California lawmakers try to extend ObamaCare to illegal immigrants

We all knew this was coming.

Remember when you could keep your insurance but then you couldn't?

The bastard in the WH is consistently caught in lie after lie after lie with no consequence. Every action he has ever taken during his presidency is based on lies and deceit. From F&F to ObamaCare, Benghazi, the IRS scandal, to the Iran Nuke debacle, if it were anyone else but him they would have been impeached. Believe me, Bergdahl was never about..."no soldier left behind". It was all about getting five more Gitmo dogs released.

Clear as glass. 

Three presidential candidates on stage and all three are world class liars!

Video 247

Edwards didn't go to jail. Either will Clinton. And Barry will never be impeached.

And the latest. What will come of this?

Nothing.

Video of a State Dept. Official ‘Lying’ to Reporter James Rosen Mysteriously Deleted — Here’s the Government’s Response

We are deserving of what we get.

Plato:

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."

And it also could be said of people who have their head up their ass when they do vote.

-------------------------------------------------

California is on the brink of becoming the first state in the nation to offer illegal immigrants the chance to buy insurance on an ObamaCare exchange -- testing what's being described as a "loophole" in the law. 

The Affordable Care Act technically bars illegal immigrants from the insurance exchanges. 

But the California bill, which last week passed the state legislature and was sent to Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk, would allow the state to apply for a federal waiver to open its exchange -- Covered California -- to undocumented residents. 

There's no guarantee that will happen. Brown first would have to sign the bill and the Obama administration then would have to green-light the waiver. Even if that is granted, it wouldn't necessarily give illegal immigrants access to insurance subsidies. 

Critics, though, say it’s a slippery slope and yet another example of how the federal government has hoodwinked Americans into getting behind the Affordable Care Act, or ObamaCare.

“This is the first step in another misrepresentation of the Affordable Care Act,” Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform told US News & World Report. “It was sold to the American people on the fact that you wouldn’t have to subsidize health care for illegal immigrants.”

During his monthslong public pitch for the health care overhaul, President Obama had promised repeatedly the benefits that come with the federal and state health care exchanges would not be made available to illegal immigrants. 

Currently, it is illegal under ObamaCare for undocumented immigrants to buy into the ACA.

According to HealthCare.gov, “undocumented immigrants aren’t eligible to buy Marketplace health coverage, or for premium tax credits and other savings on Marketplace plans.”

However, a provision in the law called the “innovation waiver” allows states like California to change portions of the law as long as the state makes coverage available to more people and as long as the federal government doesn’t get stuck footing the bill.

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Ricardo Lara, a Democrat, says if Brown signs the bill, 390,000 illegal immigrants would be eligible to receive health insurance. 

“We are talking about our friends. We are talking about our neighbors and our families who are denied basic health care in the richest state of this union,” Lara, the son of an undocumented worker, said during Senate negotiations last June.

While the California waiver would be the first of its kind on a large scale, 18 states already have offered subsidies for prenatal care for undocumented women and health insurance for all undocumented children, according to Think Progress. 

Requests for comment to Brown's office and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as well to Lara's office, were not immediately returned.

California lawmakers try to extend ObamaCare to illegal immigrants

Former US attorney: Clinton aides' legal strategy is 'red flag'

Clinton told ABC News on Sunday that her email practices were in line with those of her predecessors. (Really…who else had a private server?)

Let's talk about brazen.

In a Friday radio interview with KNX 1070, Clinton said there is “absolutely no possibility” she’d be indicted. 

---------------------------

Four central figures in the FBI’s criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email practices are all using the same lawyer, a move described as a “red flag” by a former U.S. attorney who now runs a government watchdog group. 

Lawyer Beth Wilkinson is representing: Clinton former chief of staff Cheryl Mills; policy adviser Jake Sullivan; media gatekeeper Philippe Reines; and former aide Heather Samuelson, who helped decide which Clinton emails were destroyed before turning over the remaining 30,000 records to the State Department.  

aka the Clinton Mafia:

"I think it would be a real red flag," Matthew Whitaker, executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, or FACT, told Fox News, in reference to the legal defense. He suggested having a single lawyer would help the four Clinton aides align their stories for FBI interviews. 

"The benefit is to have one lawyer’s brain have all the knowledge of the various pieces and parts, and so each of those potential targets or subjects of the investigation get to share information across that same attorney -- and quite frankly get their story to sync up and understand what other people know of the situation,” he said.

