Archive for June 4th, 2018

The Pronk Pops Show 1087, June 5, 2018, Story 1: Labor Participation Rate at 62.7% Still Way Below 66-67% Rate in Bush and Clinton Years and 95.9 Million Americans Not In Labor Force — An Increase of 170,000 in May — Heading Towards 100 Million — Videos — Story 2: Supreme Court Rules 7-2 in Favor of Bakery Owner Who Refused to Make A Wedding Cake for Gay Couple — Colorado Civil Rights Commission Showed Impermissible Hostility Toward Religion When It Stated Jack Phillips, Bakery Owner, Violated State’s Anti-Discrimination — Videos– Story 3: Kristian Saucier, Sailor Who Served 1 Year in Prison and Pardoned by Trump Suing Obama and Comey For Clearing Hillary Clinton of Mishandling Classified Documents — Videos

Posted on June 4, 2018. Filed under: Blogroll, Breaking News, Business, Cartoons, Communications, Congress, Constitutional Law, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Culture, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Education, Elections, Federal Government, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, Hate Speech, House of Representatives, Human, Human Behavior, Law, Life, Lying, Media, National Interest, News, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Trump, Privacy, Progressives, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Regulation, Rule of Law, Scandals, Terror, Terrorism, Transportation, Unemployment, United States Constitution, United States of America, United States Supreme Court, Videos, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 1087, June 4, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1086, May 31, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1085, May 30, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1084, May 29, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1083, May 24, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1082, May 23, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1081, May 22, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1080, May 21, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1079, May 17, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1078, May 16, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1077, May 15, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1076, May 14, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1075, May 10, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1073, May 8, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1072, May 7, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1071, May 4, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1070, May 3, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1069, May 2, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1068, April 26, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1067, April 25, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1066, April 24, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1065, April 23, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1064, April 19, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1063, April 18, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1062, April 17, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1061, April 16, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1060, April 12, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1059, April 11, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1058, April 10, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1057, April 9, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1056, April 4, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1055, April 2, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1054, March 29, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1053, March 28, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1052, March 27, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1051, March 26, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1050, March 23, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1049, March 22, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1048, March 21, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1047, March 20, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1046, March 19, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1045, March 8, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1044, March 7, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1043, March 6, 2018

Pronk Pops Show 1042, March 1, 2018

Labor Force Participation Rate 62.7%

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

 

Story 1: Labor Participation Rate at 62.7% Still Way Below 66-67% Rate in Bush and Clinton Years and 95.9 Million Americans Not In Labor Force — An Increase of 170,000 in May — Heading Towards 100 Million — Videos —

Labor Force Participation Rate 62.7%

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over


Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Download:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2000 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.1 67.1 66.9 66.9 66.9 66.8 66.9 67.0
2001 67.2 67.1 67.2 66.9 66.7 66.7 66.8 66.5 66.8 66.7 66.7 66.7
2002 66.5 66.8 66.6 66.7 66.7 66.6 66.5 66.6 66.7 66.6 66.4 66.3
2003 66.4 66.4 66.3 66.4 66.4 66.5 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 65.9
2004 66.1 66.0 66.0 65.9 66.0 66.1 66.1 66.0 65.8 65.9 66.0 65.9
2005 65.8 65.9 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.0 66.0
2006 66.0 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.3 66.4
2007 66.4 66.3 66.2 65.9 66.0 66.0 66.0 65.8 66.0 65.8 66.0 66.0
2008 66.2 66.0 66.1 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.0 66.0 65.9 65.8
2009 65.7 65.8 65.6 65.7 65.7 65.7 65.5 65.4 65.1 65.0 65.0 64.6
2010 64.8 64.9 64.9 65.2 64.9 64.6 64.6 64.7 64.6 64.4 64.6 64.3
2011 64.2 64.1 64.2 64.2 64.1 64.0 64.0 64.1 64.2 64.1 64.1 64.0
2012 63.7 63.8 63.8 63.7 63.7 63.8 63.7 63.5 63.6 63.8 63.6 63.7
2013 63.7 63.4 63.3 63.4 63.4 63.4 63.3 63.3 63.2 62.8 63.0 62.9
2014 62.9 62.9 63.1 62.8 62.8 62.8 62.9 62.9 62.8 62.9 62.9 62.8
2015 62.9 62.7 62.7 62.8 62.9 62.7 62.6 62.6 62.3 62.5 62.5 62.7
2016 62.8 62.9 63.0 62.8 62.6 62.7 62.8 62.8 62.9 62.8 62.7 62.7
2017 62.9 62.9 63.0 62.9 62.7 62.8 62.9 62.9 63.0 62.7 62.7 62.7
2018 62.7 63.0 62.9 62.8 62.7

U-3 Unemployment Rate 3.8%

Series Id:           LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Download:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 9.0 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.8 9.3
2011 9.1 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.0 9.1 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.8 8.6 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.1 7.8 7.8 7.7 7.9
2013 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.6 7.5 7.5 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 6.9 6.7
2014 6.6 6.7 6.7 6.3 6.3 6.1 6.2 6.2 5.9 5.7 5.8 5.6
2015 5.7 5.5 5.5 5.4 5.5 5.3 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
2016 4.9 4.9 5.0 5.0 4.7 4.9 4.9 4.9 5.0 4.9 4.6 4.7
2017 4.8 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1
2018 4.1 4.1 4.1 3.9 3.8

