EDL Marches against Islamist Racism and Bigotry

"We shall never surrender... We will protect our island"
The Leftists and Socialists call you a "racist" for daring to believe that your

language, culture, religion and nation have a right to exist.

English Defense League protest against Islamization of the UK


By Eric Dondero:

Mostly well-behaved blokes, much to the great disappointment of the media who were hoping for violent protests. The English Defense League held a massive march in protest of racism by Islamists on native Brits on Saturday in New Castle.
.

Note especially the cooperative attitude with police, even EDL officials with bright yellow vests "EDL Steward," to assist the police with crowd control.
.
Also of note, homosexuals were invited to participate in the EDL march. The gay rainbow flag can be seen twice in the video, once at the 14 second mark, and then a few seconds later.

Muslims have been particular vicious in harassing gays on London streets. The EDL on the other hand, embrace homosexuals within their ranks.


Thanks to the Libertarian Republican.

English Defense League march.

EDL March Against Radical Muslim Extremism

FUCKIN' AMAZING!!!!
Islamist violence against the West creating new political allies

Just how will the BBC report this one? EDL marchers chant an old punk rock tune, "English til I die," in yesterday's march against Islamist violence against Westerners in New Castle. At the 58 second mark, a Gay rainbow flag comes into view.

Muslims most recently have been attacking gays, leaving pubs and discos in East London, for holding hands, or dressing flamboyantly.

The EDL is an expressly multi-cultural, tolerant organization that embraces anyone who supports Western values, and English patriotism regardless of skin color or sexual identity.

From the Libertarian Republican.

A $15,000 "Obamacare" fine - Welcome to Socialism

"It's hand-to-hand combat right now."
California Retailers Association President Bill Dombrowski

A $15,000 per employee fine on business

• A Socialist union backed bill to punish job creating businesses with monster sized fines.

The People's Republic of California  -  A new and controversial proposal in California's Obamacare related health care overhaul calls for the huge fining of large employers if the wages they pay are not high enough to keep workers off Medi-Cal rolls.

Leftist Democrat Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez will formally unveiled the measure as Assembly Bill 880 in a drive sponsored by the California Labor Federation and United Food and Commercial Workers.

"We need to close a loophole that basically allows the largest and most profitable employers in the state to skirt their responsibility to provide health care coverage," said Gomez (Socialist Democrat - Los Angeles).

The bill was approved Friday by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a party-line vote.


Wal-Mart and various restaurant chains and janitorial firms are among large businesses that could be affected, said Sara Flocks, a policy coordinator for the labor federation reports the Sacramento Bee.


Labor groups see the bill as a test for the Democratic members they helped elect. Business groups, led by the California Retailers Association, are pulling out all the stops to prevent a two-thirds majority from coalescing around the bill.

"It's hand-to-hand combat right now," said Bill Dombrowski, president and CEO of the association. "Labor has made it their No. 1 issue."

Kenneth Burt, political director of the California Federation of Teachers, said he considers AB 880 to be a test of the Democrats' supermajority reports Hispanic Business.
.
The Obamacare overhaul planned for next year already promises to fine businesses of 50 employees or more if their full-time workers are forced to buy health insurance from a new state exchange because they are neither covered by an employer plan nor eligible for Medi-Cal.

Gomez's bill takes the concept of punishment a step further. The threshold for fining businesses under the bill would be lowered to include workers on Medi-Cal rolls, whether they are full-time or part-time employees.

Angie Wei, the labor federation's legislative director, said the bill is meant to stop efforts by some big businesses to cut benefits and convert full-timers to part-timers, thus making more workers eligible for Medi-Cal and the employer ineligible for a fine under current law.


Assemblyman Dan Logue, R-Marysville, said the legislation would "micromanage businesses" and "is the wrong bill at the wrong time."

"I'm stunned by it," said Logue, vice chairman of the Assembly Health Committee. "With this type of overregulation, a lot of these businesses basically are going to relocate or pass the cost onto consumers."

AB 880's monetary penalty has been "scrubbed" from on-line versions of this story.

Here is the info from the print version of the Ventura County Star:

California Retailers Association President Bill Dombrowski said there are up to 1,200 California businesses with more than 500 workers that could be impacted by the bill.

