Pasquale Talarico

Will California Lawmakers Fall for Fraudulent Study Justifying Unjustified Prison Guard Union Giveaways?

September 5, 2023 By Editorial Board 4 Comments

California taxpayers should pay careful attention to the scheme orchestrated by the Newsom administration to further enrich his political cronies at the California Correctional Peace Officers Association.

Under California law, the state of California is required to conduct compensation studies in order to determine the appropriateness of general raises for public employees.

Prior to this year, the last publicly released compensation study for California’s prison guards was from 2013. According to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office that compensation study determined “that state correctional officers were compensation 40.2% above their local government counterparts and 28.1% above their federal government counterparts.”

Ever since, the state has dragged its feet in completing and referencing these legally required studies.

In 2018, Gavin Newsom was elected governor with the support of the CCPOA.

In 2020, the CCPOA ousted one of its most prominent critics in the California Legislature, Republican Sen. John Moorlach, helping to elect compliant Democrat Dave Min.

In 2021, the CCPOA dumped millions to defend him from recall. That same year, over the objections of the LAO pointing out the lack of a compensation study, the California Legislature, including Min, uncritically voted to give the CCPOA a lucrative new contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars per year.

That contract is now up.

The LAO is raising alarm bells once again about how the state is trying to justify a lucrative new contract for the CCPOA.

For one, the state’s HR department has concocted a deliberately misleading compensation study using different methodology and comparison groups designed to make the CCPOA-represented prison guards look underpaid.

The LAO notes a number of problems with the Newsom administration’s compensation study. It deliberately compared the pay of prison guards to law enforcement employees in high cost-of-living counties where few prison guards actually work and even two counties where zero prison guards work.

The LAO also notes the study conveniently omitted overtime pay, “which is equivalent to roughly 24 percent of gross regular pay in 2022,” and “mischaracterizes the value of pension and retiree health benefits.”

For these reasons and more, the LAO is advising the Legislature not to even reference the study.

The LAO brings to light other very useful information. Like the fact that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has to turn away more than 90% of qualified applicants for the prison guard academy, which indicates that at current levels of compensation there are more than enough people willing to do the job. No general raises needed.

The LAO also notes that compared to 2013, “the share of state correctional officer positions that are vacant” has also gone down. This, too, indicates there’s no actual problem bringing prison guards on to the job.

And as for handwaving from the CCPOA about retention problems, the LAO points out “the average Unit 6 member is younger today than they were in 2013. To some extent, this may reflect recent rates of retirement.”

Despite this, the Newsom administration wants to reward his cronies at CCPOA.

This is yet another test voters should use to gauge who in the Legislature is truly representing them and who is willing to play political games over public service.

There is no reason to throw more money at CCPOA. None.

For comparison, consider this question from watchdog group Govern for California: “Do our elected state officials really believe that California should spend twice as much on the compensation and benefits of 64,937 [correctional] employees as it spends on the 450,000 students served by California State University?”

Click here to read the ful article in the Orange County Register

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: California Politics, elections, unions

Prosecutors ask judge to impose long sentence for Northern California Jan. 6 rioter

September 4, 2023 By Sam Stanton 5 Comments

Arguing that a Northern California man who participated in the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol came “prepared for violence,” prosecutors are asking a judge to impose one of the longer sentences handed down on Jan. 6 defendants.

The government is asking U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates to order former Auburn construction worker Sean Michael McHugh, 35, to serve 10 years and three months in prison, pay a $73,000 fine and pay $2,000 in restitution when he is sentenced next Thursday.

The request comes in a 44-page sentencing memorandum filed late Thursday in federal court in Washington, D.C., where prosecutors argued that McHugh armed himself with powerful bear spray and a bullhorn and traveled to the Capitol to urge fellow supporters of then-President Donald Trump to “march on Congress.”

“During the riot, McHugh actively participated in at least four attempts to breach perimeters established by officers during the riot,” Assistant U.S. Attorneys Lynnett Wagner and Carolina Nevin wrote. “First, he was one of the initial rioters to breach a police line and enter the West Plaza. “Second, he wrestled with an officer for control of a barricade protecting access to the Capitol. Third, he assaulted officers on the West Plaza, hitting them with his bear spray, causing the officers to back away from the line, and preventing them from performing their official duties.

“Fourth, he helped other rioters to push a large metal sign into officers. In between these acts of aggression, McHugh used his megaphone to spew vitriol towards officers and to encourage other rioters to act against the officers.”

MCHUGH ATTORNEY SEEKS MUCH SHORTER SENTENCE McHugh, 35, was convicted last April of assaulting, resisting or impeding officers using a dangerous weapon and obstruction of an official proceeding and could face a sentence of up to 20 years in prison. His attorney argues that McHugh should receive a sentence of only two years, which “should permit him to rejoin society in time for his son’s high school graduation.”

Attorney Joseph Allen contends in a 13-page sentencing memorandum that McHugh was exercising his First Amendment rights on Jan. 6, that McHugh was swept up in the moment as protesters moved toward the Capitol from the Ellipse, where Trump had spoken before Congress was scheduled to certify Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.