U-6 Unemployment Rate 7.6%

Series Id:           LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status:  Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over
Percent/rates:       Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

Download:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2000 7.1 7.2 7.1 6.9 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.0 6.8 7.1 6.9
2001 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.9 7.8 8.1 8.7 9.3 9.4 9.6
2002 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.7 9.8
2003 10.0 10.2 10.0 10.2 10.1 10.3 10.3 10.1 10.4 10.2 10.0 9.8
2004 9.9 9.7 10.0 9.6 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.4 9.7 9.4 9.2
2005 9.3 9.3 9.1 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.8 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.7 8.6
2006 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.9
2007 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.8
2008 9.2 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.7 10.1 10.5 10.8 11.0 11.8 12.6 13.6
2009 14.2 15.2 15.8 15.9 16.5 16.5 16.4 16.7 16.7 17.1 17.1 17.1
2010 16.7 17.0 17.1 17.1 16.6 16.4 16.4 16.5 16.8 16.6 16.9 16.6
2011 16.2 16.0 15.9 16.1 15.8 16.1 15.9 16.1 16.4 15.8 15.5 15.2
2012 15.2 15.0 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.8 14.6 14.8 14.4 14.4 14.4
2013 14.6 14.4 13.8 14.0 13.8 14.2 13.8 13.6 13.5 13.6 13.1 13.1
2014 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.3 12.1 12.0 12.1 11.9 11.7 11.5 11.4 11.2
2015 11.3 11.0 10.9 10.9 10.8 10.4 10.3 10.2 10.0 9.8 9.9 9.9
2016 9.9 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.5 9.7 9.6 9.7 9.6 9.3 9.1
2017 9.4 9.2 8.8 8.6 8.4 8.5 8.5 8.6 8.3 8.0 8.0 8.1
2018 8.2 8.2 8.0 7.8 7.6

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this news release is embargoed until USDL-18-0916 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, June 1, 2018 Technical information: Household data: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * http://www.bls.gov/cps Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 * cesinfo@bls.gov * http://www.bls.gov/ces Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION — MAY 2018 Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 223,000 in May, and the unemployment rate edged down to 3.8 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment continued to trend up in several industries, including retail trade, health care, and construction. Household Survey Data The unemployment rate edged down to 3.8 percent in May, and the number of unemployed persons declined to 6.1 million. Over the year, the unemployment rate was down by 0.5 percentage point, and the number of unemployed persons declined by 772,000. (See table A-1.) Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (3.5 percent), Blacks (5.9 percent), and Asians (2.1 percent) decreased in May. The jobless rates for adult women (3.3 percent), teenagers (12.8 percent), Whites (3.5 percent), and Hispanics (4.9 percent) changed little over the month. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.) The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 1.2 million in May and accounted for 19.4 percent of the unemployed. Over the past 12 months, the number of long-term unemployed has declined by 476,000. (See table A-12.) Both the labor force participation rate, at 62.7 percent, and the employment-population ratio, at 60.4 percent, changed little in May. (See table A-1.) The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was essentially unchanged at 4.9 million in May. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-8.) The number of persons marginally attached to the labor force, at 1.5 million in May, was little different from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.) Among the marginally attached, there were 378,000 discouraged workers in May, little changed from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.1 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in May had not searched for work for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.) Establishment Survey Data Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 223,000 in May, compared with an average monthly gain of 191,000 over the prior 12 months. Over the month, employment continued to trend up in several industries, including retail trade, health care, and construction. (See table B-1.) In May, retail trade added 31,000 jobs, with gains occurring in general merchandise stores (+13,000) and in building material and garden supply stores (+6,000). Over the year, retail trade has added 125,000 jobs. Employment in health care rose by 29,000 in May, about in line with the average monthly gain over the prior 12 months. Ambulatory health care services added 18,000 jobs over the month, and employment in hospitals continued to trend up (+6,000). Employment in construction continued on an upward trend in May (+25,000) and has risen by 286,000 over the past 12 months. Within the industry, nonresidential specialty trade contractors added 15,000 jobs over the month. Employment in professional and technical services continued to trend up in May (+23,000) and has risen by 206,000 over the year. Transportation and warehousing added 19,000 jobs over the month and 156,000 over the year. In May, job gains occurred in warehousing and storage (+7,000) and in couriers and messengers (+5,000). Manufacturing employment continued to expand over the month (+18,000). Durable goods accounted for most of the change, including an increase of 6,000 jobs in machinery. Manufacturing employment has risen by 259,000 over the year, with about three-fourths of the growth in durable goods industries. Mining added 6,000 jobs in May. Since a recent low point in October 2016, employment in mining has grown by 91,000, with support activities for mining accounting for nearly all of the increase. In May, employment changed little in other major industries, including wholesale trade, information, financial activities, leisure and hospitality, and government. The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at 34.5 hours in May. In manufacturing, the workweek decreased by 0.2 hour to 40.8 hours, and overtime edged down by 0.2 hour to 3.5 hours. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls remained at 33.8 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.) In May, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 8 cents to $26.92. Over the year, average hourly earnings have increased by 71 cents, or 2.7 percent. Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 7 cents to $22.59 in May. (See tables B-3 and B-8.) The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for March was revised up from +135,000 to +155,000, and the change for April was revised down from +164,000 to +159,000. With these revisions, employment gains in March and April combined were 15,000 more than previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors.) After revisions, job gains have averaged 179,000 over the last 3 months. _____________ The Employment Situation for June is scheduled to be released on Friday, July 6, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).

