Posts

“Lerner Bill” to Fire Federal Employees Who Refuse to Testify

Photo Credit: Vimeo

Photo Credit: Vimeo

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) on Thursday proposed legislation that would require federal workers to be fired if they don’t answer questions from Congress.

The bill is a reaction to Lois Lerner, the IRS official who refused to answer questions about the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups during a congressional hearing last month. Lerner told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, “I have not done anything wrong,” then invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination on the advice of her lawyers…

“This is a statement which should not be made by federally appointed officials before a congressional hearing if they are faithfully carrying out the duties of their office,” Brooks told The Hill on Friday of Lerner’s decision to plead the Fifth…

Brooks’s bill says simply, “Any federal employee who refuses to answer questions in a congressional hearing after being granted immunity shall be terminated from employment.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Federal Nullification Efforts Mounting in States

Photo Credit: Western Journalism

Photo Credit: Western Journalism

Imagine the scenario: A federal agent attempts to arrest someone for illegally selling a machine gun. Instead, the federal agent is arrested – charged in a state court with the crime of enforcing federal gun laws.

Farfetched? Not as much as you might think.

The scenario would become conceivable if legislation passed by Missouri’s Republican-led Legislature is signed into law by Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon.

The Missouri legislation is perhaps the most extreme example of a states’ rights movement that has been spreading across the nation. States are increasingly adopting laws that purport to nullify federal laws – setting up intentional legal conflicts, directing local police not to enforce federal laws and, in rare cases, even threatening criminal charges for federal agents who dare to do their jobs.

An Associated Press analysis found that about four-fifths of the states now have enacted local laws that directly reject or ignore federal laws on marijuana use, gun control, health insurance requirements and identification standards for driver’s licenses.

Read more from this story HERE.

Government Could Use Metadata to Map Your Every Move

Photo Credit: Alex Garcia

Photo Credit: Alex Garcia

If you tweet a picture from your living room using your smartphone, you’re sharing far more than your new hairdo or the color of the wallpaper. You’re potentially revealing the exact coordinates of your house to anyone on the Internet.

The GPS location information embedded in a digital photo is an example of so-called metadata, a once-obscure technical term that’s become one of Washington’s hottest new buzzwords.

The word first sprang from the lips of pundits and politicians earlier this month, after reports disclosed that the government has been secretly accessing the telephone metadata of Verizon customers, as well as online videos, emails, photos and other data collected by nine Internet companies. President Barack Obama hastened to reassure Americans that “nobody is listening to your phone calls,” while other government officials likened the collection of metadata to reading information on the outside of an envelope, which doesn’t require a warrant.

But privacy experts warn that to those who know how to mine it, metadata discloses much more about us and our daily lives than the content of our communications.

Read more from this story HERE.

Senator Rand Paul: We Can’t Trust the Fed’s Clandestine Services (+video)

Photo Credit: Reuters

Photo Credit: Reuters

Senator Rand Paul appeared on Sirius XM Patriot 125 and, in a wide-ranging interview with Mike Church, hammered the National Intelligence Director James Clapper for lying to Congress. Paul contends that that creates trust issues regarding anything the clandestine services tell Americans:

You know, in March of this year, the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper came to the Senate and he was asked directly by Senator Wyden, “Are you collecting data on American citizens,” and he said, “No.” And interestingly, he’d been prepped for the questions. Senator Wyden’s office called him in advance and said, “We’re going to ask you are you collecting data on Americans.” So wasn’t not like he fumbled around and kind of gave a wrong answer, he just decided to lie.

When he was caught in the lie he said well I said the least untruthful thing I could think of. Well, that does make us a little bit skeptical of what they’re saying.

Rand Paul then goes on to explain that Clapper excused his lie, arguing that the truth was classified.

Senator Paul makes it clear that he supports the efforts the feds undertake to protect Americans from terrorists, but that he is concerned about the potential of the enormous power of the federal government being wielded against innocent U.S. citizens.

He also discusses drones and the FBI Director’s admission that they are presently being used for surveillance of the American citizens:

Abuse of Power and Deceit: Obama Imposed Rules as Early as 2009 to Defeat Government Transparency

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

Even as the freshly minted Obama administration was pledging a “new era of open government” in 2009, officials were quietly adding new rules that had the potential to slow down public requests for documents.

