

Despite no official action from the president ahead of the election, the Obama administration has quietly begun preparing to issue millions of work authorization permits, suggesting the implementation of a large-scale executive amnesty may have already begun.

Unnoticed until now, a draft solicitation for bids issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Oct. 6 says potential vendors must be capable of handling a “surge” scenario of 9 million id cards in one year “to support possible future immigration reform initiative requirements.”

The request for proposals says the agency will need a minimum of four million cards per year. In the “surge,” scenario in 2016, the agency would need an additional five million cards – more than double the baseline annual amount for a total of 9 million.

“The guaranteed minimum for each ordering period is 4,000,000 cards. The estimated maximum for the entire contract is 34,000,000 cards,” the document says.

The agency is buying the materials need to construct both Permanent Residency Cards (PRC), commonly known as green cards, as well as Employment Authorization Documentation (EAD) cards which have been used to implement President Obama’s “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” (DACA) program. The RFP does not specify how many of each type of card would be issued.

[...]

Continue Reading

 

 

Sanctuary Cities Release Thousands of Criminal Illegal Aliens Across America

I guess the claim by the DOJ that federal jurisdiction overrules states in immigration matters only applies when illegals are actually in danger of being prosecuted – this is clearly an attempt by the Obama Regime to look like they’re serious about immigration enforcement

Via The Associated Press:

SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) — Immigration officials say local authorities across the U.S. released thousands of immigrants from jails this year despite efforts to take them into federal custody, including more than 3,000 with previous felony charges or convictions.

The numbers are the first time federal immigration authorities have publicly detailed how many times local agencies have refused to comply with their requests. They highlight the friction between the federal government and police and sheriff’s departments, some of which say holding immigrants beyond their release dates harms community policing efforts.

Immigration officials say the denials pose a public safety threat as immigrants who previously would have been placed in federal custody once they were eligible to leave jail are being released into communities where they could commit new crimes.

In the first eight months of this year, immigration agents filed roughly 105,000 requests for local agencies to hold immigrants for up to 48 hours after they were eligible for release on the allegations for which they initially were arrested, said Virginia Kice, a spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The agents wanted the immigrants held so they could take them into federal custody and start deportation proceedings.

Local law enforcement agencies declined 8,800 such requests, also known as detainers, during the same period. Those released include people arrested for investigation of domestic violence and drug charges, as well as others detained on lesser offenses but who had past convictions for crimes such as assault with a deadly weapon, Kice said.

Across the country, many local agencies no longer are willing to hold jailed immigrants beyond their scheduled release dates. They say immigrants should not be held longer than U.S citizens for the same crime, and turning them over to ICE creates an atmosphere of distrust among community members.

Colorado stopped honoring detainers earlier this year, and New York City is considering doing the same.

In California, local law enforcement agencies scaled back their collaboration with ICE to comply with a state law that took effect this year limiting the use of immigration detainers. After a federal court in nearby Oregon ruled a woman’s constitutional rights were violated when she was held in jail without probable cause, some agencies stopped honoring the requests altogether.

Five Southern California counties no longer honor ICE’s requests, said David Marin, deputy field office director for the agency’s enforcement and removal operations in the greater Los Angeles area. He said he’s shifted at least 40 agents from screening and transporting arrestees to teams working in the field to track down immigrants they believe are in the country illegally.

It takes more manpower to do so and puts his staff at greater risk, Marin said. And he believes some of the immigrants who are being released will commit new crimes, adding that his agency has filed multiple detainers this year for some immigrants, which indicates they have been re-arrested.

“There’s a lot of crimes we could probably prevent if people would just honor our detainers,” Marin said. He noted that because of a prison overhaul, local jails in California now house more lower-level felons who previously would have gone to state prison.

In Illinois, a man who was released from jail despite a 2011 request by immigration authorities to detain him shot and killed his 15-year-old girlfriend earlier this year, Kice said.

Some California sheriff’s officials, however, say they’re simply following the latest law governing the conditions under which anyone, an immigrant or otherwise, can be held by law enforcement.

In Riverside County, Chief Deputy Jerry Gutierrez said the Oregon ruling coupled with an ICE memo indicating the detainers were requests, not requirements, prompted his agency to stop honoring them.

“If we were to honor them, it would expose the county and the department to civil liability,” he said. “Any person who is ordered to be released, we would be releasing them the same way.”

In San Bernardino County, deputy Ruben Perez said his department has reported no problem with repeat offenders but it might be too soon to tell.

The change is welcomed by immigrant advocates, who have long fought the requests from immigration authorities to continue detaining people after they’re eligible for release from jail, whether on bail or at the conclusion of a criminal case.

They say immigrants in communities that honored ICE’s requests have been afraid to report crimes, and the policy change will improve, not hamper, public safety.

Chris Newman, legal director at the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said deportation should not be used as a form of punishment.

“There has been an insidious erosion of constitutional rights protections,” he said. “Immigrants and citizens should be treated alike by our criminal justice system.”

Obama Admin Began Expediting West African Visas As Ebola Outbreak Exploded

Via Breitbart:

[...]

In short, the USCIS has been waiving fees, expediting the immigration process, and allowing extensions of visas for anyone coming from the three designated Ebola-stricken countries, provided that they are in the United States. The Free Republic blog reported that the law firm of Edward W. Neufville, III, LLC, a Washington, D.C. area immigration firm, added a section to their website two days after the USCIS announcement, with more details about how these relief measures would work, including extensions of the time that the foreign national could remain in the United States, additional work permit opportunities, and even forgiveness for failure to appear at required interviews or submit required evidence. According to the Neufville firm, the new USCIS policies mean that “[i]ndividuals from Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea currently in the United States may apply for an extension or change in status due to the Ebola Outbreak, even if their request is filed after the authorized period of admission has expired.” Otherwise stated, this means that someone from one of those countries who illegally overstayed their visa can now apply for an extension, or someone who arrived illegally can apply to get legal status.

Thomas Eric Duncan, the Liberian man who died from Ebola earlier this month, had traveled to the United States after his visa was approved in August, the same month that USCIS announced the new relief measures.

[...]

Continue Reading

Biden’s Son Kicked Out of Navy for Cocaine Use

Via Fox News:

The son of Vice President Joe Biden says he is “embarrassed” after being discharged from the Navy Reserve earlier this year — reportedly after testing positive for cocaine.

The Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with the matter, reported Thursday that Hunter Biden’s short-lived military career ended because he failed a drug test after reporting to his unit in 2013. According to the Wall Street Journal, the Navy discharged him in February of this year.

Biden said in a statement to Fox News that he respects the Navy’s decision but did not specify why he was discharged.

“It was the honor of my life to serve in the U.S. Navy, and I deeply regret and am embarrassed that my actions led to my administrative discharge,” he said. “I respect the Navy’s decision. With the love and support of my family, I’m moving forward.”

Biden, 44, made the decision to join the military late in life. According to the Wall Street Journal, Biden was commissioned as an ensign in the Navy Reserve in 2013 after deciding the previous year to join the service as a public affairs officer.

However, Biden was given a drug test after reporting to his unit at Navy Public Affairs Support Element East in Norfolk, Va. and tested positive for cocaine, the Wall Street Journal reported. According to the paper, the Navy would not specify what sort of discharge he was given.

Vice President Biden spoke about his son’s decision to join the Navy late in life at the American Legion’s Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball in 2013, joking that his son’s decision was a result of poor judgment.

“We have a lot of bad judgment in my family,” Biden said. “My son over 40 just joined the Navy to be sworn in.”

Hunter Biden is a lawyer who serves as a managing partner for a Rosemont Seneca Partners, an investment firm. He made headlines earlier this year when he was hired to be a director and lawyer for a Ukraine company promoting energy independence from Moscow.

The move raised eyebrows, as Vice President Biden and others in the Obama administration have attempted to influence energy policies and other issues of the Ukrainian government as it battles Russia and pro-Russian separatists to control the county.

The vice president’s spokeswoman, Kendra Barkoff, has said that Biden’s son is a private citizen and a lawyer, and that Joe Biden “does not endorse any particular company and has no involvement with this company.”