 

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

 

 

Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age

HOUSEHOLD DATA
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status, sex, and age Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted(1)
May
2017
Apr.
2018
May
2018
May
2017
Jan.
2018
Feb.
2018
Mar.
2018
Apr.
2018
May
2018

TOTAL

Civilian noninstitutional population

254,767 257,272 257,454 254,767 256,780 256,934 257,097 257,272 257,454

Civilian labor force

159,979 161,280 161,765 159,729 161,115 161,921 161,763 161,527 161,539

Participation rate

62.8 62.7 62.8 62.7 62.7 63.0 62.9 62.8 62.7

Employed

153,407 155,348 156,009 152,892 154,430 155,215 155,178 155,181 155,474

Employment-population ratio

60.2 60.4 60.6 60.0 60.1 60.4 60.4 60.3 60.4

Unemployed

6,572 5,932 5,756 6,837 6,684 6,706 6,585 6,346 6,065

Unemployment rate

4.1 3.7 3.6 4.3 4.1 4.1 4.1 3.9 3.8

Not in labor force

94,788 95,992 95,689 95,038 95,665 95,012 95,335 95,745 95,915

Persons who currently want a job

5,976 5,010 5,696 5,475 5,171 5,131 5,096 5,115 5,183

Men, 16 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population

123,120 124,418 124,509 123,120 124,173 124,250 124,331 124,418 124,509

Civilian labor force

85,007 85,965 86,309 84,852 85,931 86,267 86,169 86,152 86,157

Participation rate

69.0 69.1 69.3 68.9 69.2 69.4 69.3 69.2 69.2

Employed

81,572 82,610 83,103 81,272 82,274 82,685 82,630 82,611 82,784

Employment-population ratio

66.3 66.4 66.7 66.0 66.3 66.5 66.5 66.4 66.5

Unemployed

3,436 3,355 3,206 3,581 3,658 3,582 3,539 3,541 3,373

Unemployment rate

4.0 3.9 3.7 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.1 3.9

Not in labor force

38,113 38,453 38,201 38,268 38,242 37,983 38,162 38,266 38,352

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population

114,627 115,921 116,017 114,627 115,669 115,748 115,832 115,921 116,017

Civilian labor force

82,130 83,225 83,458 81,915 82,928 83,309 83,200 83,199 83,234

Participation rate

71.6 71.8 71.9 71.5 71.7 72.0 71.8 71.8 71.7

Employed

79,126 80,242 80,698 78,794 79,705 80,213 80,113 80,111 80,329

Employment-population ratio

69.0 69.2 69.6 68.7 68.9 69.3 69.2 69.1 69.2

Unemployed

3,004 2,983 2,761 3,120 3,223 3,096 3,087 3,088 2,905

Unemployment rate

3.7 3.6 3.3 3.8 3.9 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.5

Not in labor force

32,497 32,697 32,559 32,712 32,741 32,440 32,632 32,723 32,783

Women, 16 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population

131,647 132,853 132,944 131,647 132,607 132,684 132,766 132,853 132,944

Civilian labor force

74,972 75,314 75,456 74,877 75,183 75,654 75,594 75,375 75,382

Participation rate

56.9 56.7 56.8 56.9 56.7 57.0 56.9 56.7 56.7

Employed

71,835 72,738 72,907 71,620 72,157 72,530 72,548 72,569 72,690

Employment-population ratio

54.6 54.8 54.8 54.4 54.4 54.7 54.6 54.6 54.7

Unemployed

3,136 2,576 2,549 3,257 3,027 3,124 3,046 2,805 2,692

Unemployment rate

4.2 3.4 3.4 4.3 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.7 3.6

Not in labor force

56,675 57,539 57,488 56,770 57,423 57,030 57,172 57,479 57,562

Women, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population

123,386 124,579 124,674 123,386 124,328 124,407 124,491 124,579 124,674

Civilian labor force

72,085 72,573 72,599 71,979 72,210 72,565 72,610 72,498 72,493

Participation rate

58.4 58.3 58.2 58.3 58.1 58.3 58.3 58.2 58.1

Employed

69,340 70,266 70,341 69,087 69,583 69,828 69,916 69,992 70,077

Employment-population ratio

56.2 56.4 56.4 56.0 56.0 56.1 56.2 56.2 56.2

Unemployed

2,745 2,307 2,258 2,892 2,627 2,737 2,695 2,506 2,415

Unemployment rate

3.8 3.2 3.1 4.0 3.6 3.8 3.7 3.5 3.3

Not in labor force

51,300 52,006 52,075 51,407 52,118 51,842 51,880 52,081 52,181

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian noninstitutional population

16,754 16,771 16,763 16,754 16,783 16,778 16,774 16,771 16,763

Civilian labor force

5,764 5,482 5,707 5,836 5,977 6,048 5,952 5,831 5,812

Participation rate

34.4 32.7 34.0 34.8 35.6 36.0 35.5 34.8 34.7

Employed

4,941 4,840 4,970 5,010 5,143 5,174 5,149 5,078 5,068

Employment-population ratio

29.5 28.9 29.7 29.9 30.6 30.8 30.7 30.3 30.2

Unemployed

823 642 737 825 834 874 803 752 745

Unemployment rate

14.3 11.7 12.9 14.1 13.9 14.4 13.5 12.9 12.8

Not in labor force

10,991 11,290 11,056 10,919 10,806 10,731 10,822 10,941 10,951

Footnotes
(1) The population figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation; therefore, identical numbers appear in the unadjusted and seasonally adjusted columns.