Those rules, detailed in memos reviewed by FoxNews.com, could even trip up present-day efforts to dig into the IRS’ practice of targeting conservative groups. The rules detailed in the memos largely emanated from the Treasury Department and, specifically, the IRS.

“It would seem to repudiate this notion that this is going to be the most transparent government in history,” said Dan Epstein, executive director of Cause of Action, the group that first obtained the memos.

The memos follow reports about the administration’s use of private email accounts, and coincide with ongoing debate about government transparency — particularly with recent disclosures about widespread surveillance programs.

Epstein said the document request procedures are “troubling” since the media are “really concerned about the limits of government power.”

Read more from this story HERE.

$509K Federal Safe-Sex Study Will Text Gay-Lingo to Meth Addicts

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

A $509,840 grant by the National Institutes of Health will pay for a study that will send text messages in “gay lingo” to methamphetamine addicts to try to persuade them to use fewer drugs and more condoms. The study began in February.

Lead researcher Dr. Cathy Reback of the Baltimore-based Friends Research Institute, Inc., told CNSNews.com how she and her team of health educators will spend the next four years and over half a million dollars encouraging gay meth addicts to cut down on unprotected sex by periodically sending them “gay-specific” text messages.

“We did a pilot about four, five years ago with 52 out-of-treatment MSM (males who have sex with males),” Dr. Reback explained. “And we sent them text messages that were gay specific – used gay lingo – and made references to the connection between high-risk sex and methamphetamine use among MSM.”

The current study, she added, will test the effectiveness of using text messages to alter gay meth addicts’ behavior.

“So what I wanted to do with this text messaging intervention was to optimize the opportunity to get these guys [to have safer sex] by sending text messages as opposed to ‘Come into my brick and mortar site that’s ten miles from your house, and come for a group [session].’ I mean – you know – okay maybe!” Dr. Reback explained.

Read more from this story HERE.

James O’Keefe Says He Was Harassed by Federal Agents

Photo Credit: dsm012

Photo Credit: dsm012

Journalist James O’Keefe tells Newsmax that the Justice Department monitoring of Associated Press reporters is similar to what he faced when he was investigating voter fraud during the 2012 elections.

O’Keefe’s organization Project Veritas videotaped a man who nearly voted as Attorney General Eric Holder when a poll worker was about to hand over the attorney general’s ballot.

“This spying on reporters is exactly what I faced when I did these voter fraud investigations,” O’Keefe said in an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV. “I had agents showing up at the homes of my friends — and I don’t even know how they got their addresses and that’s a very interesting thought — we had our emails shared potentially with members of the media.

“Again this could have only come from the federal government,” said O’Keefe.

O’Keefe is the author of the new book “Breakthrough: Our Guerilla War to Expose Fraud and Save Democracy.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Obamacare Will Share Personal Health Info with Federal, State Agencies

Photo Credit: Thinkstock

Photo Credit: Thinkstock

A new 253-page Obamacare rule issued late Friday requires state, federal and local agencies as well as health insurers to swap the protected personal health information of anybody seeking to join the new health care program that will be enforced by the Internal Revenue Service.

Protected health information, or PHI, is highly protected under federal law, but the latest ruling from the Department of Health and Human Services allows agencies to trade the information to verify that Obamacare applicants are getting the minimum amount of health insurance coverage they need from the health “exchanges.”

The ruling, explained on pages 72-73 of the book-thick guidance, does not mention any requirement that applicants first OK the release of their PHI. HHS already allows some exchange of PHI without an individual’s pre-approval, especially when for a “government program providing public benefits.” Officials said the swapping of information is simply meant to help figure the best insurance coverge of Obamacare users.

The new ruling surprised some congressional critics. “This sounds as if HHS will have access to protected health info to me,” said one top Hill aide worried about how well the administration will protect that information.

Read more from this story HERE.

FBI Director Should Hand in His Badge Now!

Photo Credit: Getty Images

Photo Credit: Getty Images

It’s not just that government collects so much data on Americans that bothers me.

It’s what the government does and doesn’t do with the data that makes it worse.

Take, for example, the feisty interchange between Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas, and FBI Director Robert Mueller last week.