“Mr. McHugh is not a rioter nor is he an insurrectionist,” Allen wrote. “He is an American citizen who, like any of us could, found himself caught up in the emotion of the events of a day which began lawfully and peacefully, then dominoed into the situation in which he finds himself now. “Mr. McHugh has maintained and continues to maintain that his actions for which he stands before this court were not planned, nor did he engage in the January 6 protest with any ill intent or malice.” McHugh, who has been in custody since his arrest May 2021, is the only one of four Sacramento-area defendants in the Jan. 6 riot to remain in jail, and faced the most serious charges among the four.

The government’s proposed sentence of more than 10 years in prison would be one of the longer ones imposed on Jan. 6 defendants to date. The longest imposed to date was 18 years for Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the far-right Oath Keepers group who was convicted of seditious conspiracy. Two other members of the right-wing Proud Boys group, Joseph Biggs and Zachary Rehl, were sentenced Thursday to 17 years and 15 years, respectively.

SENTENCE ‘REFLECTS GRAVITY OF MCHUGH’S CONDUCT’ Prosecutors in McHugh’s case argue that a sentence of 10 years and three months — which falls within federal sentencing guidelines calling for a term of 110 to 137 months — “reflects the gravity of McHugh’s conduct and his extensive criminal history.”

They also argue that he has shown no remorse for his actions, and that a fundraising site set up on his behalf contained a post from Thursday appearing to be from McHugh that stated, “I did not hurt anyone.” “Good Morning Everyone,” that post reads. “Let the countdown begin 7 more days and the fate of my life is in the hands of the DOJ… “I’ve been anxious, and nervous with so many thoughts running through my head. I’m having trouble sleeping and am consumed with thoughts of what the outcome will be.

I did not hurt anyone and I did not enter the Capital yet they want to give me 11.5 years it hardly seem fair. I ask you all to continue to pray for me and my family along with extra prays for the Proud Boys who have their sentencing this week.” The fundraising effort says it was set up by McHugh’s fiancée and describes McHugh as “just like most conservative American(s).”

“The Biden regime and DOJ has made it clear that if you are Republican, you can expect to have your civil, constitutional, and basic human rights stripped from you,” it states. As of early Friday, that site had raised $74,428 for what it described as “help with funds for legal fees and bills.”

Prosecutors contend that McHugh began planning his trip to Washington in December 2020, and “actively planned to prevent Congress’ certification of the Electoral College vote.” “In late December 2020, McHugh posted on Facebook ‘Going to D.C. Jan 5 6 7 to fight. HMU if you wanna join. Reservations made!,”’ prosecutors wrote. He added, “if this doesn’t make you want to get up in storm Congress and rip people out of office then you need to move to China,” according to prosecutors, and noted that McHugh updated his Facebook status early on Jan. 6 to write that “1776 will commence again January 6, 2021.”

TWO POLICE OFFICERS WANT TO SPEAK AT SENTENCING

Prosecutors also argue that when McHugh sprayed a line of police officers with bear spray — something he bragged about later on social media — he temporarily blinded one officer. “McHugh was one of the first rioters to break through the police line at the West Plaza,” they wrote. “McHugh assaulted officers on the West Plaza with bear spray at an early, critical juncture in the riot, causing officers pain and disrupting their ability to protect the Capitol.

“McHugh encouraged other rioters to act against officers and advance on the Capitol at multiple times and places on the West Plaza. McHugh took other physical acts against officers that included wrestling with an officer for control of a barricade at the South Scaffolding, joining other rioters to use a large metal sign as a battering ram against officers, and crossing police lines on the West Plaza.” Two officers from the riot have asked for time to speak at McHugh’s sentencing hearing, and prosecutors say McHugh’s actions warrant the sentence they are recommending.

“McHugh to this day continues to deny responsibility for his actions at the Capitol where he took part in a violent attack on officers and on the government,” they wrote. “McHugh’s denial and lack of remorse demonstrates that McHugh’s sentence must be sufficient to deter him from ever again engaging in violence in pursuit of his political goals.”

BEAR SPRAYING POLICE ‘POOR EXERCISE OF JUDGMENT’

McHugh’s attorney describes his client in a different fashion, writing that McHugh was sleep-deprived from his flight to Washington and that he only used his bear spray after seeing his mother get hit with projectiles fired by police, an action Allen described as “an exceedingly poor exercise of judgment.” He also argued that McHugh carried the bear spray to defend himself in the event Antifa counter-protesters appeared. “The facts of this case are simple,” Allen wrote.

“Mr. McHugh traveled to Washington, D.C., to protest what he believed to be an unlawful and corrupt election result. “He did so fully within his rights under the First Amendment of the Constitution to petition for a redress of grievances and under the lawfully obtained permits for the protests which had been previously acquired. Mr. McHugh participated in the protest, moving with the crowd, which became more and more agitated.

“Mr. McHugh, in an unfortunate cascade of events, found himself echoing the agitation of the crowd, expressing the growing sentiments directly to the police officers who were present to keep order. These sentiments did not come from a place of reason or from a clear and calculating mental state. Rather they were the product of that phenomenon commonly referred to as mob mentality.” Allen added that McHugh was not part of “some sinister prior plot” or conspiracy, and that he never entered the Capitol itself. “Were Mr. McHugh guilty of some other, more severe and serious action, such as breaching the Capitol Building or engaging in physical combat with law enforcement, then a more drastic example might be appropriate,” he wrote.