 

Report: 6.9 Million People Registered to Vote in 2 or More States

Related: Obama Administration Blocking Voter Roll Cleanup Attempts Nation-Wide

Via Watchdog.org:

RICHMOND, Va. — Some 6.9 million Americans are registered to vote in two or more states, according to a report obtained by Watchdog.org.

“Our nation’s voter rolls are a mess,” says Catherine Engelbrecht, president of the election-watch group True The Vote.

“Sensible approaches to roll maintenance are fought tooth and nail by radical special interests who can use the duplicity in the system to their advantage,” she said.

The latest interstate voter cross check tallied 6,951,484 overlapping voter registrations, and they’re just the tip of the iceberg.

The cross-check program involves only 28 states and does not include the three largest: California, Texas and Florida.

“Duplicate registration is an open invitation to voting fraud,” said Clara Belle Wheeler, a member of the Election Board in Albemarle County, Va. “This ability to vote more than once dilutes the legal votes and changes the results of elections.”

The interstate cross-check program matches first and last names and dates of birth to identify multiple registrations.But the data are not routinely used to purge duplicates.

“Increasingly lax standards in our election process produce increasingly unreliable results,” Engelbrecht asserted.

[...]

Continue Reading

 

Obama Admin. to Monitor Churches for “Political Activity”

Via Investor’s Business Daily:

Government’s assault on religious liberty has hit a new low as the IRS settles with atheists who sued the government over an alleged policy of not enforcing restrictions on churches’ political activities.

A lawsuit filed by the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) asserted that the Internal Revenue Service ignored complaints about churches’ violating their tax-exempt status by routinely promoting candidates from the pulpit.

The lawsuit has now been dismissed without prejudice by a U.S. District Court in response to a joint request by the FFRF and IRS. The joint motion stated that the FFRF was “satisfied that the IRS does not have a policy at this time of non-enforcement specific to churches or religious groups.”

The irony of the enforcement question is that it involves the same Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division of the IRS that was once headed by Lois “Fifth Amendment” Lerner and that openly targeted Tea Party and other conservative groups.

Among the questions that the IRS asked of those targeted groups was the content of their prayers.

Those who objected to the monitoring of what is said and done in mosques for signs of terrorist activity have no problem with this one, though monitoring what’s said in houses of worship is a clear violation of the First Amendment. Can you say “chilling effect”?

Congress can make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. So it’s not clear where the IRS gets off doing just that by spying on religious leaders lest they comment on issues and activities by government that are contrary to or impose on their religious consciences. Our country was founded by people fleeing this kind of government-monitored and mandated theology last practiced in the Soviet Union.

The FFRF cites as its authority the 1954 Johnson Amendment, which states that tax-exempt groups cannot endorse candidates. A 2009 court ruling determined that the IRS must staff someone to monitor church politicking.

The FFRF claims that the IRS has not adhered to the ruling and that the settlement amounts to enforcing both the Johnson Amendment and the court ruling.

But is the Catholic Church “politicking” when it proclaims its “Fortnight for Freedom” dedicated to opposing ObamaCare’s contraceptive mandate and the government’s forcing schools and charities it considers an extension of its faith to include it in insurance coverage or face crippling fines?

Are Protestant and evangelical churches “politicking” when they participate in “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” this year on Oct. 5 to encourage congregations to “vote their faith,” which they consider to be an exercise of free speech and freedom of religion?

The FFRF says that such events at “rogue churches” have “become an annual occasion for churches to violate the law with impunity.” But doesn’t the Constitution say that Congress can make no such laws?

Rather than “rogue churches,” it’s the rogue IRS that needs to be stopped.

 

Official In Charge of National Health Threats Helped Push Controversial No-Bid Drug Contract to Obama Donor in 2011

Via The Federalist:

[...]

There are a few interesting things about the scandal Lurie was embroiled in years ago. You can—and should—read all about it in the Los Angeles Times‘ excellent front-page expose from November 2011, headlined: “Cost, need questioned in $433-million smallpox drug deal: A company controlled by a longtime political donor gets a no-bid contract to supply an experimental remedy for a threat that may not exist.” This Forbes piece is also interesting.

