Judicial Watch: Obama Family’s October Weekend Fundraising Getaway to San Diego Cost Taxpayers $2,001,468.90 in Travel Expenses Alone
According to the newly released records obtained by Judicial Watch, the Obama family’s October 11 flight from Los Angeles, where he had attended three high-dollar fundraisers, to San Diego, and then from San Diego back to Washington on October 12, required a total of 4.7 hours of flying time at $206,337 per hour. That brought the total flight cost to taxpayers to $969,783.90. The records do not include the flight time to travel from Washington, DC, to Los Angeles (through Oregon, Seattle, and San Francisco), nor the Secret Service costs or other expenses. Previously released documents show the flight time from Washington to Los Angeles to be five hours, which safely adds $1,031,685 and brings the known total to expense to $2,001,468.90.
According to press reports, Obama and his family spent their getaway weekend in San Diego at the luxurious Rancho Santa Fe resort community. With an estimated median income of $188, 859, Rancho Santa Fe is one of the highest income communities in the United States. According to the Rancho Santa Fe website, it boasts “one of the storied private golf courses in California,” with “one of the finest walkable designs in the world” where “you and your friends will cherish the memorable times.” Sure enough, President Obama reportedly spent several hours golfing.
The White House touted Obama’s trip to the West Coast as an opportunity for the president to push his gun control agenda in Eugene, Oregon, the site of the Umpqua Community College shooting the previous week. According to the White House schedule for Friday, October 9, however, Obama spent just two hours with the victims’ families before flying off to Seattle, Washington, for a Democratic National Committee (DNC) fundraiser. He then left Seattle to participate in a DNC fundraiser in San Francisco later that evening.
In San Francisco, Obama joined Kanye West for a high-dollar fundraiser at The Warfield Theater, which, according to its website, features “the hottest rock shows in the Bay Area.” There, he attacked the Republican Party for having “gone off the deep end.”
On Saturday, October 10, Obama extended his fundraising agenda with three additional high-dollar events, all in the Los Angeles area. According to Deadline.com, “In a whirlwind 6 1/2-hour visit to Los Angeles on Saturday, the fundraiser-in-chief will hit a trio of deep-pocket events…beginning with the home of the Star Wars director and wife Katie McGrath for a $33,400-per-person.”
The $2,001,468.90 Obama spent for his flights between DC and Los Angeles to vacation in San Diego brings his known total expense to the American taxpayers thus far for all Obama travel to $72,881,504.68. That comes to more than $10 million per year for each year he has been in office.
Political candidates, campaigns, and parties reimburse the federal government for only a small portion of the costs of presidential political travel. The Obama White House keeps the formula for such cost-sharing secret.
A 2014 report by a special panel for the Department of Homeland Security found that the Secret Service “is stretched to and, in many cases, beyond its limits.”
“Barack Obama is now the 10-million-dollar man when it comes to wasteful presidential travel,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It looks like that visit with grieving families was an excuse to get out to sunny California for some fundraising with celebrities such as Kanye West – and golfing.”
If reports of an imminent indictment for Hillary Clinton are true & ndash; that is, if we’re not being played by the administration – then Democrats must be immersed in intense, behind-the-scenes maneuvering to avert a disaster or mitigate...
"In this regard, D’Souza explores the connection between mafia-friendly con-man, Saul Alinsky, who died living the Goodfellas dream life in Carmel, California, and his two most famous pupils, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The author also investigates the emotional tie between the President and his father -- a consummate con-artist and polygamist. Instead of focusing on “anti-colonialism,” as in prior paternal analyses, D’Souza now emphasizes outright criminality and skillful lying, traits that connect the failed elder Obama to his wildly successful offspring who, in true Chicago style, perpetrates his cons inside the system. (E.g. If you like your insurance plan, you can keep it.)"
Will Obama pardon Hillary?
Obama is already on record in a 60 Minutes interview in October stating that he didn’t believe Clinton’s use of a private email server, though a “mistake,” endangered national security. “I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” he told Steve Kroft. “I do think that the way it’s been ginned up is in part because of – in part – because of politics.”
If he feels that way after an indictment, and the indictment is only for email offenses, Obama could pardon Clinton from further prosecution, much as President Clinton pardoned the indicted financier Marc Rich 20 years ago. He could claim that a pardon was crucial to preserve the election process and therefore necessary for the good of the country.
The political backlash would be tremendous, but that has never bothered the Obama administration. Its political backlashes never incite media interest for long, and Democrats in general – and Obama and Clinton in particular – write off all criticism as partisan and groundless. The base might even become energized in support of its beleaguered candidate. Soon we’d be hearing that it’s time to move on, that the matter had been dealt with and was “in the past.” Given the Republican reluctance to press the attack against Democrats in national elections – witness McCain and Romney – that might be the end of the scandal.
However, if the indictment were for corruption and not just for email misuse, a pardon becomes problematic and Clinton’s continued political viability much less likely. Withdrawal still wouldn’t be automatic, not for a Clinton, but the party bosses might mobilize against her, believing her vulnerability too much of a risk. That could depend on how late in the election cycle an indictment comes.
We were told last week, through an interview with former U.S. attorney Joseph DiGenova and a report on Fox News, that the FBI was widening its investigation to include corruption and possibly other charges. We are also being assured that the FBI and its director James Comey, an Obama appointee, are impartial and independent.
But could these leaks be setting the stage for a complete exoneration of Clinton? She could claim, as she already has, that she only made a mistake with the email handling, one that she regrets, and that now the FBI has cleared her of other charges after an exhaustive investigation. At that point, a pardon cleanses her résumé.
What effect the outcome of this investigation, let alone a pardon, will have on the public’s trust and faith in America’s justice system is another matter. For that reason alone, this probe – the latest of many in the careers of the Clintons – will be one of the most politically significant investigations in the history of the republic. How politicized has our government become? Is justice still blind? We’re about to find out.