“However, Mr. McHugh is but one of the many everyday citizens who made a regrettable decision on January 6, 2021.” Allen urged the judge to take into account the fact that McHugh has not seen his teenage son in two years and to show mercy. “This court has the opportunity to demonstrate that while the events of January 6 were unacceptable, these so-called January 6 defendants are not the enemy,” he wrote. “They are our fellow citizens, neighbors, and friends. “That ideology has so torn us apart is not the fault of Mr. McHugh, no that blame lies elsewhere.”

ONE MORE SACRAMENTO DEFENDANT FACES SENTENCING

McHugh is the third of four Sacramento-area Jan. 6 defendants to face sentencing to date. Valerie Elaine Ehrke of Arbuckle received probation after pleading guilty to a misdemeanor last year.

Click here to read the full article in the Sacramento Bee

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Insurrection, Jan. 6

Does the EDD Owe the Feds Another $18 Billion Dollars?

September 4, 2023 By Thomas Buckley 1 Comment

Seems That Way…

Buried in a state Controller’s Office financial report, there is a rather odd entry: a $17.9 billion dollar “current liability” owed to “other governments.”

The Controller’s Office said the $17.9 billion line item refers to “amounts due to the Federal Government, primarily associated with federal grant expenditures for which the State was not able to verify eligibility of claimants under federal program guidelines.”

This does not refer to the $18.5 billion dollars the Employment Development Department owes the federal government for its fraud-filled disastrous pandemic unemployment benefit system response.

It’s in addition to that figure, meaning the total unemployment-related federal debt could be more than $36 billion dollars.

While neither the Controller’s Office nor the EDD would explicitly confirm it, the debt is almost certainly related to the state not being able to prove that that $17.9 billion dollars was sent to actual eligible unemployment claimants.

The language used by the Controller specifically parallels federal unemployment benefit program reporting guidelines.

Whether or not that is part of the $32-to-$40-billion-dollar overall fraud loss the EDD was fleeced for during the pandemic is not clear.

Either way, again – the unemployment-related debt to the feds appears to actually be more than $36 billion dollars (it is theoretically possible the debt is related to another program but that doesn’t remove the debt itself.)

It is unknown if that debt can be added to the existing unemployment trust fund debt or has to be treated – and paid back – separately. If it can be lumped together, that could extend out the surcharge every business is already paying per employee. The rate increases each year – this year it’s $21 and it will increase by $21 per year (plus additional increases starting in a few years) until it hits $420 per year per employee, which the surcharge is already expected to do. Originally, the EDD had estimated it would take only seven years to pay the debt; if the other debt is added it could be more than 25.

The “trust fund” part of the debt is growing because the EDD cannot cover its day-to-day bills now and is borrowing another $18 million a day, or $214 a second, or $25 bucks literally in the blink of an eye. Whether or not the “eligibility” debt is growing is unknown.

The EDD did not respond to multiple requests for comment/explanation; the Controller’s Office did provide requested information but did not directly comment further.

Indirectly, though, the Controller’s Office – like the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the State Auditor blasted the EDD’s gross incompetence. In the report – the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for fiscal year ending June, 2021 (the latest available) – the office stated it was unable to perform a proper audit of the EDD because it has “inadequate internal control over its financial reporting for unemployment benefits.”

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: California Politics, EDD, Gavin Newsom

John Eastman’s Disastrously Bad Idea

September 3, 2023 By Byron York 10 Comments

Claremont Institute legal scholar John Eastman will be arraigned next week on nine felony counts related to his efforts to reverse the results of the 2020 election, charges that were brought by the Democratic district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, Fani Willis. Eastman is one of the minds behind the scheme that, had it been enacted on Jan. 6, 2021, called for then-Vice President Mike Pence, presiding over the congressional certification of Electoral College results, to send the votes of key states including Arizona and Georgia back to the states for more debate and investigation, thus denying Joe Biden a victory in the Electoral College that was already settled and certified.

Pence refused to take part in the scheme. Then the proceedings were interrupted for several hours by the Capitol riot. And then Biden’s victory was finally certified. There was never any chance Eastman’s plan would have succeeded, but there is no doubt that, had Pence followed Eastman’s advice, the already chaotic day would have descended into a far more serious disorder.

That doesn’t mean Eastman’s idea was illegal. It does not mean it was a crime. In the political world, there are a lot of very damaging ideas that are not crimes. But prosecutor Willis has pushed ahead, even though a judge barred her from pursuing one possible defendant because of her, Willis’s, partisan political activities.

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

In any event, now Eastman, facing the possibility of years in prison, will begin his defense. This week, he began it in a very public way by sitting for an interview with Fox News’s Laura Ingraham, who in addition to her work on television is a lawyer and former Supreme Court clerk. In just a few minutes, Ingraham exposed a key flaw, perhaps the key flaw, of Eastman’s plan: He had no idea what to do if he succeeded.