The donor is billionaire Ron Perelman, who was controlling shareholder of Siga. He’s a huge Democratic donor but he also gets Republicans to play for his team, of course. Siga was under scrutiny even back in October 2010 when The Huffington Post reported that it had named labor leader Andy Stern to its board and “compensated him with stock options that would become dramatically more valuable if the company managed to win the contract it sought with HHS—an agency where Stern has deep connections, having helped lead the year-plus fight for health care reform as then head of the Service Employees International Union.”

The award was controversial from almost every angle—including disputes about need, efficacy, and extremely high costs. There were also complaints about awarding a company of its size and structure a small business award as well as the negotiations involved in granting the award. It was so controversial that even Democrats in tight election races were calling for investigations.

Last month, Siga filed for bankruptcy after it was found liable for breaching a licensing contract. The drug it’s been trying to develop, which was projected to have limited utility, has not really panned out—yet the feds have continued to give valuable funds to the company even though the law would permit them to recoup some of their costs or to simply stop any further funding.

The Los Angeles Times revealed that, during the fight over the grant, Lurie wrote to Siga’s chief executive, Dr. Eric A. Rose, to tell him that someone new would be taking over the negotiations with the company. She wrote, “I trust this will be satisfactory to you.” Later she denied that she’d had any contact with Rose regarding the contract, saying such contact would have been inappropriate.

The company that most fought the peculiar sole-source contract award to Siga was Chimerix, which argued that its drug had far more promise than Siga’s. And, in fact, Chimerix’s Brincidofovir is an antiviral medication being developed for treatment of smallpox but also Ebola and adenovirus. In animal trials, it’s shown some success against adenoviruses, smallpox, and herpes—and preliminary tests show some promise against Ebola. On Oct. 6, the FDA authorized its use for some Ebola patients.

It was given to Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan, who died, and Ashoka Mukpo, who doctors said had improved. Mukpo even tweeted that he was on the road to recovery.

[...]

 

Top Official for Public Health Threats Missing in Action

Via The Federalist:

[...]

So, we have an office for public health threat preparedness and response. And one of HHS’ eight assistant secretaries is the assistant secretary for preparedness and response, whose job it is to “lead the nation in preventing, responding to and recovering from the adverse health effects of public health emergencies and disasters, ranging from hurricanes to bioterrorism.”

In the video below, the woman who heads that office, Dr. Nicole Lurie, explains that the responsibilities of her office are “to help our country prepare for, respond to and recover from public health threats.” She says her major priority is to help the country prepare for emergencies and to “have the countermeasures—the medicines or vaccines that people might need to use in a public health emergency. So a large part of my office also is responsible for developing those countermeasures.”

Or, as National Journal rather glowingly puts it, “Lurie’s job is to plan for the unthinkable. A global flu pandemic? She has a plan. A bioterror attack? She’s on it. Massive earthquake? Yep. Her responsibilities as assistant secretary span public health, global health, and homeland security.” A profile of Lurie quoted her as saying, “I have responsibility for getting the nation prepared for public health emergencies—whether naturally occurring disasters or man-made, as well as for helping it respond and recover. It’s a pretty significant undertaking.” Still another refers to her as “the highest-ranking federal official in charge of preparing the nation to face such health crises as earthquakes, hurricanes, terrorist attacks, and pandemic influenza.”

Now, you might be wondering why the person in charge of all this is a name you’re not familiar with. Apart from a discussion of Casey’s comments on how we don’t need an Ebola czar because we already have one, a Google News search for Lurie’s name at the time of writing brings up nothing in the last hour, the last 24 hours, not even the last week! You have to get back to mid-September for a few brief mentions of her name in minor publications. Not a single one of those links is confidence building.

So why has the top official for public health threats been sidelined in the midst of the Ebola crisis? Only the not-known-for-transparency Obama administration knows for sure. But maybe taxpayers and voters should force Congress to do a better job with its oversight rather than get away with the far easier passing of legislation that grants additional funds before finding out what we got for all that money we allocated to this task over the last decade. And then maybe taxpayers should begin to puzzle out whether their really bad return on tax investment dollars is related to some sort of inherent problem with the administrative state.

[...]

Continue Reading