NOTE: Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm

Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age

HOUSEHOLD DATA
Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status, race, sex, and age Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted(1)
May
2017
Apr.
2018
May
2018
May
2017
Jan.
2018
Feb.
2018
Mar.
2018
Apr.
2018
May
2018

WHITE

Civilian noninstitutional population

198,775 199,950 200,039 198,775 199,738 199,799 199,871 199,950 200,039

Civilian labor force

124,722 125,488 125,848 124,529 125,334 125,930 125,714 125,731 125,688

Participation rate

62.7 62.8 62.9 62.6 62.7 63.0 62.9 62.9 62.8

Employed

120,375 121,358 121,788 119,895 120,886 121,274 121,236 121,233 121,303

Employment-population ratio

60.6 60.7 60.9 60.3 60.5 60.7 60.7 60.6 60.6

Unemployed

4,346 4,130 4,060 4,634 4,447 4,656 4,478 4,498 4,385

Unemployment rate

3.5 3.3 3.2 3.7 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.5

Not in labor force

74,053 74,462 74,191 74,246 74,405 73,869 74,157 74,219 74,350

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian labor force

65,380 65,988 66,049 65,216 65,732 65,948 65,928 65,982 65,890

Participation rate

72.0 72.1 72.1 71.8 71.9 72.1 72.1 72.1 72.0

Employed

63,293 63,848 64,113 62,983 63,510 63,683 63,734 63,746 63,785

Employment-population ratio

69.7 69.8 70.0 69.3 69.5 69.6 69.7 69.7 69.7

Unemployed

2,087 2,140 1,936 2,233 2,222 2,265 2,194 2,235 2,106

Unemployment rate

3.2 3.2 2.9 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.2

Women, 20 years and over

Civilian labor force

54,933 55,210 55,277 54,834 54,896 55,243 55,176 55,179 55,197

Participation rate

57.5 57.4 57.5 57.4 57.2 57.5 57.4 57.4 57.4

Employed

53,169 53,641 53,681 52,930 53,255 53,448 53,385 53,429 53,450

Employment-population ratio

55.6 55.8 55.8 55.4 55.5 55.7 55.6 55.6 55.6

Unemployed

1,764 1,568 1,595 1,904 1,641 1,795 1,791 1,750 1,747

Unemployment rate

3.2 2.8 2.9 3.5 3.0 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian labor force