Dombrowski estimates the penalties would amount to $6,000 to $15,000 for each worker enrolled into Medi-Cal.

"It is chilling," he said, "I don't know how you would handle that."

Money taxed from business by AB 880 is meant to increase Medi-Cal provider rates, and to subsidize state costs for it.

The California Chamber of Commerce and California Restaurant Association had not seen AB 880 Thursday and opted not to comment on it.

Wal-Mart defended its practices, saying its wages and benefits, including a health care plan, "typically meet or exceed those offered by a majority of our competitors."

Hourly store associates also are offered opportunities for quarterly cash bonuses, a health care plan that starts at $17 per pay period, a 401(k) retirement savings plan with company match, promotional opportunities, and a 10 percent discount on merchandise, spokeswoman Delia Garcia said in a written statement.

 

Rand Paul: Senate Is Arming Al-Qaeda in Syria

The black flag of al-Qaeda flies high over Raqqa, Syria's main square.

Rand Paul:  Both parties are pushing to us into Syria's Civil War 

• The U.S. and Western nations pour aid and weapons into Islamist rebel hands through the CIA and Islamist Turkey and Islamist Gulf States.

“This is an important moment. You will be funding, today, the allies of al Qaeda.”

That was the declaration Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.; pictured) made on May 21 during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Paul’s comments were directed at his colleagues, nearly all of whom voted to send arms to Syrian rebels.

Senators Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) co-sponsored the bill that authorizes “critical support to the Syrian opposition through provision of military assistance, training, and additional humanitarian support.”

The bill sailed through the committee, passing with bipartisan support by a vote of 15-3 reports The New American.

Senator Paul offered two amendments to the bill — officially styled the Syria Transition Support Act — one that would have forbidden the transfer of weapons to the rebel forces fighting to oust the government of current Syrian president Bashar al-Asad, and another that would have prevented the use of U.S. military armed forces in Syria.

Both of Paul’s amendments were rejected by the committee.

Apart from supplying lethal and non-lethal weaponry to Syrian opposition forces, the Menendez-Corker bill contains several other regime-toppling provisions, all of which are boastfully reported by Mendendez on his website. They include:

• “Creation of a $250 million transition fund each year through FY2015 drawn from funds otherwise appropriated for regional transition support”;
• “Sanctions on arms and oil sales to Assad: Targeting any person that the President of the United States determines has knowingly participated in or facilitated a transaction related to the sale or transfer of military equipment, arms, petroleum, or petroleum products to the Assad regime.”; and
• “Amendment to the Syria Accountability Act: To allow for sanctions removal once a transitional government is in place and certain terrorism and WMD criteria have been met.”

Neither Paul’s warnings nor his amendments were enough to counteract the powerful politicians pushing to arm the Syrian rebels. A cadre of lawmakers from seemingly distinct bands of the political spectrum lined up behind the move to add Syria to the list of Middle Eastern countries with U.S.-approved ruling parties. As in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan, these dictators-in-waiting will walk a path to power paved with American money and likely covered in the blood of American soldiers.

Paul responded, saying, “It’s impossible to know who our friends are.” He later said that the vote was nothing more than a “rush to war.”

“These people [Syrian rebels] will say they love America knowing that that’s how to get weapons. They lie to us and then shoot us in the back,” Paul explained.


Rand Paul Grills Sec. of State Clinton on Benghazi:
"I Would Have Relieved You Of Your Post"

This is fucking chilling to the bone  
Advance the video to the 3:10 mark and listen to the children sing about murdering non-Muslims.

This is the insanity were are facing.

During the hearings on the attack on the American mission in Benghazi, Libya, Paul brought up the possibility that the Obama administration was covering up the existence of a gun running pipeline running throughout the Middle East.

Paul, in fact, tried to get answers to these questions from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the Senate’s investigation of the Benghazi raid that left four people dead, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. Addressing Secretary Clinton, Paul asked directly, “Is the U. S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?”

Clinton demurred, claiming that she’d never heard about that allegation.

Undaunted, Paul continued, “It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that may have weapons, and what I’d like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?”

Always the savvy politician, Clinton responded, “Well, Senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I will see what information is available.”