Early in the interview, Eastman claimed that he had “lots of evidence of fraud” in the 2020 presidential election. Ingraham challenged him. “I haven’t seen that evidence,” she responded. “And I’m always wanting to see everything. So I haven’t seen that evidence.” The conversation then turned to the legal challenges of election results. But then Ingraham got to the simple question at the heart of the Jan. 6 story: “John, on Jan. 6, what did you want to happen? … Just so the viewers can understand what would have unfolded and how that would have ultimately been constitutional.”

Eastman began by saying that “some people,” meaning some around then-President Donald Trump, “had urged that Vice President Pence simply had power to reject electors whose certification was still pending.” In other words, Pence could, all on his own, reject Biden’s victory. Ingraham quickly noted, “I don’t believe that,” but Eastman maintained that it was an “open issue.” Nevertheless, Eastman said he told Pence “it would be foolish to exercise such power even if he had it.”

OK. So what did Eastman want Pence to do? “What I recommended, and I’ve said this repeatedly, is that he accede to requests from more than a hundred state legislators in those swing states to give them a week to try and sort out the impact of what everybody acknowledged was illegality in the conduct of the election.”

“Not everyone acknowledged it,” Ingraham noted. And then a more practical question: “You thought a week was going to be enough to hear all these challenges?” Underlying Ingraham’s question was a simple fact: There was no way in the world the challenges could have been resolved in a week. Eastman acknowledged that when he responded, “We’re still 2 1/2 years later looking at the evidence.”

Still, Eastman maintained that “what a week would have done is give them an opportunity to assess, OK, is the uncertainty so great because of the illegality in the election that we have a failed election? And at that point, the power to do the best they can revolved back to the [state] legislature. … A week would have given them a time to try and decide what, if anything, to do about it. And, you know, we were never going to get in a week to the bottom of how much fraud or what have you. But we could get to the bottom of illegality, and we could make some estimates and extrapolations to try and do the best job we could to assess what the likely outcome actually was.”

There it is. Eastman said a week would be enough for the state legislatures to come up with “estimates and extrapolations” to see if the election was legitimate or not. That was his plan. But remember this:

1) The state results were already certified. They were literally signed, sealed, and delivered. The challenges from “more than a hundred state legislators” that Eastman mentioned were from several states and from people who did not represent a majority in any house of any state legislature. They were just groups of Republican lawmakers who questioned the election results. When Eastman referred to “electors whose certification was still pending” — there weren’t any. No legislature, as a body, and no governor had declared a state’s results illegitimate. Indeed, just the opposite was true. After recounts in the key states, the states had certified the results. There was no legal reason to send the election results back to any state.

2) The “illegalities” that Eastman cited had been considered in the courts. Some claims had been rejected before the election, some after the election. One important claim, in Pennsylvania, where the state Supreme Court, acting on its own, extended the time in which mail-in ballots could be received, made its way to the Supreme Court, which declined to hear it. That is not to say there was no valid criticism of the Pennsylvania court’s action, but the fact is, the objection had been taken all the way to the Supreme Court, and the case was over.

3) Most importantly, Eastman did not know what to do if he won. Let’s say Pence sent the electoral results back to some states. In a week, according to Eastman’s thinking, the state legislatures could “get to the bottom of illegality.” And what then? At that point, somebody would make “estimates and extrapolations” to determine if 2020 was a “failed election.” Then they would do “the best job we could” to “assess what the likely outcome actually was.”

Who knows how that would work. But here is the fundamental question. Under Eastman’s plan, who would be president of the United States at noon on Jan. 20, 2021? Would the president take office on the basis of Electoral College results or somebody’s “estimates and extrapolations” of what those results would be if the election were somehow conducted differently? What legitimacy would the president chosen on the basis of “estimates and extrapolations” have?

Click here to read the full article in the Washington Examiner

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Court, Donald Trump, Jan. 6

Will CA Legislature Pass SB 14 to Make Sex Trafficking a Felony Once Again?

September 3, 2023 By Katy Grimes 2 Comments

Sen. Grove’s bill will make ‘non-serious’ sex trafficking children a felony and a strike

A bill to make sex trafficking a felony once again in California was blocked in the Assembly Public Safety Committee by Democrats in July, after passing unanimously in the Senate. Eventually and two days later, the committee was pressured by the public and lawmakers to reconsider their vote, and passed SB 14.

What should have been an easy vote for the safety and security of children should not have taken public outrage for passage. When and how did California’s Democrat lawmakers become so indifferent and callous to the people?

As Senator Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) said in July in an op ed, “the grim reality is that California is one of the largest sites of human trafficking in the United States.”

As the Globe reported in July, Currently human trafficking is defined as a “non-serious” crime which means the act of human trafficking cannot be considered a strike under California’s Three Strikes law.

While most people do not encounter the sex trafficking industry, the horrific stories of survivors are out there for anyone willing to listen. “Trafficking victims must meet daily sex or labor quotas before they’re permitted to sleep, eat or rest. In many instances, traffickers will brand their victims with facial or body tattoos to signify their ownership over the victim and the victim’s status as mere property,” Grove said.