4,408 4,290 4,522 4,478 4,705 4,738 4,610 4,570 4,601

Participation rate

35.7 34.8 36.7 36.3 38.1 38.4 37.4 37.1 37.3

Employed

3,914 3,868 3,994 3,981 4,121 4,143 4,117 4,057 4,068

Employment-population ratio

31.7 31.4 32.4 32.3 33.4 33.6 33.4 32.9 33.0

Unemployed

495 421 528 497 584 595 492 512 533

Unemployment rate

11.2 9.8 11.7 11.1 12.4 12.6 10.7 11.2 11.6

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN

Civilian noninstitutional population

32,193 32,672 32,704 32,193 32,575 32,607 32,638 32,672 32,704

Civilian labor force

20,082 20,172 20,292 20,088 20,211 20,495 20,466 20,220 20,296

Participation rate

62.4 61.7 62.0 62.4 62.0 62.9 62.7 61.9 62.1

Employed

18,593 18,953 19,145 18,560 18,663 19,087 19,051 18,892 19,092

Employment-population ratio

57.8 58.0 58.5 57.7 57.3 58.5 58.4 57.8 58.4

Unemployed

1,489 1,219 1,147 1,528 1,548 1,408 1,415 1,328 1,204

Unemployment rate

7.4 6.0 5.7 7.6 7.7 6.9 6.9 6.6 5.9

Not in labor force

12,111 12,500 12,412 12,105 12,364 12,112 12,172 12,452 12,408

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian labor force

9,103 9,248 9,407 9,093 9,254 9,438 9,314 9,257 9,382

Participation rate

67.8 67.6 68.7 67.7 67.9 69.2 68.2 67.7 68.5

Employed

8,511 8,681 8,840 8,477 8,564 8,880 8,749 8,663 8,792

Employment-population ratio

63.3 63.5 64.6 63.1 62.9 65.1 64.1 63.3 64.2

Unemployed

593 567 567 616 690 558 564 594 590

Unemployment rate

6.5 6.1 6.0 6.8 7.5 5.9 6.1 6.4 6.3

Women, 20 years and over

Civilian labor force

10,178 10,239 10,207 10,207 10,197 10,254 10,337 10,229 10,233

Participation rate

62.7 62.1 61.8 62.8 62.0 62.3 62.7 62.0 62.0

Employed

9,497 9,764 9,757 9,504 9,524 9,622 9,713 9,707 9,754

Employment-population ratio

58.5 59.2 59.1 58.5 57.9 58.5 59.0 58.9 59.1

Unemployed

681 475 450 703 673 632 624 522 479

Unemployment rate

6.7 4.6 4.4 6.9 6.6 6.2 6.0 5.1 4.7

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian labor force

801 685 678 788 759 803 816 734 681

Participation rate

31.9 27.4 27.1 31.4 30.3 32.0 32.6 29.3 27.3

Employed

586 508 548 579 575 584 588 521 547

Employment-population ratio

23.3 20.3 21.9 23.1 22.9 23.3 23.5 20.8 21.9

Unemployed

215 177 130 209 185 219 227 213 135

Unemployment rate

26.8 25.8 19.2 26.5 24.3 27.2 27.9 29.0 19.8

ASIAN

Civilian noninstitutional population

15,433 15,933 15,874 15,433 15,731 15,792 15,983 15,933 15,874

Civilian labor force

9,818 10,034 9,932 9,817 9,885 9,908 10,092 10,034 9,932

Participation rate

63.6 63.0 62.6 63.6 62.8 62.7 63.1 63.0 62.6

Employed

9,479 9,765 9,732 9,466 9,584 9,617 9,780 9,755 9,720

Employment-population ratio

61.4 61.3 61.3 61.3 60.9 60.9 61.2 61.2 61.2

Unemployed

339 269 201 351 300 291 313 280 212

Unemployment rate

3.5 2.7 2.0 3.6 3.0 2.9 3.1 2.8 2.1

Not in labor force

5,615 5,898 5,941 5,616 5,846 5,884 5,891 5,898 5,942

Footnotes
(1) The population figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation; therefore, identical numbers appear in the unadjusted and seasonally adjusted columns.

NOTE: Estimates for the above race groups will not sum to totals shown in table A-1 because data are not presented for all races. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htm

Story 2: Supreme Court Rules 7-2 in Favor of Bakery Owner Who Refused to Make A Wedding Cake for Gay Couple — Colorado Civil Rights Commission Showed Impermissible Hostility Toward Religion When It Stated Jack Phillips, Bakery Owner, Violated State’s Anti-Discrimination — Videos–

Cakeshop lawyer: It’s a great day for us, religious people

Jubilant Christian baker, who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, is pictured celebrating with his customers and posing for selfies after Supreme Court sides with his case

  • The Supreme Court has ruled 7-2 in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to make a gay couple’s wedding cake over his Christian beliefs  in 2012 
  • The justices’ limited ruling Monday does not tackle the big issue in the case – whether a business can refuse to serve gay and lesbian people
  • Instead, it focused on the actions of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which claimed Phillips had violted the state’s anti-discrimination law
  • Justice Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion, said that the Commission had not been neutral towards religion when they made their decision   
  • Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Sonia Sotomayor were the two dissenters  

The Colorado baker who refused to make a gay couple’s wedding cake rejoiced on Monday after the Supreme Court sided with his case.

However, the justices’ ruling was limited, and didn’t deal with the biggest concern in the case – whether religious people like Jack Phillips could refuse to serve gay or lesbian people.

The 7-2 limited ruling Monday turns on what the court described as anti-religious bias on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission when it ruled against baker Jack Phillips.

After Phillips refused to make a cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins in 2012, the gay couple filed a complaint with the Commission. The Commission ruled in their favor, saying Phillips had violated the state’s anti-discrimination law, which bars businesses from discriminating against customers based on their race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation.

The Supreme Court has ruled in the favor of Jack Phillips, a Colorado baker who refused to make a gay couple's wedding cake over his Christian beliefs in 2012. Phillips is seen above at work on Monday after the decision was released 

The Supreme Court has ruled in the favor of Jack Phillips, a Colorado baker who refused to make a gay couple’s wedding cake over his Christian beliefs in 2012. Phillips is seen above at work on Monday after the decision was released

Phillips was all smiles after the decision was released on Monday 

Phillips was all smiles after the decision was released on Monday

Phillips even posed for a selfie with one happy customer 

Phillips even posed for a selfie with one happy customer

The justices voted 7-2 that the Commission violated Phillips’ First Amendment right to exercise his religion.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was forecast to be the swing vote, wrote the majority opinion, saying Phillips’ Free Exercise rights were violated because the Commission showed hostility to his religious beliefs when they were making the decision.

The outcome of the case hinged on the actions of the Colorado commission. In one exchange at a 2014 hearing cited by Kennedy, former commissioner Diann Rice said that ‘freedom of religion, and religion, has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust.’

Charlie Craig, left, and David Mullins talk about a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that sets aside a Colorado court decision against a baker who would not make a wedding cake for the same-sex couple as they meet reporters Monday, June 4, 2018, in Denver

Charlie Craig, left, and David Mullins talk about a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that sets aside a Colorado court decision against a baker who would not make a wedding cake for the same-sex couple as they meet reporters Monday, June 4, 2018, in Denver

‘The commission’s hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion,’ he wrote.

Kennedy also noted that the commission had ruled the opposite way in three other cases brought against bakers in which the business owners had refused to bake cakes containing messages they disagreed with that demeaned gay people or same-sex marriage. In all of those cases, the Commission allowed the bakers to refuse to decorate their cakes with a message they found offensive.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg, front left, and Sonia Sotomayor, back row second from right, were the two dissenters in the case 

Ruth Bader Ginsberg, front left, and Sonia Sotomayor, back row second from right, were the two dissenters in the case

Supreme Court sides with Christian baker in controversial ruling

When it comes to the question of whether businesses can refuse to serve gay couples because of their religious beliefs, Kennedy said that decision would have to wait until another day.