“You’re saying you don’t know?” asked Paul.

“I do not know,” Clinton said. “I don’t have any information on that.”


Also see our articles:

THE FEDERALIST - U.S. - Britain are arming the Islamist Syrian Rebels

THE FEDERALIST - There are no "moderate" rebels in Syria

THE FEDERALIST - German Jihadists on Syria's Battlefields

Corruption - Obamacare spending kept secret by Democrats



California Obamacare exchange granted secrecy

Obamacare becomes one giant pig through for business and labor

allies of Socialist Big Government.

A People's Republic of California law that created an agency to oversee national health care reforms granted it broad authority to conceal spending on the contractors that will perform most of its functions, potentially shielding the public from seeing how hundreds of millions of dollars are spent.

The degree of secrecy afforded Covered California appears unique among states attempting to establish their own health insurance exchanges under President Barack Obama's signature health law.

An Associated Press review of the 16 other states that have opted for state-run marketplaces shows the California agency was given powers that are the most restrictive in what information is required to be made public reports the Associated Press.

In Massachusetts, the state that served as the model for Obama's health overhaul, its Health Connector program is specifically covered by open-records laws. The same is true in Idaho, where its exchange was established as a private, nonprofit corporation, and in New Mexico.

The Maryland Legislature subjected its exchange to the state's public information act, but protected some types of commercial and financial information.

In California, the explicit exclusions from open-records laws may run afoul of the state constitution, said Terry Francke, head of Californians Aware, a group that promotes government transparency.

If the Legislature wants to limit access, the state constitution requires it produce findings that demonstrate the need for shielding information from the public. In the bill that authorized the exchange, the Legislature devoted two sentences to address that issue. It argued the cloaked spending was "necessary" to protect "powers and obligations to negotiate on behalf of the public."

Those provisions are vulnerable to being declared unconstitutional, according to Francke.

He said, in essence, lawmakers are saying they need it because they need it, with no details or evidence to support it. The Legislature should have answered the questions, "Why couldn't the exchange do its job without this secrecy? What's the worst that could happen?" Francke said.

Exchange spokesman Dana Howard said the agency complies with state law but declined to discuss in detail how it determines what is public and what is not.

"I'm not going to go down item by item, about how it is and what kinds of meetings and what was talked about," he said.

It's routine in government to keep bids secret until contracts are awarded, so one vendor does not get an unfair advantage over others. After a bid is awarded, contracts generally become fully public.

In setting up the California exchange, lawmakers gave it the authority to keep all contracts private for a year and the amounts paid secret indefinitely. "Except for the portion of a contract that contains the rates of payment, contracts entered into pursuant to this title shall be open to inspection one year after their effective dates," reads the code specifying what exchange records are exempt from public disclosure.

According to agency documents, Covered California plans to spend nearly $458 million on outside vendors by the end of 2014, covering lawyers, consultants, public relations advisers and other functions.

Other exchange records that are allowed to be kept secret include those that reveal recommendations, research, strategy of the board or its staff, or those that provide instructions, advice or training to employees. Minutes of the board meetings also are exempt from disclosure.

The indefinite ban on releasing rates of pay to companies and individuals receiving contracts also goes beyond exemptions for other state health programs, such as Healthy Families, which withholds rates of pay from disclosure for up to four years, but not permanently.

In response to an AP public records request, the agency released information on a dozen competitively bid contracts issued since early 2011. They included $14 million for a 19-month contract with Ogilvy Public Relations for marketing and other services; $400,000 for Pricewaterhouse Coopers for a four-month deal developing a small business program; and $327 million for a five-year deal with consulting giant Accenture to develop a web portal and enrollment system for those who will seek coverage.

Those contracts also are accessible on the agency's website, along with about two dozen requests for services the agency has published. But it's not clear how many contracts the agency has executed, for how much or with whom. Staff counsel Gabriel Ravel said in an email that the agency "exercised its discretion to waive this exemption" for the contracts it released to AP. However, "all other existing contracts are confidential and privileged," he wrote.

The closeted spending was quietly authorized in a bundle of amendments added to the bill just days before it was passed by the Senate and Assembly during a blitz of activity in August 2010, when California was sprinting to become the first state to embrace the most extensive health care changes since Medicare.

