Leftist Politician In California Blocked By Federal Court From Exposing Conservative Group’s Donor List

Federal Court Blocks Dem’s Attempt To Out Conservative Donors – Washington Free Beacon

.

.
A federal court on Tuesday blocked efforts by officials in California to force a conservative group to hand over the names of its donors, saying the order could violate those donors’ First Amendment rights.

Kamala Harris, California’s attorney general and a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate, demanded last year that the Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFPF) turn over its donor rolls. The court enjoined that demand pending the outcome of AFPF’s suit attempting to invalidate the order.

AFPF claims that the disclosure would subject its donors to “grotesque threats” similar to the routine attacks against Charles and David Koch, the group’s founders, and would therefore chill their free speech. The court agreed.

“Donors who have witnessed harassment of those perceived to be connected with plaintiff’s co-founders have experienced their unwillingness to continue to participate if such limited disclosure is made,” said Judge Manuel Real of the District Court of the Central District of California.

AFPF, the judge said, “has proffered sufficient evidence establishing that public disclosure would have a chilling effect on free speech.”

Harris’ does not have adequate measures in place to compartmentalize and protect sensitive personal information contained in AFPF’s annual tax filings, the court noted.

Its policies regarding the treatment of identifying donor information, the court said, is “impermissibly entirely discretionary and could change at any moment.”

Attorneys representing Harris objected to the order on the grounds that it enjoined the attorney general from gathering any information that would identify donors, not simply the specific tax filings that the state initially demanded from the group.

Harris did not object to the more narrow provisions of the injunction, which protects AFPF from having to furnish those tax filings specifically.

In a separate injunction last week, Real blocked the public disclosure of that information in light of death threats and other instances of harassment and intimidation against the Kochs and others affiliated with AFPF.

The judge noted at the time that AFPF had presented evidence suggesting that merely disclosing that information to the state would leave donors vulnerable to harassment. It cited previous attempts by high-ranking California officials to erroneously link the Kochs to campaign finance violations in the state.

Tuesday’s ruling is not a final determination on the merits of AFPF’s position, but rather an effort to prevent violations of its donors’ First Amendment rights while the court considers the case.

However, the ruling is a major victory for AFP and other groups fighting mandatory donor disclosure for 501(c)(4) issue advocacy groups that generally are not required by federal law to disclose their donors.

It is also a setback for Harris, whose focus on AFPF dovetails with a national Democratic strategy of vilifying Republican donors, especially the Kochs.

Harris is already running a scorched earth campaign, targeting potential Democratic rivals for a U.S. Senate seat that will be left vacant next year with the retirement of Sen. Barbara Boxer. “I make no apologies,” Harris said of her aggressive campaign style.

Attacks on the Kochs could be a useful populist foil for her campaign.

Anti-Koch sentiment has paid dividends for Ann Ravel, until 2013 the chair of the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission. Ravel made headlines that year when she accused the Kochs of supporting two groups that copped to campaign finance violations during the 2012 elections.

Ravel was forced to retract her claim after the Kochs denied any involvement with the groups, but not before President Obama appointed her as the co-chair of the Federal Election Commission.

Harris and Ravel teamed up to win a $1 million settlement from the two groups in 2013. That helped establish the former’s anti-Koch bona fides, pleasing many progressive commentators looking toward the 2016 Senate race.

Dan Newman, a political consultant in California, has been sounding the alarm on the hundreds of millions of dollars that the Kochs and their allies plan to spend during the 2016 election cycle.

Such warnings have boosted Democratic fundraising efforts in the past. Newman is also working for Harris’ 2016 campaign.

.

.

California Kicks Off New Year By Issuing Driver’s Licenses To Illegal Aliens

California Begins Issuing Driver’s Licenses To Illegal Aliens – CNS

.

.
Mexican immigrant Jesus Moreno emerged smiling from a California Department of Motor Vehicles office on Friday with official permission to do something he’s been doing here for more than a decade: driving.

The 30-year-old vending-machine installer, who has forked over hundreds of dollars in traffic tickets and car-impound fees as an unlicensed driver, became one of the first to get a permit under a new program to give driver’s licenses to the nation’s largest population of immigrants in the country illegally.

“It’s not that I want to drive,” said Moreno, after leaving a packed DMV office in Orange County. “It’s a necessity.”

Thousands of people crammed into DMV offices and waited in hours-long lines to apply for a license as California became one of 10 states to authorize immigrants in the country illegally to drive.

The DMV expects to field 1.4 million applications in the first three years of a program aimed at boosting road safety and making immigrants’ lives easier. By 3 p.m. Friday, more than 11,000 immigrants had applied, said Jessica Gonzalez, a DMV spokeswoman.

Only four DMV offices were taking walk-in applicants. Hundreds of immigrants donning scarves and gloves and clutching driver handbooks braved near-freezing temperatures in the Orange County city of Stanton to try to get a place in line before dawn.