The California Attorney General explains the magnitude of sex trafficking:

Human trafficking is among the world’s fastest growing criminal enterprises and is estimated to be a $150 billion-a-year global industry. It is a form of modern day slavery that profits from the exploitation of our most vulnerable populations. One common misperception is that human trafficking requires movement across borders. In reality, it involves controlling a person or group through force, fraud, or coercion to exploit the victims for forced labor, sexual exploitation, or both. This can occur entirely within a single country or it can cross borders.

The International Labor Organization estimates that there are more than 24.9 million human trafficking victims worldwide at any time. This includes 16 million victims of labor exploitation, 4.8 million victims of sexual exploitation, and 4.1 million victims of state imposed forced labor. The victims of human trafficking are often young girls and women. Young girls and women are 57.6% of forced labor victims and 99.4% of sex trafficking victims.

In the past, the U.S. Department of State has estimated that 14,500 to 17,500 victims are trafficked into the United States each year.

Six proposed bills in 2018-19 would have corrected unclear language and serious flaws in Proposition 57, passed in 2016 by voters, which reclassified many serious heinous crimes as “non-serious.” The initiative specified early parole for persons who committed non-violent offenses. However, the initiative never specified what is considered a non-violent felony.

But all 6 bills were killed by Democrats. Ironically, most of the bills were killed in Assembly or Senate Public Safety committees, just as SB 14 was.

Human trafficking involving a minor, assault with a deadly weapon, solicitation of murder, rape under various specified circumstances, grand theft of a firearm, elder and dependent adult abuse, were considered “non-violent” crimes under Prop. 57.

Senate Bill 14 by Senator Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) was voted down in the Assembly Public Safety Committee with 6 Democrats abstaining and 2 Republicans voting “aye”… that means Democrats wouldn’t even commit to a “no” vote lest it look bad during reelection time.

SB 14 will included sex trafficking of minors in the lists of crimes that are defined as serious under California law, making the crime a strike under the Three Strikes law, and would help strengthen protections for the millions of victims of sex trafficking.

As of today, Senator Grove says she has 64 co-authors which is more than half of the California State Legislature, including 46 Assembly members and 9 members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee who have signed on as co-authors. She has done a monumental job winning supporters and co-authors of SB 14,, and it’s taken a lot of heavy lifting.

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: Crime, SB 14, sex trafficking

The Great Climate Change Con isn’t Resonating With Normal People

September 2, 2023 By Katy Grimes 14 Comments

‘Eco-guilt is a first-world luxury’

“Anthropogenic global warming is the biggest, most dangerous and ruinously expensive con trick in history.”

Remember when climate hysterics claimed “the science is settled?” That claim didn’t weather well, but it also didn’t stop the climate liars: “The scientific consensus that humans are altering the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow,” the Guardian reported in 2021. The Cornell University climate study the Guardian cites in the article was “supported” (funded) by Alliance for Science. “Support for the Alliance for Science is provided by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.”

But the hysterics just moved on from that lie to other climate lies.

A little over one year ago, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced his pompous plan for addressing “California’s hotter, drier future:”

“Hotter and drier weather conditions spurred by climate change could reduce California’s water supply by up to 10 percent by the year 2040. To replace and replenish what we will lose to thirstier soils, vegetation, and the atmosphere, Governor Gavin Newsom has announced California’s latest actions to increase water supply and adapt to more extreme weather patterns caused by climate change.”

Think about that arrogant statement – as if California politicians are going to stop hot weather. But the joke was on the governor with record rainfall and snowfall in the winter of 2023… except that didn’t stop him. Since then, we’ve been barraged with absurd radio advertisements warning us, “now that we face a hotter, dryer future…” and “let’s make conservation a way of life,” providing helpful hints about saving water.

Enjoy the water-saving brilliance, brought to you by the Drought.CA.gov website:

If it’s raining, turn off your sprinklers
Take 5-minute showers
Fill bathtubs halfway or less
Turn off water when brushing teeth or shaving
Wash full loads of clothes and dishes
Fix leaks
Set mower blades to 3″
Use a broom to clean outdoor areas
Improve landscape irrigation

Taxpayers paid for this babble. With the state sending 50% of the water to the Pacific Ocean for environmental purposes, of the remaining 50%, 40% goes to agriculture, and 10% is urban use. Setting your mower blade to 3″ isn’t going to make a measurable amount of water conservation.

And, as we heard this week, PG&E will be shutting off the power when it is windy. Never in California’s history have energy providers shut off power when it was windy. This is a new policy, and is criminal – we are paying for that electricity. Who will be the first to sue over this?

According to the governor, “California’s Water Supply Strategy, Adapting to a Hotter, Drier Future calls for investing in new sources of water supply, accelerating projects and modernizing how the state manages water through new technology.”

Refuting this drivel is not difficult.

One way is to read the monthly reports by E&E Legal, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), the Heartland Institute, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), and Truth in Energy and Climate, which just released another version of “Climate Fact Check,” for July.

“Climate Fact Check: July 2023 Edition highlights sensationalized stories about the climate, which is typical for the corporate media propaganda machine, although not rooted in reality.”

“The media is calling July 2023 the ‘hottest month on record’ and even the ‘hottest month in the history of civilization.’ Keeping in mind that July is typically the warmest month of every year, NASA satellite data indicate that July 2023 was the warmest July in the satellite record. But that record only dates back to 1979 and there certainly were Julys before 1979.”