Legislative staffers who worked on the technical language in the bill discussed the possibility of limiting the scope of the records exemption but settled on making it comprehensive after concluding it was not practical to try to determine what should be left out.

No public hearing was held on the provision because legislative leaders claimed they did not consider it substantive enough to send the bill back to committee for an airing, according to the office of Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles.

Statements issued to the AP by his office said the bill met the constitutional test and "contains the relevant findings," while striking a practical balance between the need for confidential rate negotiations with medical plans and a board that meets in public and is covered by open-meetings law.

"At the time of the drafting of the bill in 2010, this was a non-controversial, technical provision modeled on the same exemption long provided to successful government health insurance programs, including the state's Healthy Families Program," one statement said.

Perez's account that there was agreement on the confidentiality rules in the Senate Health Committee was disputed by former Sen. Sam Aanestad, a Republican on the panel who said he opposed those blanket privacy rules as well as the broader bill creating the exchange.

"This is such an untested field, there has to be strict illumination and oversight from day one," said the retired oral surgeon. Empowering bureaucrats to make unilateral decisions on access to contracting records "bodes for disaster."

Sunday Comics

Dr. Good's Ultimate Shot Giveaway! - Dr. Good - Ep. 3

Obama Scales Back Goals For America After Visiting Denny's 

 

School - Dress as a Transvestite Day

Dress as a Transvestite Day

Milwaukee School Holding “Gender Bender” Day For Students

MILWAUKEE  –  We live in a world gone mad.  The insane are running the asylum.

Deidri Hernandez’s seven-year-old son won’t be in school today, after officials at Tippecanoe School for the Arts and Humanities confirmed they’re still holding “Switch It Up Day” – a time for students to come dressed as members of the opposite sex.

Hernandez tells EAGnews the day was originally billed as “Gender Bender Day,” but Tippecanoe officials made the name change after she called Principal Jeffrey Krupar to complain.

The Milwaukee mother was not impressed.

“I didn’t have a problem with the title. I had a problem with the activity taking place,” Hernandez says.

She says it’s “ridiculous” and “creepy” to ask elementary boys to come to school dressed as girls, and vice versa, and predicts that having students dress as “transvestites” will distract from the learning process.

Hernandez knows of at least one other parent who shares her concerns and plans to hold her child out of class, too.

She wonders if it is being done to promote the acceptance of homosexuality to students in school, which runs from pre-kindergarten through eighth grade. Hernandez thinks it’s inappropriate to expose young children to these issues, even in a light-hearted manner.

“They might as well call it ‘Transgender Day,’” she says.

Immigration bill would “hammer working Americans.” - African Americans need not apply



Democrats say:  "Black Americans need not apply."

• Democrats pander to Hispanic foreigners while African Americans experience massive unemployment.  Looks like pro-Hispanic and anti-Black racism. 
• GOP legislators are not far behind.  Many Republicans are lackeys of the Chamber of Commerce that is looking for endless new immigrants in low wage and high tech jobs in order to drive down wages.

Insanity  -  Why are Democrats and many Republicans falling all over each other to import or legalize millions of new workers when technology and outsourcing are abolishing jobs faster than they can be created?

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said Friday that the so-called Senate immigration "reform" bill would “hammer working Americans.”

Sessions, one of the immigration overhaul’s most strident critics, suggested the measure would prioritize foreign-born workers over people already in the U.S. struggling to find a job.

“This is far, far too many low-skilled workers that are going to take jobs and pull down wages of people unemployed and underemployed right now,” Sessions, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on Fox Business. “It's really, really dangerous.”

The Senate Judiciary panel cleared the immigration bill crafted by the so-called “Gang of Eight” this week by a bipartisan 13-5 vote, and its supporters hope to rack up 70 votes in the chamber reports The Hill.


Andrew McAfee:  Are droids taking our jobs? 
Why are we importing millions of new workers when technology is abolishing jobs faster than they can be created?

Robots and algorithms are getting good at jobs like building cars, writing articles, translating -- jobs that once required a human. So what will we humans do for work?

