Ex Felons For Hire

The Idaho Legislature will once again consider “ban the box” legislation that is intended to make it easier for people convicted of a crime to apply for jobs.

Such legislation was proposed last year, but was pulled by its sponsor, Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, who confirmed she would be trying a version of the bill again …

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

The Idaho Legislature will once again consider “ban the box” legislation that is intended to make it easier for people convicted of a crime to apply for jobs.

Such legislation was proposed last year, but was pulled by its sponsor, Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, who confirmed she would be trying a version of the bill again …

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

The Idaho Legislature will once again consider “ban the box” legislation that is intended to make it easier for people convicted of a crime to apply for jobs.

Such legislation was proposed last year, but was pulled by its sponsor, Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, who confirmed she would be trying a version of the bill again …

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

The Idaho Legislature will once again consider “ban the box” legislation that is intended to make it easier for people convicted of a crime to apply for jobs.

Such legislation was proposed last year, but was pulled by its sponsor, Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, who confirmed she would be trying a version of the bill again …

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

The Idaho Legislature will once again consider “ban the box” legislation that is intended to make it easier for people convicted of a crime to apply for jobs.

Such legislation was proposed last year, but was pulled by its sponsor, Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, who confirmed she would be trying a version of the bill again …

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

Like a false prophet of moral righteousness, James Comey, former FBI director is constantly pretending to be a courageous hero fighting for truth and justice. In reality, he is a hateful, vengeful, arrogant narcissist who abused power and fostered one of the most corrupt federal departments this country has ever seen. But we can report the walls are closing in on James Comey.

We have, yet, another major development in our “Hannity Watch” on the “Deep State.” Former FBI general counsel James Baker, the man who served as Jim Comey’s top lawyer, he, too, like others. is now criminal investigation for leaking to the media. And Baker has long faced scrutiny over his ties to “Mother Jones” reporter David Corn. Remember, Corn was the first journalist to report the existence of Christopher Steele’s dirty dossier in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election.

So, let’s keep track of Comey’s leadership at the FBI. You know, Mr. Integrity. Now, of course, we know Comey himself was fired by President Trump. His second in command, Andrew McCabe, was fired for lying. Andrew McCabe is now currently under a criminal investigation. Comey’s top investigator, Peter Strzok, well, he was fired for his obvious political bias. He may soon be under criminal investigation, as well as his ex- girlfriend, top FBI lawyer Lisa Page. She was forced to resign over her bias.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM SEAN HANNITY.

Then have you Comey’s chief of staff, James Rybicki, he has resigned. And now, we know Comey’s general counsel Jim Baker now, we can report, under an official criminal investigation, for something Comey himself that he admitted to doing when he leaked the FBI memos about President Trump. Remember, to his professor friend at Columbia, and then to the New York Times for the very purpose of spurring a special counsel investigation, which coincidentally — well, that’s being carried out by Comey’s close friend Robert Mueller. How nice.

So, what did all the people have in common? They all wanted Hillary Clinton to win, one of them 100 million to zero. They all hated — and continue to hate — Donald Trump. They all worked together to rig our political system and fix the outcome of the 2016 election by using their powerful top position — not rank and file — the top positions, the FBI and the DOJ, to help Hillary Clinton win, to cheat, to rig an election.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE ENTIRE EPISODE.

And as we now know, they had an emergency policy and a media leak strategy in case Clinton didn’t win, 100 million to zero. And after James Comey was fired, top officials inside the FBI were angry. They acted out of that anger, malice, emotion. And without any evidence, no probable cause or reasonable suspicion, they ended up launching what was a partisan investigation into the President of the United States, with a wild conspiracy accusing the president of working with Vladimir Putin to fire Comey because Russia told him to do it. No evidence.

They were angry. This was their punishment. This was their payback — abusing power to attack the president that they never wanted elected.

Now, this brings us to a “Hannity” history lesson. Glenn Greenwald recently pointed out that the FBI in their investigation into Donald Trump used eerily similar tactics to those pioneered by J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover served as an FBI director for many decades, and he became infamous for his aggressive investigation into Americans who he suspected had ties to the Soviet Union. Hoover even suspected FDR’s vice president, Henry Wallace. He conducted a lengthy probe and surveillance simply because Hoover disagreed with Wallace’s policy.