‘The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances must await further elaboration in the courts, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue respect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market,’ Kennedy added.

Liberal justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan joined the conservative justices in the outcome. Kagan wrote separately to emphasize the limited ruling.

The court’s three most conservative justices – Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito – wrote separate concurrences, giving a different rationale for their opinions.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor were the two dissenters.

Phillips got many hugs and balloons after the decision was released on Monday

Phillips took regular breaks to take pictures with his fans on Monday 

Phillips took regular breaks to take pictures with his fans on Monday

Above, another photo of Phillips and a well-wisher on Monday 

Above, another photo of Phillips and a well-wisher on Monday

In Ginsburg’s dissent, the justice quotes several parts of the majority opinion which she agrees with, including that Colorado state law can protect gay persons from being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation.

‘I disagree strongly, however, with the Court’s conclusion that Craig and Mullins should lose the case,’ she said, saying all of the statement’s she cited from the opinion ‘point in the opposite direction’.

GAY COUPLE BEHIND THE CASE SPEAK OUT

Following the Supreme Court’s decision on Monday, the couple behind the Colorado baker case spoke out to the Denver Post

‘We had no idea that we would end up on a journey that wound up at the Supreme Court,’ David Mullins said. 

Despite the fact that their case eventually lost, the couple said they would go through the ordeal again in a heartbeat. 

‘We’ve put a lot into this,’ Mullins said. ‘This case has technically been going on longer than our marriage has. There are a lot of good things in this verdict, even though it is a loss for us. But it’s hard to all take in.’

‘I think the hardest part for me personally has just been having to be on and feel the pressure of making sure to be an inspiring public figure,’ Charlie Craig said. ‘We’re just human beings. When you’ve asked to rise to a level that you didn’t know you were capable to do, that’s hard. Lots of growing.’

They said they harbor no ill feelings towards Phillips. 

‘This has always been about a policy and not about a person,’ they said. 

Ginsburg says Kennedy’s focus on the three other instances in which bakers were allowed to refuse writing ‘offensive’ signs on cakes is no parallel to Phillips’ case.

‘Phillips declined to make a cake he found offensive where the offensiveness of the product was determined solely by the identity of the customer resquesting it.

‘The three other bakeries declined to make cakes where their objection to the product was due to the demeaning message the requested product would lierally display,’ she wrote.

The difference, she said, is that Phillips was discriminating against a gay couple specifically, whereas the three other bakers objected to the statements they were asked to decorate their cakes with – not the customers or their religious beliefs.

While the court has set aside the question of whether businesses can refuse service to gay couples because of their religious beliefs, there are other cases in the pipeline that will force the court to give their opinion eventually.

Appeals in similar cases are pending, including one at the Supreme Court from a florist who didn’t want to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding.

Monday’s ruling was heralded as a victory for conservative Christians, including the one that represented Phillips in his case.

‘Government hostility toward people of faith has no place in our society, yet the state of Colorado was openly antagonistic toward Jack’s religious beliefs about marriage. The court was right to condemn that,’ said Kristen Waggoner, a lawyer at conservative Christian group Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Phillips. Since 2017, the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups, has labeled the Alliance as ‘virulently anti-gay’.

Waggoner added that the decision ‘makes clear that the government must respect Jack’s beliefs about marriage.’

ACLU lawyer Louise Melling, who represents Mullins and Craig, said that high court had made it clear that businesses open to the public must serve everyone.

‘The court reversed the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision based on concerns unique to the case but reaffirmed its longstanding rule that states can prevent the harms of discrimination in the marketplace, including against LGBT people,’ Melling added.

Phillips’ lawyers argued that his cakes are an art form – a ‘temporary sculpture’ – and being forced to create one to commemorate a gay wedding would violate his rights under the U.S. Constitution to freedom of speech and expression and free exercise of religion.

Mullins and Craig, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, said Phillips was using his Christian faith as pretext for unlawful discrimination based on sexual orientation. The ACLU said the baker was advocating for a ‘license to discriminate’ that could have broad repercussions beyond gay rights.

The case became a cultural flashpoint in the United States, underscoring the tensions between gay rights proponents and conservative Christians.

The litigation, along with similar cases around the country, is part of a conservative Christian backlash to the Supreme Court’s gay marriage ruling. Phillips and others like him who believe that gay marriage is not consistent with their Christian beliefs, have said they should not be required to effectively endorse the practice.

Gay rights advocates said the case is just one part of a bigger struggle seeking greater legal protections for gay, bisexual and transgender people, including in the workplace, even as they fight efforts by conservatives to undermine gains secured in recent years.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5803945/U-S-Supreme-Court-hands-narrow-win-baker-gay-couple-dispute.html#ixzz5HV40EuB4

 

U.S. Supreme Court backs Christian baker who spurned gay couple

by Reuters
Monday, 4 June 2018 15:33 GMT

From major disaster, conflicts and under-reported stories, we shine a light on the world’s humanitarian hotspots

* Court says state panel violated baker’s religious rights

* Ruling was 7-2, with 2 liberals joining 5 conservatives (Adds details on 2012 incident that triggered the case, Kennedy quote)

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON, June 4 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a victory on narrow grounds to a Colorado Christian baker who refused for religious reasons to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, stopping short of setting a major precedent allowing people to claim exemptions from anti-discrimination laws based on religious beliefs.

