The Conservative Party of Canada should cover the costs of the audit of Senator Pamela Wallin's expenses by independent consulting firm Deloitte, Opposition Leader Tom Mulcair said in an interview with host Chris Hall on CBC Radio's The House.
"I think that Stephen Harper and his party at least should be obliged to reimburse the amount of money that taxpayers are going to be on the hook for, because since the beginning everyone's known that there's a problem, and they stalled and denied," said Mulcair.
The Senate will pay the independent auditing firm $126,988 for their work, digging into the travel and expense claims for Wallin, who resigned from the Conservative caucus under pressure last May. Wallin was ordered to repay $121,348 in total, of which she has already paid $38,369.29.
Mulcair pointed to Harper's quick defence of Wallin in the House of Commons last winter. At the time, the prime minister said he had looked at her expenses and found no fault.
“Her travel costs are comparable to any parliamentarian travelling from that particular area of the country over that period of time,” Harper said in Question Period in February.
The Prime Minister's Office has since said that Wallin's expenses were not out of the ordinary, and Harper was not basing his comments on specifics.
Listen to the full interview with NDP Leader Tom Mulcair on The House.

Wal-Mart workers in Weyburn, Sask., vote to dump union

Chain's only remaining union in Canada never achieved collective bargaining deal

Workers at Canada's only unionized Wal-Mart, in Weyburn Sask., have voted 51-5 to decertify their union.
Although the United Food and Commercial Workers was certified as a bargaining agent in 2008, the two parties have never reached a collective bargaining agreement.
After a decertification drive was launched at the store and employees voted on that, the union argued the process was unfair and sought to block the votes from being counted.
But on Thursday, after the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the union's application to deal with the case, the way was cleared for the count to be held.
The Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board still needs to decide if the results are binding.

Long-running dispute 

The Weyburn decertification drive was the latest chapter in the fight between Wal-Mart and the union that's been going on for nine years.

Wal-Mart has long resisted unionization at its North American stores, and the Weyburn store is the only unionized Wal-Mart in Canada.
Two other Canadian Wal-Marts have been certified in the past: the store at St. Hyacinthe, Que., and a store at Jonquière, Que.
However, employees at the Hyacinthe outlet later voted to decertify, and Wal-Mart closed the Jonquière store.

Will Reggie Love's loose lips sink Obama's ship?

'Body man' remarks about birth certificate, bin Laden raid yanked from YouTube

A YouTube video featuring an interview with President Obama’s former personal aide Reggie Love was removed after his comments surfaced in news reports highlighting some private details of Obama’s life in the White House, according to the Washington Examiner.
The video featured a July 18 interview with Obama’s “body man” and Jim Newton, the editor-at-large of the Los Angeles Times, during a lunch hosted by the Artists and Athletes Alliance.

 A promotional still in the video describes the session as “a private briefing on decision making in the Oval Office with Reggie Love.”
The video features highlights from the interview, as Love talked about daily life with the president, including the day when Osama bin Laden was killed.
While advisers huddled in the Situation Room, Love revealed Obama played cards to distract himself during the day-long mission.
“[Obama] was like, ‘I’m not, I’m not going to be down there, I can’t watch this entire thing’,” Love said. “We must have played 15 hands, 15 games of Spades.”
Love, who left the White House at the end of 2011 to complete his MBA at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, also joked about Obama’s birth certificate.

Obama bans U.S. companies from competition

The Obama administration intends to keep contractors on stand-by to help officials evaluate conditions on the Mexican side of the U.S. border, but U.S. companies are not allowed to apply for the work.
Tracking remittances – funds sent over a distance – from the U.S. to Mexico is one of several possible research and consulting services that Obama through the U.S. Agency for International Development may solicit.

Such a task will not support, for example, tax- or drug-enforcement operations. Instead, it would help determine the extent to which the funds subsequently are “invested into social or community development projects” in Mexico, according to a Request for Quotations that WND discovered via routine database research.
Only Mexican organizations – or, at the very least, groups based in Mexico that are majority owned or managed by Mexican citizens – may submit responses to the solicitation, the Scope of Work emphasizes.
USAID/Mexico needs a “local quick-response mechanism” to support projects not already covered under other agency activities, the document says.

Un-American, Unqualified… Unimpeachable?