More American Workers Outsourcing Own Jobs Overseas
A new Department of Labor report finds personal outsourcing is revolutionizing how Americans don't do their own work.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah), another senior Republican on the Judiciary panel, voted for the measure in committee, but has said he might not back it on the Senate floor.
.
In his Friday interview, Sessions stressed that the unions for the officers that guard the border opposed the immigration bill, and that the measure would be a huge burden on the American safety net.

“We believe in immigration,” Sessions said. “All of us do. And we all believe that we need to make this legal system of immigration better. This bill just does not do it, and it can't pass in this form.”

Sorry Senator, not all of us believe in immigration.  How about protecting American workers?

Key conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation are also deeply skeptical of the Senate immigration bill, but other prominent figures on the right, like Grover Norquist and Douglas Holtz-Eakin, back a comprehensive immigration reform.

40% Black youth unemployment (16 to 19). 
But Democrats say we must import more foreigners.

 

CORRUPTION - The Shakedown of Apple Computers

"If God didn't want them sheared, he
would not have made them sheep."
 Eli Wallach
The Magnificent Seven (1960)

Political Extortion
Apple joins the list of companies that have been shaken down for hard cash by both parties


The Washington Examiner reports that Senators are angry that tech giant Apple isn't paying its fair share.

I'm not talking about taxes. This is about the bipartisan extorting of campaign contributions and lobbying fees.

An investigation by Sen. Carl Levin and a grilling of Apple CEO Tim Cook on Tuesday by the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations were ostensibly about Apple's low tax bill. But nobody accused Apple of breaking the law. The company moved money around to minimize the tax it owed and then paid the amount the law required. Apple didn't write the tax law or even lobby very hard to shape it.

And that's just the problem. The grilling of Apple is best understood as a shakedown by politicians upset with Apple for not playing the Washington game that yields contributions, power, and personal wealth for congressmen and their aides reports the Washington Examiner.



The American Sheeple think they live in a Democracy,
instead we have a Kleptocracy.

Apple doesn't have a political action committee to fund incumbents' re-elections. Apple doesn't hire many congressional staff or any former congressmen as lobbyists. Apple mostly minds its own business -- and how does that help the political class

The Beltway Shakedown is an old game. Microsoft may be its most famous victim. In the 1990s, while the Federal Trade Commission investigated the software giant for supposed antitrust violations, the Senate Judiciary Committee, run by Republican Orrin Hatch of Utah, held hearings to beat up CEO Bill Gates.

Microsoft's crime? "I have given [Microsoft] advice, and they don't pay any attention to it," fumed Hatch, who described this as "knuckle-headed and hard-nosed."

"The industry had an attitude that government should do what it needs to do but 'leave us alone,' " a congressional aide complained to Businessweek at the time. "Their hands-off approach to Washington will come back to haunt them."

Microsoft got the message and ramped up its lobbying and campaign spending. From $2 million on lobbying in 1997, the company's lobby shop grew to nearly $10 million by 2004. From less than $50,000 in contributions in the 1996 cycle, Microsoft's PAC grew twentyfold in two cycles, to $1.2 million 2000 and $2.3 million in 2012.

Hatch, in 2000, made sure others learned from Microsoft's experience, telling a tech conference, "If you want to get involved in business, you should get involved in politics."

In the 2012 election, where Hatch faced a tough primary, he pocketed $10,000 of Microsoft PAC money.

Lawmakers have sent that message to many industries, sometimes more subtly.

When Democrats took control of the Senate in 2007, Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York invited top hedge fund moguls to dinner in January, where, as the New York Times put it, he "had some simple advice for the billionaires in his midst: If you want Washington to work with you, you had better work better with one another."

In the following election, hedge funds tripled their campaign contributions over the previous cycle. The industry's lobbying spending increased twelvefold that year. One way in which the industry ramped up its lobbying: hiring Schumer's banking staffer, Carmencita Whonder, as a lobbyist. Whonder then became a Schumer bundler, raising money for him.

Politicians beat up Wal-Mart until Wal-Mart hired Democrat Leslie Dach in 2006 as its top political aide. The retailer started heavily funding the liberal Center for American Progress, run by Obama transition director John Podesta -- and hiring the lobbying firm Podesta co-founded.