The justices, in a 7-2 decision, said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed an impermissible hostility toward religion when it found that baker Jack Phillips violated the state’s anti-discrimination law by rebuffing gay couple David Mullins and Charlie Craig in 2012. The state law bars businesses from refusing service based on race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

The ruling concluded that the commission violated Phillips’ religious rights under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.

But the justices did not issue a definitive ruling on the circumstances under which people can seek exemptions from anti-discrimination laws based on their religious views. The decision also did not address important claims raised in the case including whether baking a cake is a kind of expressive act protected by the Constitution’s free speech guarantee.

Two of the court’s four liberals, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, joined the five conservative justices in the ruling authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who also was the author of the landmark 2015 decision legalizing gay marriage nationwide.

“The commission’s hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion,” Kennedy wrote.

But Kennedy also stressed the importance of gay rights while noting that litigation on similar issues is likely to continue in lower courts.

“Our society has come to the recognition that gay persons and gay couples cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth,” Kennedy wrote.

“The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances must await further elaboration in the courts, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market,” Kennedy added.

The case marked a test for Kennedy, who has authored significant rulings that advanced gay rights but also is a strong advocate for free speech rights and religious freedom.

Of the 50 states, 21 including Colorado have anti-discrimination laws protecting gay people.

The case pitted gay rights against religious liberty. President Donald Trump’s administration intervened in the case in support of Phillips.

Mullins and Craig were planning their wedding in Massachusetts in 2012 and wanted the cake for a reception in Colorado, where gay marriage was not yet legal. During a brief encounter at Phillips’ Masterpiece Cakeshop in the Denver suburb of Lakewood, the baker politely but firmly refused, leaving the couple distraught.

They filed a successful complaint with the state commission, the first step in the six-year-old legal battle. State courts sided with the couple, prompting Phillips to appeal to the top U.S. court. Phillips has said a backlash against his business has left him struggling to keep the shop afloat.

The case’s outcome hinged on the actions of the Colorado commission. In one exchange at a 2014 hearing cited by Kennedy, former commissioner Diann Rice said that “freedom of religion, and religion, has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust.”

‘OPENLY ANTAGONISTIC’

Kennedy noted that the commission had ruled the opposite way in three cases brought against bakers in which the business owners refused to bake cakes containing messages that demeaned gay people or same-sex marriage.

“Government hostility toward people of faith has no place in our society, yet the state of Colorado was openly antagonistic toward Jack’s religious beliefs about marriage. The court was right to condemn that,” said lawyer Kristen Waggoner of the conservative Christian group Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Phillips.

Waggoner said the decision “makes clear that the government must respect Jack’s beliefs about marriage.”

American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Louise Melling, who represents Mullins and Craig, said the high court made it clear that businesses open to the public must serve everyone.

“The court reversed the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision based on concerns unique to the case but reaffirmed its longstanding rule that states can prevent the harms of discrimination in the marketplace, including against LGBT people,” Melling added.

The case became a cultural flashpoint in the United States, underscoring the tensions between gay rights proponents and conservative Christians.

Mullins and Craig said Phillips was using his Christian faith as pretext for unlawful discrimination based on sexual orientation. Phillips’ lawyers said his cakes are an art form – a “temporary sculpture” – and being forced to create one to commemorate a gay wedding would violate his constitutional rights to free speech and expression and free exercise of religion.

The litigation, along with similar cases around the country, is part of a conservative Christian backlash to the Supreme Court’s gay marriage ruling. Phillips and others like him who believe that gay marriage is not consistent with their Christian beliefs have said they should not be required to effectively endorse the practice.

Gay rights advocates said the case is just one part of a bigger struggle seeking greater legal protections for gay, bisexual and transgender people, including in the workplace, even as they fight efforts by conservatives to undermine gains secured in recent years.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham)

http://news.trust.org/item/20180604150452-eu3tg

 

Story 3: Kristian Saucier, Sailor Who Served 1 Year in Prison and Pardoned by Trump Suing Obama and Comey For Clearing Hillary Clinton of Mishandling Classified Documents — Videos

Ex-Navy sailor doesn’t have a case against Obama: Judge Napolitano

 

Sailor pardoned by Trump is SUING Obama and Comey for going easy on Hillary Clinton but sending him to prison after he photographed classified area of nuclear sub

  • Kristian Saucier spent 1 year in federal prison for taking souvenir photos of a classified area aboard the nuclear sub where he worked as a U.S. Navy sailor
  • President Trump pardoned him this year but his life had largely been ruined as he was forced to work as a garbageman to feed his family
  • Now Saucier is preparing to sue the Justice Department, former president Barack Obama and former FBI Director James Comey
  • He says he received unequal legal treatment and cites their failure to prosecute Hillary Clinton for storing classified files on her private email server
  • ‘There’s a two-tier justice system and we want it to be corrected,’ his lawyer says

A former U.S. Navy seaman who spent a year in federal prison for photographing a classified area of a nuclear submarine plans to sue former President Barack Obama and fired FBI director James Comey for selectively prosecuting him.