This is Very interesting:

Recalling that average global temperature is on the order of 58°F, use of the term “hottest” is obviously quite an exaggeration. Finally, the notion of “average global temperature” is not really meaningful in the first place. It has no physical reality, and its component satellite and surface station temperature measurements lack precision to a significant degree.

The group of actual scientists debunk recent reporting of the Washington Post’s claims of an “Era of Global Boiling”:

And no, extreme heat is not killing more people. The scientists confirm that “it is well established that cold weather kills many more people than hot weather.”

In an old interview (2009) at the Spectator, James Delingpole talked to Professor Ian Plimer, the Australian geologist who dispelled much of the nonsense:

“…geologists have always recognized that climate changes over time. Where we differ from a lot of people pushing Anthropogenic global warming is in our understanding of scale. They’re only interested in the last 150 years. Our time frame is 4,567 million years. So what they’re doing is the equivalent of trying to extrapolate the plot of Casablanca from one tiny bit of the love scene. And you can’t. It doesn’t work.”

“What Heaven And Earth sets out to do is restore a sense of scientific perspective to a debate which has been hijacked by ‘politicians, environmental activists and opportunists’. It points out, for example, that polar ice has been present on earth for less than 20 per cent of geological time; that extinctions of life are normal; that climate changes are cyclical and random; that the CO2 in the atmosphere — to which human activity contributes the tiniest fraction — is only 0.001 per cent of the total CO2 held in the oceans, surface rocks, air, soils and life; that CO2 is not a pollutant but a plant food; that the earth’s warmer periods — such as when the Romans grew grapes and citrus trees as far north as Hadrian’s Wall — were times of wealth and plenty.”

How did this common sense not get more traction? We can thank the media for that, and the global nonprofits funded by hateful billionaires.

Looking at the mind numbingly imbecilic headlines reminds us that the stupid people are in charge of everything right now – they are easier to control.

Plimer said “modern environmentalism is that it is driven by people who are ‘too wealthy’. ‘When I try explaining “global warming” to people in Iran or Turkey they have no idea what I’m talking about. Their life is about getting through to the next day, finding their next meal. Eco-guilt is a first-world luxury. It’s the new religion for urban populations which have lost their faith in Christianity. The IPCC report is their Bible. Al Gore and Lord Stern are their prophets.’”

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: California Politics, environment, Legislature

California’s COVID Comeback Intensifies, But Officials Say There’s No Cause for Alarm

September 2, 2023 By Rong-Gong Lin III 2 Comments

Outbreak investigations. Disrupted work schedules. Canceled vacations. Wearing masks.

Sound familiar?

COVID-19 is making a comeback in California. Coronavirus levels in wastewater are on the rise in the state’s most populated areas, and hospitalizations continue to tick upward as residents return from trips and head back to school.

The latest rebound, seen both in public health data and at-home tests, has led some to question what — if any — new measures they should consider taking to protect themselves. With Labor Day weekend right around the corner, some may wonder whether they should scale back or alter their plans.

While residents should be aware of current trends, and the steps they can take to reduce their risk of infection, the higher transmission rates aren’t “a cause for alarm,” Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said.

“We want everyone to enjoy this last weekend of the summer, and we think this can be easily done with some simple basic safety measures,” she said.

Such steps are taking on increasing importance given the first sustained COVID flare-up in months.

Coronavirus levels have more than doubled in Los Angeles’ wastewater since the start of summer, state data show, although they remain less than half of last winter’s peak. The rate at which reported test results are coming back positive is also up, now at 13.2% across California; at the start of summer, it was around 4%.

“These higher rates of transmission, while they’re not a cause for alarm, they do translate to more outbreaks in L.A. County, across schools, work sites and healthcare facilities,” Ferrer said. “Unfortunately, this often means missed days of work, missed learning and increased risk for those who are most susceptible to severe illness.”

In L.A. County, as of Thursday, there were 128 outbreak investigations in which new cases have appeared in the last four weeks. Eighty-six were in healthcare or community care settings, 20 in workplace settings, 12 in educational settings — including the L.A. Unified School District headquarters — five at sites serving people experiencing homelessness and five at correctional/detention facilities.

A number of work sites in the entertainment industry have experienced outbreaks recently, including the Directors Guild of America in Los Angeles, “The Masked Singer” studio at Red Studios Hollywood, Lionsgate Entertainment in Santa Monica and Walt Disney Feature Animation in Burbank, according to the county’s public health department.

People with COVID-19 are asked to stay home for at least five days after their first symptoms or their first positive test, whichever comes first.

The California Department of Public Health calculates that for every 100 people with the coronavirus in the state, 118 others are being infected by them, the highest transmission rate all summer.

During a news conference, the first held in months after what she acknowledged has been a “relatively calm summer,” Ferrer struck a largely calming tone. Coronavirus spread, though increasing, is nowhere near as far-reaching or disruptive as during the pandemic’s earlier phases.

Over the last week, Ferrer said, L.A. County has reported an average of about 571 new coronavirus cases a day — essentially double the figure from a month ago.