Congress at Work

Apple has held out, though. Every couple of years, Politico, the trade publication of the Beltway, has run a piece warning Apple of the dangers of ignoring Washington. "Its low-wattage approach in Washington is becoming more glaring to policymakers," a 2010 article said, pointing out that the company doesn't have a PAC and its lobbying spending was a paltry $1 million.

The 2012 Politico warning to Apple included an explicit threat from a Judiciary staffer-turned-lobbyist, Jeff Miller: "There have been other tech companies who chose not to engage in Washington, and for the most part that strategy did not benefit them."

"Not engag[ing] Washington" includes spending only $1.97 million on lobbying in 2012 -- Google spent more than twice that much in last year's first quarter alone. Just as offensive, Apple still doesn't have a PAC.

A year ago, recounting the Microsoft saga, I wrote, "Wal-Mart underwent this same shakedown last decade ... Next on the menu is Apple."

That's the best way to understand Levin's investigation and the hearing. The thing to watch now: Does Apple make peace with Washington? Does it start a PAC? Does it hire the Podesta Group and employ Levin's aides?

Or will Apple try to stand up to the Beltway Shakedown.


Bill Moyers Essay:  Washington's Revolving Door
Bill shares his perspective on one of the most corrupt D.C. fixtures -- the revolving door between Washington leadership and lobbying. That lucrative pathway ensures that "when push comes to shove, corporate interests will have the upper hand in the close calls that determine public policy... no matter which party is in power."

Congress extorts billions in "voluntary" contributions

• If you don't pay you can't play.

 

Sector Totals, 2011-2012

Rank	Sector	Amount	Dems	Repubs	To DEMS To REPUBS
1	Finance/Insur/RealEst	$658,268,997	24.6%	52.0%
2	Other	$554,499,848	45.7%	42.2%
3	Misc Business	$459,033,143	26.5%	39.6%
4	Ideology/Single-Issue	$322,409,523	42.7%	41.0%
5	Health	$260,409,805	33.5%	42.4%
6	Lawyers & Lobbyists	$247,301,408	61.8%	29.9%
7	Communic/Electronics	$202,445,500	46.1%	27.4%
8	Labor	$141,435,385	43.1%	4.3%
9	Energy/Nat Resource	$139,287,170	15.8%	64.1%
10	Construction	$122,516,909	20.3%	50.9%
11	Agribusiness	$90,609,782	22.4%	66.0%
12	Transportation	$76,849,595	21.7%	69.0%
13	Defense	$27,438,703	39.5%	59.6%

METHODOLOGY

For more go to Open Secrets.org - industries.

The Corrupt Revolving Door


Ex-Senator Jon Kyl, Covington & Burling

Conservative Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) has gone 360 degrees through the revolving door with his decision to join top-earning lobbying firm Covington & Burling upon his retirement from the Senate.

Kyl began his career as a lawyer and lobbyist for the Arizona firm Jennings, Strouss & Salmon decades before he became Senate minority whip, that body's second-ranking Republican.

He first won a seat in the House of Representatives in 1987 and served until 1995 before beginning his 18-year Senate career. Kyl was ranked the fourth most conservative senator by National Journal in 2007 and has been an outspoken critic of Planned Parenthood and the Affordable Care Act.
Kyl occupied many different leadership positions during his tenure on Capitol Hill, including senior roles on the Senate Finance and Judiciary Committees. He was named one of the top 100 most influential people in the world in 2010 by Time Magazine. In his post-Senate career, Kyl has already been named a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a contributor to Fox News

.In a statement on its website, Covington & Burling cited Kyl's "encyclopedic" legislative knowledge and said he's respected on both sides of the aisle. He is expected to work mostly on expanding Covington's global public policy practice, according to the firm. As a former senator, Kyl will have to wait two years before he may lobby his former colleagues in Congress, but, as he emphasized in an interview with the Wall Street Journal's law blog, he is "not prohibited from giving them his best advice."

For more go to Open Secrets.org - Revolving Door.

Political Extortion
Give us the "voluntary" campaign contributions and high paying jobs for our buddies or Congress will fuck you over so hard that your company will never recover.