Wilkinson is a well-respected Washington, D.C., attorney who successfully argued in favor of the death penalty for Timothy McVeigh in the Oklahoma City bombing case. Wilkinson has deep ties in Washington and is married to former NBC “Meet the Press” host David Gregory, who is now a regular political commentator on CNN. 

Asked for comment, there was no immediate response from Wilkinson's office. It has been their practice not to respond to press inquiries on this case.

Whitaker was appointed U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Iowa by President George W. Bush in June 2004 and held the position until November 2009, when President Obama's appointed replacement was confirmed. He said the legal set-up presents challenges for FBI investigators in the Clinton probe. 

"All you're trying to do is seek the truth, and when someone is sharing a lawyer, you worry that the interview that you just did an hour ago with that attorney has been shared with the next witness and they can fix or reconcile their story to be the same," Whitaker explained. 

In other words, when it comes to lying it may prove difficult if everyone is not on the same page.

While apparently unusual, the legal representation has not been openly challenged by Justice Department officials. 

A different perspective, presented by a leading defense attorney who asked not to speak on the record, is that the four Clinton aides plan to present a united front and do not fear criminal liability.

Politico first reported in April on the legal representation; since then, Mills and Wilkinson blocked questions about Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano – another key figure in the probe – during a civil suit deposition in Washington. Pagliano, who struck an immunity deal with the Justice Department last year, is now seeking to assert his Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions in the same Judicial Watch proceedings. 

One thing for sure. Pagliano's immunity deal suggests where's there's smoke there's fire.

Clinton told ABC News on Sunday that her email practices were in line with those of her predecessors. In a Friday radio interview with KNX 1070, Clinton said there is “absolutely no possibility” she’d be indicted. 

Whitaker's group FACT also is seeking the emails of Dennis Cheng, Clinton's former deputy chief of protocol at the State Department, whose records may reveal a great deal about the possible intersection between Clinton Foundation work and Clinton's time as secretary of state. Cheng was the point person for senior foreign government officials. Only a handful of Cheng emails were among the more than 30,000 pages made public by the State Department.

According to his State Department biography, Cheng also served as Clinton’s national finance director when she was a senator, her New York finance director for her 2008 presidential campaign, and as a consultant to the William J. Clinton Foundation. 

The FBI probe into Clinton’s email use is not the first time her record-keeping has faced federal scrutiny. Long before she became a secretary of state, Clinton’s billing records and documents tied to her work as a partner in the Rose Law Firm on behalf of the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan and Capital Management Services came under question. Those missing records from her work as a lawyer were at the crux of investigations by three separate federal agencies which cost taxpayers $65 million. A special committee’s report on the matter (page 155) said it received computer printouts of the billings in January 1996, “discovered under mysterious circumstances in the Book Room of the White House Residence.” 

If this isn't Clintonesque I don't know what is.

Clinton is still represented by the same lawyer who defended her throughout the in the 1980’s and 1990’s, David Kendall.

After reading this and knowing her f-u-l-l history do you really want Hill-Zilla as your next president?

Former US attorney: Clinton aides' legal strategy is 'red flag'

Keeping the Clinton Tradition A Habit

Roger Clinton arrested on suspicion of DUI in California

Guess The Clinton Foundation will be making a $15,000 donation instead of receiving one. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

REDONDO BEACH, California -- Roger Clinton, brother of former President Bill Clinton, has been arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence in Redondo Beach near Los Angeles.

CBS Los Angeles reports police say Roger Cassidy Clinton, 59, was arrested around 8:00 p.m. Sunday.

Clinton is being held in lieu of $15,000.

At this time, it remains unclear when he will make his first court appearance.

Clinton's arrest occurred two days ahead of the California primary election in the 2016 presidential race. The polls have Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in a dead heat there.

His brother, Bill, visited the Southland over the weekend to campaign on behalf of his wife, Hillary.

Roger Clinton is Bill's half-brother, and has a well-documented history of trouble with substance abuse and causing political trouble for his famous sibling. Then-President Bill Clinton famously pardoned Roger Clinton for his 1985 conviction over cocaine possession. 

(Pardoning a member of your own family? Doesn't that just reek!) 

Then again in the Clinton household…It’s what’s for dinner.

Roger Clinton has also been arrested for DUI previously.

Keeping the Clinton Tradition A Habit

The Suit Against Marilyn Mosby In Freddie Gray Case Has A Few Big Problems

Wouldn't it be something if they won!

Even though they're downplaying it I think they have a case. Another thing worth mentioning. If all the officers are acquitted how does the city, in particular, Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake justify paying the Gray family $6.4 million? 