“Case numbers are relatively low compared to many other points this past year,” she said. “I also want to note that it’s a bit unfair to make those comparisons because there’s less reportable testing.”

Official case tallies have long been an undercount because of the prevalence of at-home testing, and that gap has only widened as public health departments wind down their screening efforts.

Though the rise in infections is also accompanied by an increase in hospitalizations, the latter does not appear to be climbing at a rate comparable to past surges.

New weekly COVID-19 hospitalizations in California have doubled since the beginning of summer but remain less than half of last summer’s peak — possibly because of enduring immunity from past vaccinations or infections.

Nationally, new weekly COVID-19 hospitalizations are more than double since the start of the summer, but only one-third of last summer’s peak.

The dramatic decrease in severe illness and hospitalization explains why there is little appetite for tactics such as universal mask-wearing orders, the last of which ended in Los Angeles County 18 months ago. Even mask-wearing requirements for healthcare workers have ended in recent months; most California counties dropped the requirement in April, and L.A. County ended its order on Aug. 11.

Masking orders at certain sites, such as workplaces, have been ordered specifically to quell an outbreak. Some hospitals have returned to mask mandates; Kaiser Permanente Santa Rosa recently imposed one for hospital employees in response to the latest increase in coronavirus infections.

“The immunity is stronger today than at any other point in the outbreak,” Dr. Mandy Cohen, the director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in a recent video briefing. “That means we’re moving toward COVID-19 being a more manageable illness with less severe illness.”

Compared to last summer, “we’re in a much different and better place in August of 2023,” Cohen said. “We have stronger immunity and tools to protect ourselves: We have vaccines, at-home tests, effective treatments and common-sense strategies like washing your hands and staying away from people when you’re sick.”

She added: “However, COVID-19 remains riskier if you’re unvaccinated, and riskier still if you are unvaccinated and [have] not had COVID as a prior infection. Your age and your underlying health conditions also matter.”

The rise in infections illustrates the importance of getting the newly updated COVID-19 vaccine as soon as it becomes available, possibly by mid-September if authorized as expected by federal authorities. The vaccine will be especially important for older people.

About 70% of COVID-19 hospitalizations are among those 65 and older, Cohen said. Those most at risk continue to be older people who are not current on their vaccinations. At least 45,000 COVID-19 deaths have been recorded nationally this year.

Immune protection from COVID-19 “does decrease over time. And we have to remember that the COVID virus continues to change,” Cohen said. And with mutations constantly keeping scientists watchful, “people need to make sure that they’re staying up to date on their COVID vaccines.”

For people who have never been vaccinated, and for some older residents and those at higher risk, it might be better to get the existing vaccine now and not wait for the newer version, Cohen said.

Still, getting the older shot now could delay a person’s ability to get the new shot. Patients should talk to their healthcare providers for individual advice.

People can get a COVID-19 vaccination and a flu shot at the same time. Generally, everyone 6 months and older should get an annual flu shot, officials say; the best time is in September and October.

This year’s COVID-19 vaccine, which will be reviewed at a CDC advisory committee meeting on Sept. 12, is designed against the Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5, unofficially known as Kraken.

Officials have been closely watching another upstart Omicron subvariant, BA.2.86, nicknamed Pirola. Not many cases have been identified in the U.S., but there is concern it could be more capable of causing infection in people who previously have had COVID-19. More study is needed.

Studies are still underway to evaluate the effectiveness of the forthcoming vaccine, according to a risk assessment by the CDC, although it is expected to remain “effective at reducing severe disease and hospitalization.”

Health experts continue to advise taking reasonable precautions to avoid COVID-19 infection. Though most people no longer wear masks routinely, some officials say that masking up in the highest-risk settings, such as on public transit and while boarding and exiting an airplane, can make a difference.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: California Politics, Covid-19, Los Angeles

Senator Dave Min Sentenced To Three Years Probation For Drunk-Driving Offense

September 1, 2023 By Evan Symon 1 Comment

Min’s DUI, conviction expected to greatly affect his 2024 Congressional run

Senator Dave Min (D-Orange County) was sentenced this week to three years probation for receiving a DUI in May, as well as having to pay over $2,000 in fines and being forced to complete a 30-hour state-licensed alcohol and drug education program.

According to the Capitol Protection Section of the California Highway Patrol (CHP), Senator Min (D-Orange County) was driving a Toyota Camry through Sacramento after 10 P.M. At 10:23 P.M., the CHP observed Min go south on Ninth Street just north of S Street without headlights on. Following him, they then witnessed him go through a red light at 9th Street and Broadway before finally pulling him over at Riverside and Broadway.

Earlier that night, Min had gone to a few bars with fellow Assembly members, lobbyists, and realtors, and was shown to have had some alcohol that night. He had then left in a state silver Camry.

The officers proceeded to conduct a DUI test on Min. However, he failed, and he was arrested on suspicion of driving with a blood alcohol level above the legal limit of 0.08%. Later reports revealed that he had blown a .15 on scene with later blood tests giving a .14 and .13 respectively. This was confirmed with Min then formally charged with a DUI misdemeanor, arrested, and sent to Sacramento County Jail. On Wednesday morning, May 3rd, the Senator was subsequently released and was given a July hearing date.