“This is a big opportunity for me,” said Sammy Moeung, a 24-year-old Cambodian immigrant eager to get a license to avoid having to ride his bike to work at his brother’s doughnut shop. “Having this is moving a step forward in life, in California and the United States.”

Immigrant advocates have cheered the licenses as a way to integrate immigrants who must drive to work and shuttle children to school, though the cards will include a distinctive marking and are not considered valid federal identification. Critics have questioned state officials’ ability to verify the identity of foreign applicants, citing security concerns.

Applicants must submit proof of identity and state residency and pass a written test to get a driving permit. Those who don’t possess foreign government-issued identification on a list of approved documents can be interviewed by a DMV investigator to see if they qualify.

Immigrants must come back at a later date and pass a road test to get the license, which will be marked with the words “federal limits apply.” Those who have licenses from other states are not required to take the road test again, Gonzalez said.

Law enforcement officials have said the program will improve road safety because more drivers will be tested and insured. A DMV study of 23 years of crash data found unlicensed drivers were more likely to cause a fatal collision.

Some immigrants who waited in line for hours Friday failed the required written test and vowed to make an appointment to return on another date to try again. About half of new driver’s license applicants fail the written exam, Gonzalez said.

Celia Rayon, a 49-year-old warehouse worker from Anaheim, left the crowded office in Stanton with her new permit in hand. For nearly two decades, the Mexican immigrant has refrained from driving, relying on rides from co-workers to get to her job.

“You can’t go out anywhere,” Rayon said, adding that she’d like to drive to visit relatives in Georgia once she passes her road test. “Now we’re going to feel more secure.”

.

.

California Judge Rules Against Smarmy, Leftist Teacher’s Unions

California Judge Rules Against Teacher’s Unions And His Perspective Is Incredibly Refreshing – Independent Journal Review

.
…………

.
A California judge ruled today that current tenure statutes for teachers deprive students of their right to an education due to evidence so compelling that “it shocks the conscience.” This ruling will be submitted for further appellate review.

Furthermore, he specifically stated that judges should focus solely on the law when making a decision, and ignore politics and personal opinion. How wonderfully adroit.

That this Court’s decision will and should result in political discourse is beyond question, but such consequence cannot and does not detract from its obligation to consider only the evidence and law in making its decision.

At issue in the lawsuit, filed by nine public school students, are statutes of the CA Education Code that violate the state’s constitution by resulting in “grossly ineffective teachers obtaining and retaining permanent employment.”

In other words, the functional impossibility of firing “grossly ineffective” teachers and the resultant letting-go of “competent” ones, especially in low-performing schools, kept kids from getting the quality of education to which they are entitled.

The lawsuit was vigorously opposed by the California teachers’ unions. Which is a shocking revelation in-and-of-itself, to be sure. The head of the L.A. teachers union said this in response:

This decision today is an attack on teachers, which is a socially acceptable way to attack children. You attack teacher and student rights.

So, a clear statement that children are being substantially harmed by current rules, is actually an attack against those very children? One wonders what planet teachers’ union leaders originate from and how reality is perceived of on that sad, alien world. Because it’s certainly different down here on earth.

The particular items at issue:

1. Permanent Employment Statute – 2 years is not sufficient time to establish sufficient competence. Most states have 3 to 5 year periods and 4 states have no tenure system at all.

2. Dismissal Statutes – it is almost impossible to fire “grossly ineffective” teachers once they’ve received tenure, so most districts do not even try.

3. Last-In, First Out – the newest teachers get let go first, regardless of gifting or performance.

The sixteen pages of the decision, with its unyielding indictment of the current tenure rules on every page, is stunning in its evisceration of the status quo. No wonder the unions are outraged. The status quo is them.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

CA Obamacare Costs $1.2B More Than Expected; Governor Moonbeam Thinks That’s Swell

California Obamacare Costs $1.2 Billion More Than Expected – Breitbart

.

.
Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown warned on Tuesday that his state’s Obamacare program will cost California taxpayers $1.2 billion more than the state originally budgeted for.

“I’m proud we did it,” said Brown. “But we also have to take into account this thing is growing.”

Brown said the state’s Obamacare exchange, known officially as Covered California, and the state’s Medi-Cal expansion represent “a huge social commitment on the part of the taxpayers of California.”

As the Los Angeles Times reports, “Although the federal government picks up the tab for any patients who became eligible for Medi-Cal under the Affordable Care Act, the state is still responsible for half the price for people who were previously eligible but hadn’t yet signed up.”

Last week, the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office reported that California faces $340 billion in debts, or more than $8,500 for each of the 38 million people who live in the state.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Party Of Fraud: CA Democrats Kill Bill To Ban Felons From Working On Obamacare Exchange

California Democrats Kill Bill To Ban Felons From Working On Obamacare Exchange – Breitbart

In a near party-line vote, California state Democratic legislators killed a bill on Tuesday that would have banned the state’s Obamacare exchange from hiring felons convicted of financial crimes.