Gohmert was grilling Mueller over the FBI’s abject failure at preventing the April 15 Boston Marathon bombing by neglecting to investigate their mosque, founded by Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was convicted of supporting terrorism. He also pointed out the FBI had a tip from Russia that one of the Tsarnaev brothers had been radicalized in a visit to Chechnya prior to the attack…

Mueller accused Gohmert of not having his facts straight, for which he should be cited for contempt of Congress. It is Mueller who didn’t have his facts straight – even admitting he didn’t know about who founded the mosque…

I don’t know what’s scarier – the fact that government collects information from every American surreptitiously or that it uses all the wrong criteria in figuring out who really represents a threat to the safety and security of our country and citizenry.

Read more from this story HERE.

Federal Agents Now Invade Hospital Exam Rooms, Thanks to HIPPA

Photo Credit: WND

I recently endured my third round of invasion by the Joint Commission, or JCAHO (Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations). I am still reeling from the experience. Without my consent and without warning, the investigator invited herself into the sanctum of our exam room, explaining that she had verbal consent from the patient to observe, “and we learn so much!” I was caught completely off guard, and working as a private contractor in a government sponsored facility, I didn’t resist, but I can say now in retrospect…it will never happen to me again.

Never in more than 20 years of medical practice have I had a government agent invade the sacred space of my private exam room. Oh yes, I have acceded to the review of my private medical records by their auditors, holy ground that never should have been given, but this was too much. Ah, but she had HIPAA in her hand.

It has taken me a while to get the big picture. At first when I heard of HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) I was mystified, why should we need such a law? After all, the idea of doctor-patient confidentiality has been an essential foundation of western medicine for two thousand years before there ever was a United States of America, so we surely didn’t just think it up. Furthermore, if the King’s Court jesters (or shall we say ‘Supreme Court’) can find an “implied right to privacy” in the US Constitution for a woman to kill her unborn baby, why in the world would we need a new set of laws to protect privacy between a doctor and patient?

It’s really quite simple, the cost of medicine today has escaped us. When my Grand daddy was still around, he either paid for his medical care out of his pocket, or he didn’t get it, simple as that. Today, nobody can afford to pay their own medical costs, why a small cut on your finger with a trip to the emergency room for a few stitches could run over a thousand dollars, and a woman recently confided to me that her hysterectomy cost in excess of $65,000! Now think about how many women in this country will need a hysterectomy this year, can we afford this? How about a $90,000 heart catheterization and stent followed by a new blood thinner drug that will cost $2000 a month to keep it working? So we see that more and more we have to rely on our government to foot the bill of the things we could never pay for.

There it is… if the government is going to pay for health care, they want to get the ‘most bang for their buck’ so they need a way to measure, and to measure, they need beans to count, and to have beans to count, they have to have records, and to have records—they can’t be in a safe paper chart in some doctors office, they need to be electronic and available, hence the advent of the EHR (Electronic Health Record). Nobody honestly finds this actually facilitates patient care (everyone I talk to finds that all this data entry increases the time need to see one patient), but it sure gives the government beans to count.

Now for them to sell us on this idea, they had to create the illusion of protecting the privacy of medical information when in reality the foxes were just letting themselves into the hen house! Remember, the “P” in HIPAA does not stand for privacy like they want us to believe, but for portability, so it’s easier for them to access. The government now has an information highway to the most private thing you have, your own medical record. And remember, next time you sit down with your doctor in confidence, you may look up and find they have invited themselves to sit in, after all, “they can learn so much!” Welcome to the 21st century and a brave new world (soon to be ‘Logan’s Run’).

_______________________________________________

AUTHOR’S NOTE: I would like to respond to concerns raised in response to the above article regarding the Joint Commission. Let me clarify, JCAHO was not originally created by the Federal Government nor is it directly funded by Federal moneys. And if my use of the term “agent” created that misunderstanding, I extend my apologies, that was not my intent. Rather my intent is to point out that Joint Commission has become a tool of the Federal machine. Joint Commission accreditation has become a primary measure by which health organizations can qualify for Medicare participation and, in many states, Medicaid participation as well. Medicare funds are clearly of Federal origin, and to put it simply, a health organization which doesn’t have Joint Commission accreditation or, worse yet, fails their accreditation will find it very difficult to access those Federal moneys. Thus, JCAHO is operationally an agent of the Federal system, and reflects Federal intrusion. One cannot deny that Joint Commission is required to comply with Federal regulations in its reporting and that Joint Commission reflects the requirements of CMS (Center for Medicare Services) standards, thus playing a regulatory role for the Federal government.