Later in May, footage of Min’s DUI arrest was released, leading to some to call for his resignation or for him to pull out of the 2024 Congressional race as a result. However, besides his hearing, his DUI has remained relatively quiet until this week when he was sentenced. Min pleaded no contest on Tuesday to his misdemeanor first-time DUI and received three years of unsupervised probation, $2,050 in fines, and a 30-hour state-licensed alcohol and drug education program that all first time DUI offenders must take.

Neither Min nor his representatives commented on the matter this week, nor has the Democratic Party. However, what is clear is that the DUI has significantly hurt Min’s chances of being elected to Congress next year, with both Republicans and Democrats previously chastising Min for getting a DUI last year. In particular, Harley Rouda, a former Democratic Congressman who was briefly in the running for the 47th Congressional seat earlier this year, backed the other Democrat running in the race, activist Joanna Weiss.

Republicans, meanwhile, are likely to use the DUI against Min during the race, something that could push the balance in their favor next year. While the 47th district slightly leans Democratic, Congresswoman Katie Porter (D-CA) barely squeaked out a win in the district last year, only beating Scott Baugh by around 9,000 votes in a close 51.7% to 48.3% race. With Baugh remaining popular, Rouda out because of a brain injury, and Porter running for the Senate instead, had expected Min to run a close race. With the DUI conviction this week now out there, many experts say that Min is now looking at much less support than initially believed.

Three years probation

“Min managed to avoid a more embarrassing sentence,” said Malik Griffin, a Los Angeles polling analyst. “He avoided having his drivers license being revoked and any jail time besides what he got the night of the arrest. But the fact that he got a DUI in the first place and got three years probation and other punishments will still hurt him. Specifically, he has many supporters who are older liberals who tend to be more strait-laced and are more conservative in the non-political way. A DUI isn’t really forgivable for them, so you could see many of them switch support to Weiss or Baugh.”

“The GOP is really going to push this in adds, in debates, and pepper it in just enough to make people not forget. Democrats will be more forgivable, although with some people, like Baugh, they really don’t like it and have switched support to Weiss as a result. Min had a lot of people calling for his resignation or not to run next year, and with this sentence, Min now has a permanent black mark on his record. It’s not the worst thing in the world to have happened, but many Congressional campaigns have been suspended on far less too.”

Click here for the full article in the California Globe

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: California Politics, DUI, MIN

California Mom Receives $100K Settlement after School Socially Transitioned Daughter Without Consent

September 1, 2023 By Ari Blaff 4 Comments

Jessica Konen won a $100,000 judgment against the Spreckels Union School District in Monterey County, Calif., after they secretly “socially transitioned” her daughter, permitting her to use the boy’s bathroom and male pronouns without her knowledge or consent.

“If you choose not to fight for your children, then they will fight and take your children,” Jessica Konen said in a statement following the ruling. “Stand up parents, it’s your right to be able to parent your own children.”

Konen’s lawsuit, assisted by the conservative non-profit Center for American Liberty (CAL), argued that after Alicia joined the school’s “Equality Club” in Grade 6, she began learning “LGBT concepts” as well as exploring transgenderism and bisexuality. Shortly afterward, the school actively abetted Alicia’s social transition, “giving her articles on how to conceal her supposed new gender identity from her mother and giving her a ‘Gender Support Plan’ that required school staff to refer to her by a male name,” the organization notes.

Alicia’s mother was reportedly kept in the dark while educators in Spreckels District pushed the girl to identify her frustrations stemming from not abiding by how she “truly felt inside.”

When Konen sought to intervene and undo the surreptitious transition, the district “attempted to actively deceive” her by using Alicia’s “birth name and corresponding pronouns in her presence while using” Alicia’s “new name and pronouns when she was not present,” the lawsuit explains.

“Ms. Konen simply wants to be a part of her daughter’s life and exercise her rights as a parent to direct the upbringing of her child,” the legal documents add. “Ms. Konen brings this action to vindicate her fundamental right under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution to direct the upbringing of her minor child.”

Spreckels Union School District did not respond to a request for comment.

“They need to understand their place, and they need to stay in their place. And schools nowadays, they’re awful. So, I’m going to fight this fight and keep fighting this fight,” Konen told Fox News Digital on Tuesday.

“I am not going to allow this to keep happening to children.”

On Monday, the state’s attorney general Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against Chino Valley Unified School District after it instituted a new policy of contacting parents when children seek to change their personal pronouns or gender identity.

“It tramples on students’ rights,” Bonta said during a press conference announcing the suit, adding that the new procedure amounted to “forced outing” of trans kids.

Click here to read the full article at the National Review

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: California Politics, equality, transagender

Will California Lawmakers Fall for Fraudulent Study Justifying Unjustified Prison Guard Union Giveaways?

Prosecutors ask judge to impose long sentence for Northern California Jan. 6 rioter

John Eastman’s Disastrously Bad Idea

The Great Climate Change Con isn’t Resonating With Normal People

Senator Dave Min Sentenced To Three Years Probation For Drunk-Driving Offense

Three years probation

Recent Posts

Connect With CPR On Twitter