.

.
Critics of the bill said the legislation was overly restrictive and could be “discriminatory under federal civil rights law,” reports the Los Angeles Times.

The bill’s backer, Assemblywoman Connie Conway (R-Tulare), said she simply intended to help protect California Obamacare customers’ sensitive information from financial crimes.

“I believe in second chances but not giving those convicted of forgery or fraud access to people’s Social Security numbers or tax returns,” said Conway. “Today’s vote by the majority party means that consumers who sign up for a plan through Covered California will still be at risk of having their private information compromised by those who have committed financial crimes.”

California Health Line reports that between June 2013 and November 2013, 31 individuals convicted of felonies or misdemeanors were approved as Obamacare enrollment counselors, including crimes of battery, burglary, forgery, shoplifting, and welfare fraud.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Non-Violent thug gets early release, immediately tries to set 16-year-old girl he kidnapped on fire

California is CRAZY! Stacy McCain blames Democrats

This is what happens when you elect Democrats:

A man on probation as a “non-violent offender” under California’s prison realignment program has been charged with kidnapping, raping, and torturing a 16-year-old girl in South Los Angeles, and detectives suspect he may be connected to three other recent murders. Robert L. Ranson, 30, was arrested in late March after the girl escaped from a U-Haul van in an alley near Imperial Highway and New Hampshire Ave., according to police and booking records. The girl was covered in gasoline and said her attacker, later identified as Ranson, had tied her hands and taped her mouth, and was trying to light her on fire when she ran away, naked.

So, how could this happen? I mean California released this “non-violent” felon. Turns out CaliCRAZYfornia defines non-violent without regard for things like common sense

According to state prison officials Ranson was released from prison in Susanville in June, 2013 and returned to Los Angeles for supervision by probation officials. He was considered a non-violent offender because his most recent prison term was for possession of a firearm by a felon. Ranson had previously served time for two carjackings and an assault with a firearm, prison officials said.

Oh of course, THAT sounds “non-violent” Assault with a firearm! Crazyfornia should go after violent thugs with the same fervor they put into disarming law-abiding gun owners with useless gun control laws!

 

Dem Wants To Ban Importing Legal Firearms Because A Dem Was Busted Trying To Illegally Import Banned Weapons

Democrat Wants To Ban Importing Legal Firearms Because A Democrat Was Busted Trying To Illegally Import Banned Weapons – Downtrend

California State Rep. Jackie Speier, a democrat of course, is calling on President Obama to ban the importation of all foreign-made firearms, and her reason defies logic. Because of Leland Yee’s arrest last week, where her fellow democrat was accused of trying to import illegal machine guns and rocket launchers, Speier thinks we should stop the importation of legal semi-automatic rifles.

.

.
Speier released a statement yesterday, blissfully unaware of her hypocrisy and apples-to-oranges comparison:

“This FBI investigation of Leland Yee reveals how easy it is to import lethal assault weapons that were previously banned. This case should be a warning to us all that even the most trusted appearing among us are ready to do real harm. Since Congress can pass no meaningful gun-control laws, even after the mass killing in Newtown, President Obama should use his pen to slow the import of these weapons, which have no place in our homes.”

The FBI investigation had nothing to do with the import of weapons that were previously banned. Yee is accused of trying to bring in full-auto rifles and shoulder-fire rockets. These things have always been banned.

What she is confusing here is the Clinton-era ban on imported semi-auto rifles. Under George W. Bush that ban was allowed to expire. Military-grade weapons and consumer-level firearms are not the same thing. Speier is purposefully erasing the line to push further gun ownership limitations on the people.

In addition, the FBI investigation does not show how easy it is to import illegal guns. It was a complex criminal organization involved in this scheme. Your average Joe would not be able to get the Chinese Triads to ship him a case of M4 rifles or Javelin missiles. Even the legal importation of semi-auto rifles is beyond an average person’s ability. It requires a license and all kinds of hoops to jump through.

Best line in her rant: This case should be a warning to us all that even the most trusted appearing among us are ready to do real harm.

What she must mean are that democrat gun grabbers can’t be trusted because I can’t think of one Republican that ever tried to raise campaign funds by selling illegal weapons. I fail to see how the dishonesty and hypocrisy of democrats should lead to a further erosion of the 2nd Amendment. Also, she should speak for herself; I never trusted Yee.

There is a subtle little twist in the gun grabber’s rhetoric included as well. Usually, the enemies of freedom like to say these guns don’t belong on our streets. Speier has switched it up and says they “have no place in our homes.” I sense this is a shift in strategy by the anti-gun crowd to convince us that not only don’t we not have a right to protect ourselves in public, but that we no longer enjoy that protection at home.

Lelenad Yee did a bad bad thing. He tried to illegally import weapons that themselves were illegal. Leave it to a democrat to use this situation as a reason to halt the legal importation of legal firearms.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.