Donald Trump issued a presidential pardon this year to Kristian Saucier, whose lawyer Ronald Daigle told Fox News on Monday that the pending lawsuit will also name the Justice Department as a defendant.

Daigle says former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was given a free pass by avoiding prosecution for mishandling classified information on her infamous private email server.

Saucier, 31, believes Comey and Obama should be held responsible for treating him unequally.

‘They interpreted the law in my case to say it was criminal,’ he told Fox, ‘but they didn’t prosecute Hillary Clinton. Hillary is still walking free.’

‘Two guys on my ship did the same thing and weren’t treated as criminals. We want them to correct the wrong.’

Saucier and his lawyer say Obama and Comey should be held responsible for his unequal legal treatment since they sent him to prison while failing to prosecute Hillary Clinton

Clinton, the Democratic Party's 2016 presidential nominee, was let off the hook despite operating a private, unsecured email server that housed classified files while she was secretary of state

Clinton, the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee, was let off the hook despite operating a private, unsecured email server that housed classified files while she was secretary of state

Daigle told Fox News that his legal strategy includes drawing attention to ‘the differences in the way Hillary Clinton was prosecuted and how my client was prosecuted.’

‘There’s a two-tier justice system and we want it to be corrected,’ he said.

Saucier admitted in 2016 that he had taken photos inside the USS Alexandria while it was docked in Connecticut seven years earlier.

He said he wanted to show his family where he worked, but now acknowledges he was wrong to take the pictures.

Federal prosecutors persuaded him to plead guilty by threatening to paint him as a resentful serviceman who risked the security of the United States and then destroyed a camera and a computer to hide the evidence.

But Saucier believes prosecuting him was a politically motivated decision driven by the Obama Justice Department’s desire to appear tough on the kinds of crime it was sweeping under the rug when Clinton was their investigative target.

‘They used me as an example because of Hillary Clinton,’ he said Monday.

Saucier’s pardon drew eyeballs to his post-incarceration plight: He said the only job he could get after his release from prison was as a garbage man.

Saucier expressed his gratitude towards President Donald Trump after he was pardoned in early March, 2018

Trump often compared Saucier's and Clinton's cases while he was campaigning for the White House, saying it was unfair that his rival got off scot-free while the Obama administration threw the book at the sailor

Trump often compared Saucier’s and Clinton’s cases while he was campaigning for the White House, saying it was unfair that his rival got off scot-free while the Obama administration threw the book at the sailor

Saucier maintains that the pictures he took inside the USS Alexandria submarine were meant to be souveniers

‘They took the kid who wanted some pictures of the submarine,’ he told a crowd just days before his November 2016 election. ‘That’s an old submarine! They’ve got plenty of pictures, if the enemy wants them, they’ve got plenty of them.’

‘He wanted to take a couple of pictures. They put him in jail for a year.’

‘We’ve never been in a situation like this,’ Trump added, before pivoting to bash his Democratic opponent: ‘And then she’s allowed to run for president!’

Saucier, of Arlington, Vermont, was a 22-year-old machinist’s mate on the nuclear-powered attack submarine when he took the photos.

His lawyers said he knew the photos would be classified but he wanted to show his family what he did in the Navy. He denied sharing the photos with any unauthorized recipient.

Clinton’s case was the subject of bipartisan acrimony. Comey, then the nation’s top cop, announced in July 2016 that his agency had wrapped up its probe of the classified material on her private server and determined that it would be improper to prosecute her.

Former sailor Kristian Saucier is pictured with his wife Sadie (right) and baby daughter; he said as a felon, the only work he could get after his prison release was a job as a garbageman

Republican cried foul, but later cheered Comey when he told Congress just days before the election that a new cache of emails had been located – necessitating a reboot of the investigation.

That step came after DailyMail.com reported on the existence of a laptop that had belonged to the disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner, whose wife Huma Abedin had been Clinton’s deputy campaign chairwoman.

Clinton and her attorneys deleted more than 33,000 emails from her server before handing it over to law enforcement agents. Those messages were never recovered.

But some of the material that was forwarded to Weiner was also classified.

‘Somehow,’ Comey testified last year in a Senate hearing, ‘her emails were being forwarded to Anthony Weiner, including classified information, by her assistant Huma Abedin.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5805519/Sailor-pardoned-Trump-photographing-classified-area-sub-SUING-Obama-Comey.html#ixzz5HV9uCQNc

 

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1082-1087

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1073-1081

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1066-1073

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1058-1065

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1048-1057

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1041-1047

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1033-1040

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1023-1032

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1017-1022

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1010-1016

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1001-1009

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 993-1000

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 984-992

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 977-983

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 970-976

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 963-969

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 955-962

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 946-954

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 938-945

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 926-937

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-925

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 793-799

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 785-792

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 777-784

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 769-776

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 759-768

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 751-758

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 745-750

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 738-744

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 732-737

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 727-731

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 720-726

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShows 713-719

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShows 705-712

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 695-704

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 685-694

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 675-684

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 668-674

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 660-667

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 651-659

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 644-650

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 637-643

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 629-636

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 617-628

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 608-616

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 599-607

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 590-598

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 585- 589

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 575-584

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 565-574

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 556-564

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 546-555

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 538-545

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 532-537

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 500-509

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 490-499

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 480-489

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 473-479

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 464-472

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 455-463

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 447-454

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...