Isn't that putting the cart before the horse?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/freddie-grays-family-settles-city-6-4m-145735914.html?ref=gs

---------------------------------------------

Two officers charged in the death of Freddie Gray are suing Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby, but legal experts have serious doubts about their case.

Sgt. Alicia White and Officer William Porter have filed suit against Mosby for defamation and invasion of privacy, alleging she made false statements about them to quell the Baltimore riots. Legal experts told The Daily Caller News Foundation the suit has an uphill battle. They point out that prosecutors have broad immunity and are difficult to bring charges against. On top of that, the law makes it difficult to sue state employees while they're acting in their employment, and aside from the difficulties involved in suing a prosecutor, defamation cases are often difficult to win.

"The bottom line is that there are a lot of obstacles for the plaintiffs to overcome," Don Gifford, a University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law professor, told TheDCNF. "They must win a lot of legal issues in order to prevail in their litigation, but it's not a firmless case. It's a tough piece of litigation, but it's not a firmless case."

Gifford said the officers could be considered public figures because the case is so high-profile, making a defamation claim even more difficult. The Supreme Court has broadly protected speech against public figures.

"In those circumstances the defendant, Mosby, would have to have either made these statements knowing that they're false or with reckless disregard as to whether they are true or false," Gifford told TheDCNF.

Michael Glass, the lawyer representing the officers in the suit, told TheDCNF that Mosby overreached so far that she should not be protected by the immunity usually due to prosecutors. Glass says she used rhetoric and charges that were too tough in order to quell the riots after Gray's death. The aggressive charges against all six officers did raise eyebrows, but experts largely say it does not warrant a defamation suit victory.

"Our position is that once she brought charges for purposes other than prosecution these officers for alleged charges, she went outside her scope of employment and therefore does not enjoy absolute immunity," Glass told TheDCNF. "She certainly was not acting as a prosecutor. The reaction to some of the verbiage that she used was pretty significant. She was saying things like 'I've heard your call of no justice, no peace.' That she's seeking justice on behalf of the young people. She said something to the effect that 'your time is now. Our time is now.' Those aren't words that support the purported reasons for bringing the charges which was prosecuting a crime. It speaks more to stopping the riots and appeasing the crowd. Our position is that this goes outside the scope of her employment."

David Vladeck, professor of Law at Georgetown University, told TheDCNF he believes the officers are aware of the legal difficulties in the case, but they want to get their side of the story out. He said the "odds of winning are very low."

"I don't think the police officers who brought this case expect to win the case," he told TheDCNF. "The standard would require them to show and to allege that Ms. Mosby knew full well at the time she made these statements that the statements were not true, and I think that's going to be very very difficult to prove."

"You don't necessarily bring a case like this because you expect to win, you bring a case like this because you want to tell your side of the story," he added. "This is a very effective way to gets people to look at the case through their perspective rather than the perspective of Freddie Gray or the prosecution. In terms of the invasion of privacy claim, that's going to get them nowhere."

Maxwell Chibundu, a University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law professor, echoed the idea that the case could be an effort to get their side of the story out to the public.

"A prosecutor's mistaken belief, even if arguably motivated by a prosecutor's desire for self-aggrandizement does not ordinarily override the protection afforded by the wide discretion allowed to the prosecutor," Chibundu told TheDCNF. "Absent a gag order from a court, a prosecutor, as a public servant, has a good deal of leeway in informing the public of cases pending before her."

Glass rejected the claim that the suit was for publicity, noting he had no press conference for the suit.

"The complaint was filed with a motion to seal the case," he told TheDCNF. "The intent was, to the extent that it could've been a violation of the gag order, the intent was to comply with the gag order to the extent that it covered any civil action. It appeared that the press was honoring that motion until the Judge denied it [the seal]. If the intent was to draw attention to my clients or Ms. Mosby or Shariff Cogen then the case would not have been filed without an accompaniment to seal."

The Suit Against Marilyn Mosby In Freddie Gray Case Has A Few Big Problems

The truth be told

Let's face Americans have had it!

...And not to mention this guy's been involved in enough scandals to be impeached 10 times over.

So this is where we stand today:

A vote for Killary (scandals) Clinton is a vote to maintain the status quo. Why would anyone vote for one inept scandal-ridden presidency to be taken over by another with a track record of scandals dating back over 25 years from Whitewater, to Monica, Benghazi, and of course emails, just to name a few? 

She'll also destroy the SC!

But Trump has is finger on the button. This comes from the bitch who sold our uranium to the Russians! 

The truth be told