The FBI should never be in the business of investigating political differences or policy decisions. They shouldn’t be lashing out because of personal opinions that they have. The 99 percent of FBI field agents of rank-and-file do their jobs. They investigate crimes and criminals. Not politics, not policy, and especially not launching a counterintelligence investigation into a duly elected president with zero evidence because you don’t like him.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP.

On Tuesday, William Barr, President Trump’s pick to be our next attorney general, faced his first day of confirmation hearings on the Hill. Sen. Lindsey Graham grilled him about whether or not he would investigate the FBI’s baseless, corrupt investigation into President Trump. “Mr. Chairman. I think there were a number of investigations as I understand it going on in the department,” Barr said.

That’s a good sign, that William Barr cares about equal justice, equal application of our laws and says he will serve as a fair attorney general. Mr. Barr, there are no shortage of corrupt Trump haters to investigate and many with a lot of power that they have abuse. No shortage of crimes here.

We’re going to begin to lay out a road map of corruption for the new attorney general to investigate. Fox News’ Gregg Jarrett has compiled a comprehensive list. We’re going to start with FISA abuse. That is lying to a FISA court. That is committing a fraud against a court to get a warrant to spy on a Trump campaign associate using Hillary Clinton’s bought and paid for phony dossier that was full of Russian lies.

James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates, Rod Rosenstein all likely committed fraud on a FISA court by presenting Hillary Clinton’s dirty dossier as unbiased, verified evidence, when reality, it was never verified, never corroborated and full of Russian lies. And they never told the courts that it was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton.

That’s a good sign, that William Barr cares about equal justice, equal application of our laws and says he will serve as a fair attorney general. Mr. Barr, there are no shortage of corrupt Trump haters to investigate and many with a lot of power that they have abuse. No shortage of crimes here.

Next up, Mr. Barr, if you get this job, you need to look into the theft and leaking of government documents. Now, Jim Comey obviously committed a serious crime when he intentionally leaked his FBI memos about his conversations with the president. It’s important to also look at abuse of power charges that would be applied to many of the same names: Comey, McCabe, Strzok, all fired. Lisa Page, resigned and shamed. Bruce Ohr, demoted twice – he should have been fired. All using their high positions in our federal government to persecute those they disagreed with politically. All trying to get Hillary Clinton get elected and then having an insurance policy, and a media leak strategy if, in fact, Donald Trump did win.

Let’s not forget about lying to the FBI. After all, this crime shouldn’t only apply an American war hero like General Flynn and Trump campaign staffer like George Papadopoulos, who just spent two weeks in jail for nothing. Andrew McCabe was literally fired over that charge. Is he going to receive the same treatment as General Flynn and be prosecuted?

Now, the DOJ also will need to tackle the unauthorized leaks. We now know that James Baker is already facing a criminal investigation over this charge. But so, too are we going to look at John Brennan and James Clapper? What about Susan Rice? And what about Samantha Powers? Shouldn’t they be investigated over the massive amount of names that they unmasked while serving in the final year of the Obama administration?

And because of James Comey’s biased investigation into Hillary Clinton and exoneration before an investigation, there’s an obvious violation of the Espionage Act. Mr. Barr must also revisit Hillary Clinton’s various crimes, like, deleting subpoenaed emails and deleting your hard drive and washing it with BleachBit and busting up devices and ripping out SIM cards.

Adapted from Sean Hannity’s monologue from “Hannity” on January 15, 2019.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Criminals run free while authorities drown in open arrest warrants  Worcester Telegram

Millions of Americans are wanted on criminal arrest warrants, including hundreds of thousands of fugitives accused of murder, rape, robbery or assault, while …

Source

A garda report has found that 3,500 children got away with committing almost 8,000 crimes, including serious crimes, over a seven-year period because gardaí did not do their jobs properly.

The report shows the juvenile offenders, the majority of whom were already known to gardaí, should have been prosecuted, but were not.

More than 3,400 victims were affected by these crimes and An Garda Síochána is to write to them to apologise and offer support.

Three quarters of the crimes not properly investigated relate to public order, theft, traffic and criminal damage, but also included are 55 serious crimes, including the rape of a woman, another serious sexual offence and a case of child neglect.

The figures have been published today in a garda report, which reviewed the Youth Referrals Scheme from 2010 to 2017.

Garda Commissioner Drew Harris issued a public apology when he appeared before the Policing Authority this afternoon.

He said the work of 3,400 gardaí is being examined by chief superintendents to see whether or not disciplinary measures are required, adding that most of the cases are concentrated in very busy divisions.

The figure represents over a quarter of the force.

A national helpline – 1800-589 589 - has been set up for people who feel they may have been affected.

The service will operate from Monday to Sunday from 7am to 10pm for the next two weeks.

Commissioner Harris said most of the children were habitual, recidivist child criminals, juvenile offenders already well known to gardaí.

On behalf of An Garda Síochána, he said: ”I want to apologise to more than 3,000 young people that we have let down.”

He said each of these cases should have been investigated and gardaí have let society and the individuals involved down by not fulfilling their obligations to them. 

“I want to apologise to those young people we let down, vulnerable young people, we should have done better by them, we failed. It was caused by organisational and individual failings.”

Mr Harris said what has been published today is an interim report and undoubtedly some individual numbers will change.

He said they need to take into account when investigating the cases individual gardaí were involved in and look at a discipline process that may then follow, adding that they need to ensure the system is working properly today.

He said he hoped it would not take away from the work that is being done in relation to the youth diversion programme and preventing crime. 

The Officer in charge of the Garda Youth Diversion Programme has admitted that thousands of juvenile offenders were not prosecuted for multiple offences.

Assistant Commissioner Pat Leahy told the Policing Authority that 2,500 offenders were not prosecuted for up to two offences, another 870 had between three and ten, a further 35 had committed over 20 crimes while another seven youths were not prosecuted for more than 20 offences.

Cases

More than 158,521 youth referrals were examined and it was found that:

• In 16,877 cases there was no prosecution
• 7,894 (5%) had not been properly progressed by gardaí
• Another 4,851 were due to insufficient evidence to proceed
• Another 2,659 could not be prosecuted because of the actions of the injured party
• The remainder did not proceed because a suspect had died or could not be found (497)

Or

•  A time delay (383)

Or

• No crime had been committed (291)

Or

• It was not in the public interest to proceed (262)

And

•  as a small number of other reasons (40).

Types of crimes

Of 7,894 crimes that should have been prosecuted, 73% of them were for public order.

However, gardaí say that 55 of those not dealt with were serious crimes, including the rape of a woman, another serious sexual offence, child neglect, threats to kill, aggravated burglary, violent disorder, and escaping from prison.

Offenders

Almost 3,489 committed the crimes not properly dealt with by gardaí. Most of them were habitual, recidivist child criminals, juvenile offenders already well known to gardaí.

On average each child had come to garda attention seven times (four prior referrals, two prior charges, one prior summons) before they committed the crime they should have been prosecuted for and 34 times (ten referrals, 17 charges, seven summons) after it.

Victims

Almost 3,480 have been the victims of these crimes that should have been prosecuted; 2,492 were personal victims and another 988 were individual business victims.

Some even received a letter saying a person had been identified for the offence committed against them, but the offender was not subsequently prosecuted.

Gardaí say measures have been put in place to ensure this does not happen again.

They point out that the 8,000 cases represent 5% of the total number of incidents dealt with over the seven year period (2010-2017) that the review examined.

They also said that 96% of the incidents occurred between 2010 and 2015, followed by a marked reduction after the introduction of a new PULSE update in 2016, which introduced computer-based monitoring and reduced paper-based cases.

The rate of cases dropped from 7.3% in 2010 to 0.7% in 2017.

A new National Bureau for Child Diversion has been established headed by a chief superintendent, staffing and supervision has been increased, standard operating procedures for youth referrals and mandatory training programmes for gardaí have been introduced.

The Minister for Justice and Equality, Charlie Flanagan, and Minister of State, David Stanton, who has special responsibility for youth justice, have described the report as “unacceptable”.

Minister Flanagan said “The failure to properly manage these cases is very concerning.  I welcome the fact that the Garda Commissioner, Drew Harris, has shown a dedication to tackle these problems urgently and take all appropriate action. Addressing any failings by individual Gardaí is clearly a matter for the Commissioner himself and his team.

The Ministers said they would be keeping the matter under continuing review.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source

In 2016 and 2017, Colorado’s legislature took up the question of whether to prohibit employers from asking job applicants up-front about their criminal records. Both times, committees in the Republican-controlled Senate rejected the idea.

But it’s a new day at the Capitol, with Democrats having seized control of the Senate in November while maintaining a majority in the House. And on the opening day of this year’s legislative session, Democratic Reps. Leslie Herod and Jovan Melton filed a bill to restrict how and when public- and private-sector employers can inquire about applicants’ criminal histories.

Such restrictions already exist in 11 states, and the Herod/Melton bill mirrors those states’ actions, which are parts of a movement commonly referred to as “Ban the Box” — as in, the little box on job applications where one might put a check mark to indicate they’ve got a criminal record.

“The data is there, showing that when you give someone an opportunity to have a face-to-face conversation with an employer, to get out of that application process, they’re more likely to get that job,” said Herod, who represents northeast Denver.

“All we’re trying to do is ensure that people aren’t automatically screened out for a mistake they made in their past and that they’ve paid their time for. This will allow them to sit next to an employer one-on-one and say, ‘Here’s what I did in my past, here’s who I am now and here’s how I plan to move forward.’ Ban the Box will give them that opportunity.”

If passed, the bill would also ban employers from advertising that people with criminal records can’t apply for open positions. (They’d be excluded in cases where law prohibits employment of individuals with certain records; Ban the Box would not, for example, let a child sex offender apply to be a schoolteacher.)

These rules are already in place for government employers in Colorado and 32 other states. But as of 2016 there were about 1.8 million Coloradans with criminal records, according to a Department of Justice Survey, and having to check that little box on job applications can often effectively disqualify them for contention.

“For many of these people, “involvement with the justice system has led to perpetual unemployment and income instability for themselves and their families,” argued the Colorado Center on Law and Policy in a memo advocating for Ban the Box.

CCLP and other bill supporters say it’s much more effective to advocate for oneself in person than it is through a form or an email.

“In this day and age, so many job applications are online, and when someone clicks the box indicating they have a criminal history, many of these are automatically axed,” said CCLP attorney Jack Regenbogen, who’s worked on the issue since Colorado first debated it at the legislature. “People get screened out without ever getting a foot in the door.”

Related: Colorado prison inmates fight wildfires but can’t work as firefighters once they’re released

In the past in Colorado, even some of those people sympathetic to the notion that people with criminal histories deserve job opportunities have been uncomfortable with Ban the Box on a philosophical level.

The day the bill died in 2016, State Sen. Owen Hill, a Republican from Colorado Springs, summed up the opposition: “For the government to go out and tell private employers what to do violates the role of what the government is. I think there are many other things we should be working on. But the government telling private employers what they can and can’t do is not the solution.”

It’s not just Republican lawmakers who feel that way; the Colorado Chamber of Commerce has opposed Ban the Box, too, on similar grounds.

Other skeptics include anti-racism advocates who might seem like obvious supporters, but who harbor concerns about the effort’s side effects. A 2017 study from researchers at Rutgers University and the University of Michigan — it involved sending out 15,000 fake job applications to employers in New York and New Jersey, both before and after Ban the Box policies were implemented — found that these policies sometimes have the counterintuitive effect of increasing discrimination by employers.

“Before (Ban the Box), white applicants to employers with the box received 7 percent more callbacks than similar black applicants, but (Ban the Box) increased this gap to 43%,” the researchers wrote. “We believe that the best interpretation of these results is that employers are relying on exaggerated impressions of real-world racial differences in felony conviction rates.”

Some Colorado supporters of the bill acknowledge that the 2017 study and others like it have unearthed troubling numbers. But, they argue, those findings shouldn’t be deterrents for legislators considering Ban the Box bills.

“I think that the main problem raised by these studies is not Ban the Box,” Regenbogen said, “but rather that there’s systemic racism in the hiring process, which can manifest as racial profiling of people of color as criminals. The reality is that Ban the Box is working, and it increases employment opportunities for people with records and changes employer attitudes.”

Studies around the country have shown that removing employers’ option of screening up-front for criminal backgrounds does improve job prospects for people with records, and does alter attitudes.

One study by the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission tested pairs of individuals with similar resumes except that one in the pair would have a criminal record and the other would not. Having the opportunity to move beyond the initial application stage and meet face-to-face with employers was found to improve prospects for the job applicants with criminal records by 15 percent.

Herod makes the case that her bill not only seeks to resolve an problem of equity, but is also a workforce issue, given that former criminals with steady employment are consistently shown to be less likely to break the law again or face housing crises.

“If they have good employment, it’s a key factor,” she said. “We want people to have real jobs once they get back into society.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source