Podcasts about obama's department

Kipp Mueller is a resident of Santa Clarita and a Democratic candidate for State Senate in the 21st District, challenging incumbent Scott Wilk. Kipp grew up in Sacramento. He graduated from the University of California, Berkeley in 2008 and then Columbia Law School in 2014, where he studied and researched labor and employment law. He was part of President Obama's Department of Justice in the Consumer Protection Branch, and joined the Santa Clara District Attorney's office consumer fraud and sex crime unit. Later, he became a small business owner, creating an online education company. He is currently a partner at a worker's rights attorney law firm where he represents employees and union members against large corporations. Kipp also works as a pro bono asylum attorney fighting for asylum seekers who are currently in ICE detention. As a candidate, Kipp has a platform which, in all honesty, is pretty much standard Democratic fair - he believes in a strong middle class, quality health care, etc. etc. but the thing that had me wanting to interview Kipp is he considers homelessness a critical issue. At my first real meeting with him, he had specific ideas and plans on how to help alleviate this huge problem in California. His ideas impressed me and the homeless issue is a particularly important one to me. Some have complained about Kipp as a candidate due to having moved to the Santa Clarita Valley just last year. That nasty word of "carpetbagger" has been thrown around at him by a few, including some of his opponents. Whatever your feeling about so-called carpetbagging, Kipp has become very actively involved with the Democratic organizations in the SCV and has shown a commitment to this valley which appears to reach beyond just running for State Senate. It could be argued that Kipp faces a tough challenge against Scott Wilk, but the reality is the way the political demographics have changed in this district, it could pretty much be anyone's race to win or, lose. I want to thank Kipp for taking the time to meet with me and just make it known that Senator Wilk has an open invitation to appear on the show as soon it becomes convenient for him. Click on the link below for a video version of this podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP5pdDE_sfE&feature=youtu.be

Vanita Gupta, head of the Civil Rights Division in Obama's Department of Justice and now head of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, talks about where we are and where we're going

Sean sits down with Luke Rosiak, Investigative Reporter for The Daily Caller, to discuss the role of a senior DOJ official, Bruce Ohr, who failed to obtain a conflict of interesest waiver for his wife's work with Fusion GPS. Should we spend more time trying to make up a Russian collusion story or should we focus on draining the swamp? The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://news.iheart.com/podcast-advertisers

In today's episode, we take a look at a rule first proposed by President Obama's Department of Labor in 2016 that would require financial advisers to abide by a "fiduciary" duty with their clients.  What does that mean?  Listen and find out! We begin with a relevant note about the status of the rule, which is due to be implemented in 60 days. Next, in our main segment, we take a look at the implications of the Fiduciary Rule by consulting an expert; in this case, certified financial planner Ben Offit, CFP® who has a somewhat novel take on this enhanced obligation.  He breaks down what the proposed rule means for you and the financial professionals you might hire. After the main segment, we turn to a petition that has been garnering significant attention on the Internet:  #ReVote2017.  What is it?  Is it really pending before the Supreme Court, and what does that mean? Finally, we end with a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam question #14 regarding the tort of the intentional infliction of emotional distress.  Remember that TTTBE issues a new question every Friday, followed by the answer on next Tuesday's show.  Don't forget to play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and/or our Facebook Page and quoting the Tweet or Facebook Post that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Show Notes & Links To find out more about Ben Offit, CFP® and his services, you can visit his firm, Clear Path Advisory, or email Ben at ben@clearpathadvisory.com. This is the announcement that the Fiduciary Rule has been postponed for 60 days. You can also check out the text of the Fiduciary Rule itself. This is the hilarious petition for writ of mandamus filed by the #ReVote 2017 petitioners. And this is the docket entry for their petition, which is currently pending before the Court and will be denied on March 17, 2017, one week from today. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com Direct Download

Today's episode is part two of our two-part series on pending changes to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").  As we've previously mentioned, in 2016, the Obama Department of Labor promulgated new rules requiring that employees who are "exempt" from the FLSA's overtime requirements must earn at least $47,476 per year.  A district court judge issued an injunction blocking those rules from going into effect; that decision is currently pending on expedited review before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.  In this episode, Andrew continues his explanation as to why he thinks those rules are going to eventually go into effect and what that means for employers and employees. We begin, however, with a thoughtful question from friend of the show Noah Lugeons regarding how the FLSA's tipping rules interact with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Is it illegal for employers to rely on tips knowing how inequally tips are handed out to men and minorities?  Listen and find out! After our main segment on the FLSA, we answer a delightfully mad question from Robert Rautio regarding the supposed "right to travel" in the Constitution.  Answering this doozy takes us back into the weird and wonderful world of "sovereign citizens" -- you won't want to miss it! Finally, we end with a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam question #8 about whether a company dumping toxic waste has a duty to warn trespassers.  Remember that TTTBE issues a new question every Friday, followed by the answer on next Tuesday's show.  Don't forget to play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and/or our Facebook Page and quoting the Tweet or Facebook Post that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Show Notes & Links The relevant provisions of the FLSA for this episode are 29 USC § 207 (maximum hours) and 29 USC § 213 (exempt employees). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 begins at 42 USC § 2000e and can be found here. This is the original rule promulgated by Obama's Department of Labor. Here is the judicial injunction blocking the implementation of the rule. And here is the judge's decision not to overturn his own injunction after a motion for reconsideration. Please laugh at -- but DO NOT FILE! -- this suggested "brief" by the weirdos at The Lawful Path who think you can get out of a traffic ticket by filing this nonsense.  (You can't.) And here's another absolutely bonkers list of random string-cites that purports to show that you have an absolute right to travel guaranteed by the Constitution.  (You don't.) Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com Direct Download

Today's episode is part one of a two-part series on pending changes to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").  As we've previously mentioned, in 2016, the Obama Department of Labor promulgated new rules requiring that employees who are "exempt" from the FLSA's overtime requirements must earn at least $47,476 per year.  A district court judge issued an injunction blocking those rules from going into effect; that decision is currently pending on expedited review before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.  In this episode, Andrew explains why he thinks those rules are going to eventually go into effect and what that means for employers and employees. We begin, however, with a listener correction regarding the FLSA and tipped employees.  As it turns out, Andrew mis-spoke on a prior episode and employers must ensure that an employee's total compensation (including tips) meets the federal minimum wage. After our main segment on the FLSA, the much-beloved "Are You A Cop?" segment returns with a myth about President Trump revoking the commutation of Chelsea Manning's prison sentence. Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam question #7 about hearsay.  Remember that TTTBE issues a new question every Friday, followed by the answer on next Tuesday's show.  Don't forget to play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and/or our Facebook Page and quoting the Tweet or Facebook Post that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Show Notes & Links The relevant provisions of the FLSA for this episode are 29 USC § 207 (maximum hours) and 29 USC § 213 (exempt employees). The DOL Fact Sheet #15 referred to listener Victoria McNair is here. This is the original rule promulgated by Obama's Department of Labor. Here is the judicial injunction blocking the implementation of the rule. And here is the judge's decision not to overturn his own injunction after a motion for reconsideration. Finally, here's the New York Times story about President Obama commuting Chelsea Manning's sentence. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

A Federal Judge has now ordered every lawyer in the Department of Justice to take a three hour course in ethics every single year because too many DOJ attorneys lied in his open court. But, the problem of lying to Americans isn't just restricted to the DOJ. It's happening all across the Obama Administration.