Before the August Congressional recess, the mainstream media predicted a series of angry town hall confrontations between Latinos and Congressmen opposed to immigration reform.
Those protests haven’t panned out.
Instead, the angriest of confrontations have been between Congressmen and constituents upset that Barack Obama hasn’t been impeached, or about Obama’s questionable citizenship. Rep. Blake Farenthold of Texas answered some Obama questions candidly and his answers were captured on video.
Here is what he said: “I think, unfortunately, the horse is already out of the barn on this, on the whole birth certificate issue… The original Congress when his eligibility came up should have looked into it and they didn’t. I’m not sure how we fix it.”
Farenthold continued: “You tie into a question I get a lot: ‘If everyone’s so unhappy with what the president’s done, why don’t you impeach him?’ I’ll give you a real frank answer about that: If we were to impeach the president tomorrow, you could probably get the votes in the House of Representatives to do it. But it would go to the Senate and he wouldn’t be convicted.”
Farenthold explained the impeachment process. The House of Representatives impeaches, and then a trial is held in the U.S. Senate. The Senate needs to vote 2/3 for impeachment conviction to actually remove a president from office. Half of this process is what happened during the Bill Clinton presidency. The House voted to impeach Clinton, but the Senate failed to remove him from office.
Handling a similar question with less tact was Congressman Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma. He was confronted by a citizen activist who wanted to give him “a 71-page affidavit” from Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse outlining charges concerning Obama’s ID fraud. Mullin refused to receive the documents, stepping back and saying, “Hold on, I don’t even want it.”
He called the argument over Obama’s birth certificate “a dead issue” because “we had four years to get that proven, we didn’t… So when I say we lost the argument, we lost that argument. Now let’s move on to some other issues.”

Obama Ignores U.S. History And Constitutional Principles

At his press conference last Friday, President Obama said that when Congress won't agree to what he wants, he will act alone. That statement, which he has made before, should send shivers through freedom-loving Americans.
The president was asked where he gets the authority to delay the Affordable Care Act's employer mandate, even though the law states that the mandate "shall" go into effect Jan. 1, 2014. The Obama administration announced the delay on July 3, without seeking Congress' help in changing the law.
In response, Obama said that "in a normal political environment, it would have been easier for me to simply call up the speaker and say, ‘You know what, this is a tweak that doesn't go to the essence of the law ... so let's make a technical change to the law.' That would be the normal thing that I would prefer to do."
But Obama explained that he took a different route because Republicans control the House of Representatives and ardently oppose ObamaCare.
Obama's statement reveals how disconnected this president is from this nation's history and constitutional principles. Divided government is the norm in the United States. Most modern presidents have had to govern with an uncooperative Congress or at least one house of Congress controlled by the other major party.
With the exception of Richard Nixon, these presidents - from Eisenhower to Reagan to Clinton and both Bushes - have not tried to exempt themselves from the Constitution.
Article II, Sec. 3 of the Constitution commands the president to faithfully execute the law. Courts have consistently ruled that presidents have little discretion about it. Obama can't pick and choose what parts of the Affordable Care Act he enforces and when.
The framers duplicated the safeguards their English ancestors fought hard to win against tyrannical monarchs. Most important, the English Bill of Rights of 1689 barred an executive from suspending the law.
The tug and pull between the president and an uncooperative Congress is what the framers intended. It's checks and balances in action. Obama has no patience for this constitutional system.

Hollywood Producer Bettina Viviano says Obama threatened and silenced Clinton with murder of daughter

Farmers To Face Fines Or Prison Sentences For Selling Food Directly To Customers - See more at: http://govtslaves.info/farmers-to-face-fines-or-prison-sentences-for-selling-food-directly-to-customers/#sthash.uE2INQxc.btkcEBZH.dpuf

This would seem to embody the USDA’s advisory, “Know your farmer, know your food,” right? Not exactly.
For the USDA and its sister food regulator, the FDA, there’s a problem: many of the farmers are distributing the food via private contracts like herd shares and leasing arrangements, which fall outside the regulatory system of state and local retail licenses and inspections that govern public food sales.
In response, federal and state regulators are seeking legal sanctions against farmers in Maine, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and California, among others. These sanctions include injunctions, fines, and even prison sentences.
Food sold by unlicensed and uninspected farmers is potentially dangerous say the regulators, since it can carry pathogens like salmonella, campylobacter, and E.coli O157:H7, leading to mild or even serious illness.
Most recently, Wisconsin’s attorney general appointed a special prosecutor to file criminal misdemeanor charges against an Amish farmer for alleged failure to have retail and dairy licenses, and the proceedings turned into a high-profile jury trial in late May that highlighted the depth of conflict: following five days of intense proceedings, the 12-person jury acquitted the farmer, Vernon Hershberger, on all the licensing charges, while convicting him of violating a 2010 holding order on his food, which he had publicly admitted.
- See more at: http://govtslaves.info/farmers-to-face-fines-or-prison-sentences-for-selling-food-directly-to-customers/#sthash.xZKYlUvW.dpuf

 Best Facebook post of the week: