JEANNIE DeANGELIS: BRANDENBURG BARACK REPRIMANDS DONALD TRUMP - THE LECTURES FROM A PSYCHOPATH WHO HATED AMERICA EXCEPT AMERICAN BANKSTERS

Time and experience have taught Americans that we either agree with the Barack Obama or become the object of his wrath.  The former president is so physically uncomfortable with disapproval that he becomes myopically fixated and seems obsessed w...

May 27, 2017

Brandenburg Barack Reprimands Donald Trump

By Jeannie DeAngelis

Time and experience have taught Americans that we either agree with the Barack Obama or become the object of his wrath.  The former president is so physically uncomfortable with disapproval that he becomes myopically fixated and seems obsessed with the mission of convincing his critics otherwise.

There’s no doubt that Obama perceives the 2016 election as a complete rejection of everything he stands for. That’s why; of late, the ex-president seems compelled to correct those he perceives as having rejected what it is he believes. 

So, when not kite-surfing in Tahiti, super yachting and relaxing in Teti'aroa, or gorging on Torta di Ceci in Tuscany, Obama is about the business of chastising Americans his eight years of continual haranguing did nothing to change and embarrassing the president those voters elected.

Take for instance Trump’s injunction concerning refugees and immigrants from seven majority-Muslim countries.

Unable to restrain the urge to express his opinion on the subject, the former POTUS waited just one week before having his spokesperson congratulate Americans for protesting the ban. That’s right, less than six months out of office and by inspiring thugs to oppose Trump with street violence; Obama has slipped back into the role of community organizer.

Then, as a representative of the government knowing better than parents, Obama, who was busy counting the $3.2 million stipend he pocketed in Milan, sent a “riled up” Michelle to the 2017 Healthier Future Summit, to rebuke Donald Trump for daring to implement a policy.

Obama’s proxy was so irate, she accused the current president of not caring about the same children both she and her husband would have aborted so as to never require a school lunch. In fact, Michelle equated minor nutritional adjustments to the menu with Trump feeding children “crap!”

More recently, Obama again exhibited his incapacity to control the urge to outmaneuver anyone disagreeing with, or getting more attention than him. 

Rather than canceling the speech he supposedly committed to last year, and in hopes of seizing attention from Trump during his first international visit, Obama agreed to appear beside the chancellor who is orchestrating the Muslim conquest of Germany.

In the run-up to that speech, in hopes of offsetting Trump’s exposure, “Dear Barack” photo bombed the current president. To ensure everyone was aware he was in Europe, prior to meeting up with the women he spied on, Obama thrilled the European press by strutting around Tuscany in sunglasses, accompanied by a wife dressed in a shoulder-baring laced-up number that looked like a ripped sheet. 

Then, just days after 22 youthful-corpses were lined up in a Manchester morgue, felled by a Libyan refugee/terrorist-administered nail bomb, at an event commemorating the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, Obama exploited the event by discounting the value of finding a way to make it harder for terrorists to plant shrapnel in little girls.

Feeling compelled to add credence to absurdity, and to present a stark comparison an agenda he views as a personal affront, the ex-president garnered strength from the words of a liberal pop star who can’t co-exist with a husband, boyfriend, or Taylor Swift. Reacting to the Manchester massacre, singer and intellectual oracle Katy Perry pronounced that there should be “No barriers, no borders, we all just need to coexist.”  Such foolhardy gibberish was all the affirmation Obama needed to reconfirm his commitment to a message that emboldens extremists.

Obama also doubled down on former State Department SPOX Marie Harf’s suggestion that rehabilitating ISIS requires jobs programs. Without mentioning the far-right populist president’s name, in the shadow of Brandenburg Gate, the rock star usurper took it upon himself to school a man he clearly perceives to be intellectually inferior to himself, saying:

One way we can do a better job is to create more opportunities for people in their home countries. If there are disruptions in these countries, if there is bad governance, if there is war or if there is poverty, in this new world that we live in we can’t isolate ourselves -- we can’t hide behind a wall.

In Germany, Obama promoted “new world”-globalism telling the crowd that, according to loftier thinking, “We can’t isolate ourselves -- we can’t hide behind a wall.”

The ex-president elaborated by adding “a child on the other side of the border is no less worthy of love and compassion than my own child. We can’t distinguish between them in terms of… worth and inherent dignity, and that they’re deserving of shelter and love and education and opportunity.” 

That kind of liberal rationale comes from a well-practiced hypocrite.

If Obama doesn’t believe in walls, why then does he “isolate” himself behind the brick wall that surrounds his Washington, DC rental property?  

Moreover, is Obama saying that the children on the other side of the wall outside his DC brick mansion are “less worthy of love and compassion” than Sasha and Malia? By blocking children out, is Barack distinguishing “between [children] in terms of their worth and inherent dignity, and [implying] that [only two are] deserving of shelter and love and education and opportunity?” 

As for the children Obama cited in his speech, could some of those “deserving” cherubs be the adorable unaccompanied-minor MS-13 gang members his administration knowingly released onto American streets and who are currentlyhacking off heads on Long Island?

Either way, with all bloodshed in Britain, Barack was not about to waste an opportunity to adjust the attitude of his detractors, especially if doing so provided an excuse to elevate his philosophies above those of his successor.

And so, based on Obama’s comments, the reason the world’s greatest defender of failed liberal policy traveled all the way to Germany was not to commend Martin Luther, but as an excuse to crash Trump’s party, exalt his egotistical self, and to reaffirm among friends that his worldview is far superior to Donald Trump’s.

Jeannie hosts a blog at www.jeannie-ology.com

"Clinton’s campaign felt that Sanders had wounded her campaign by portraying her as “conspiring with Wall Street types to rig the system against the little guy.” Meanwhile, Clinton set out to raise extraordinary amounts of money from the financial aristocracy to fund a general election campaign based largely on television advertising."

Clinton, the candidate favored by most of Wall Street and the corporate elite and large sections of the Republican Party establishment, is seeking to assemble something akin, within the framework of the US political setup, to a grand coalition between the Democratic Party and the Republican leadership.

The Washington Post’s Sargent notes, “One finding from the polling stands out: A shockingly large percentage of these Obama-Trump voters said Democrats’ economic policies will favor the wealthy—twice the percentage that said the same about Trump.

Her campaign married the military-intelligence apparatus and finance capital to the politics of racial and gender identity, while Clinton consciously ignored the economic struggles of the working class and opposed the demagogue Trump from the right on questions of war and state surveillance.

The American oligarchy, steeped in criminality and parasitism, can produce only a government of war, social reaction and repression. In its blind avarice, it is creating the conditions for unprecedented social upheavals. It is hurtling toward its own revolutionary demise at the hands of the working class.

“But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now.”

“So when Clinton was hobnobbing with  Goldman Sachs CEO Blankfein in 2013, while  investigations of wrongdoing by Goldman and the other Wall Street banks were still ongoing, she was consorting with a man who belonged in prison.”

The Democratic Convention, anti-Russian hysteria, and Clinton’s concession

Part Two

By Eric London
27 May 2017

Part One of this review of Shattered followed the Democratic Party primary elections from 2015 through mid-2016. Part Two traces the Clinton and Sanders campaigns from the Democratic National Convention to the November election.

Sanders and Clinton at the Convention

Shattered provides details of the collaboration between the Clinton and Sanders campaigns and the Obama White House, which expose the Vermont senator’s political cowardice and the thuggery and corruption of the Democratic Party leadership. Sanders’s performance at the convention confirms his role in preventing masses of workers and youth with a growing interest in socialism from breaking with the Democratic Party.

Obama personally met with Sanders after his defeat in the California primary and urged him to end his campaign and support Clinton. Sanders “irritated” Obama, according to the authors, and the president “could be heard grumbling about” comparisons between his own 2008 campaign and Sanders’s 2016 run. Obama “seldom failed to let his annoyance show.”

During their meeting, Obama said “he didn’t want Democrats to lose what Bernie had brought to the table—and not just because he wanted Hillary to win. Obama and Sanders shared a capacity to bring more people into the political system. The two men spent some of their hour-long meeting brainstorming ways that the Democratic Party could sustain the energy of Bernie’s campaign both in the election and in helping to move public policy debates with grassroots engagement.”

The Democratic Party used Sanders to “bring more people into the political system”—i.e., to turn them into the Democratic Party and away from socialism. During the convention, Sanders’s main goal was suppressing opposition among his own delegation to Clinton’s nomination.

“Bernie and his top aides softened,” Allen and Parnes write, but “his supporters didn’t always follow suit. ‘They were trying to get their people in line,’ one Hillary source said.”

During discussion on the party platform, “Many of [Sanders’s] supporters were furious with each loss in the development of the program. … In the end, the platform threw enough vague concessions to Bernie that he could support it without locking Hillary into detailed promises on policy.”

Both campaigns were deeply concerned over the prospect of an explosion of opposition on the floor of the convention hall. The following passages are worth quoting in full:

There was good reason for them to fear a full-scale revolt from Bernie’s delegates. The platform talks had demonstrated goodwill on the part of Bernie and his top aides, but they’d also shown just how recalcitrant many of his supporters remained. Both sides knew that Bernie didn’t really control them, and that meant they could sow chaos inside the hall and on television screens across the country. Heading into Monday, July 25, the first day of the convention, [Clinton campaign manager Robert] Mook was nervous. ‘Absolutely shitting my pants’ is how he described it to others.

With his own speech scheduled for that night, Sanders sent a text message to his

delegates imploring them to behave themselves on the floor. ‘I ask you as a personal courtesy to me not to engage in any kind of protest on the floor,’ he wrote. By this point, he had a lot of skin in the game. If he was seen as failing to unify a party that he had helped divide during the primary, his reputation would be permanently damaged. That didn’t matter to his diehards.

When Bernie delivered a speech to his delegates in a ballroom at the nearby Philadelphia Convention Center, they booed lustily when he spoke of his rival. Mook lost his temper. He picked up his phone and dialed [Sanders senior aide Jeff] Weaver. ‘What the fuck are you doing?’ Mook demanded. But Weaver wasn’t doing anything.

The two campaign managers’ worst fears were being realized. There was a segment of Bernie’s constituency that was so angry they couldn’t even stand silently by when he talked about his support for Hillary—and the television news cameras had a knack for giving every last dead-ender his or her moment of fame.

The convention, they knew, could turn sideways fast. Fortunately for Hillary, for Bernie, and for the Democratic Party, Mook and Weaver had a contingency plan. About a week before the convention, they had put together a joint command operation behind the arena’s main stage. The boiler room, a big open space filled with long tables, folding chairs, and telephones, functioned as a nerve center from which the two camps could exert control over their delegates during the four-day program. On one side sat an office for Clinton’s senior staff and on the other a matching space for Bernie’s top advisers. The phones, staffed by a mix of Hillary and Bernie aides, connected directly to phones on the convention floor designated for each state’s delegation. The big unions, which had been divided in the primaries but would support the Democratic nominee, had their own whip operation humming nearby.

The boiler room proved a physical nexus for the Bernie and Hillary brain trusts, but an electronic connection kept them in sync throughout the convention hall. The two teams created a text messaging distribution list that allowed for constant communication about potential problems during the four-day convention. When a Bernie supporter raised an anti-Clinton sign, a whip team member in the convention hall could relay the message quickly to the boiler room.

Throughout [Clinton’s] speech, pockets of die-hard Bernie backers screamed slogans at the stage. Each time, the joint Clinton-Sanders whip team jumped into action, and chants of ‘U-S-A’ drowned out the dissidents. Recalcitrant Bernie supporters who left the hall to get a soda or go to the bathroom found that their seats had been occupied by pro-Clinton forces when they returned. Schwerin, Rooney, and Sullivan had tailored the speech with the aim of including a lot of applause lines, fearful that any lulls would encourage outbursts from the pro-Bernie delegates. They had reassured Hillary that there would be plenty of cheering to cover up any dissent. It turned out to be a prescient concern. The interruptions were more disruptive in the hall than they seemed at home, and several of Hillary’s longtime advisers said that the cadence of her delivery was thrown off.

Ultimately, Clinton’s nomination was secured: “Mook was most keenly aware of the optical illusion the two camps had pulled off, as he revealed to friends in a story he would tell later. During the convention, a woman approached him and said that the American flags in the arena were beautiful. That was to hide the crazy people shouting things, he thought. But it looked great. Similarly, the campaign looked a lot better in front of the curtain than behind it.”

These passages convey not only the deeply anti-democratic character of the Democratic Party, but also the degree to which the policy decisions of the ruling class are influenced by their profound fear that social opposition will break free from the confines of the Democratic Party and trade unions.

In this framework, Sanders’s conscious role in shoring up support for the Democratic Party exposes the right-wing character of the American pseudo-left, which supported Sanders and thereby provided a left cover for Sanders’s efforts to block an independent movement of the working class from developing outside the control of the two main capitalist parties.

Throughout 2016, groups like the International Socialist Organization and Socialist Alternative credited Sanders as responsible for creating a left-wing challenge to what they call the “establishment” wing of the Democratic Party.

In May 2015, these groups were joined by other pseudo-left organizations at the Left-Elect Conference in Chicago. At the time, Socialist Alternative published a letter distributed to conference attendees and signed by Sanders himself.

“Dear Friends in Chicago,” the letter began, reading, in part: “I strongly believe your efforts in Chicago this weekend and back home are still very much complementary to the national electoral campaign that I just announced this week. And I hope that this spirit of cooperation reflected in your meeting agenda will extend to our mutual ability to work together, now and in the future.”

This letter implicates the pseudo-left as co-conspirators in Sanders’ efforts to provide the Democratic Party with a phony “left” veneer. It was this thread of a common “spirit of cooperation” that linked them through the Sanders campaign to the Democratic Party’s efforts to secure electoral victory in 2016.

The general election

The sections of Shattered that relate to the general election portray a campaign blinded by its own arrogance that ignored repeated warnings of impending crisis. From the structure of the book, which devotes far more attention to the primary than to the general election, it is evident that the authors shared the conviction of the Clinton camp that the contest with Sanders had been the “real” election—like the Obama-Clinton primary struggle in 2008—and that the general election campaign against a reactionary and unpopular Republican billionaire was merely an afterthought.

Clinton’s campaign felt that Sanders had wounded her campaign by portraying her as “conspiring with Wall Street types to rig the system against the little guy.” Meanwhile, Clinton set out to raise extraordinary amounts of money from the financial aristocracy to fund a general election campaign based largely on television advertising.

Hillary mingled with old friends in Sag Harbor under a tent on the night of August 30: Calvin Klein, Harvey Weinstein, Jimmy Buffett, Jon Bon Jovi, and Sir Paul McCartney. Buffett and his wife, Jane, were the hosts of this extravaganza, which capped a multiday fund-raising blitz through the Hamptons. For a minimum of $100,000, VIPs were treated to dinner, ‘premium seating,’ and the option to dance the night away with Hillary, Bill, and a few of their A-list pals. Hillary put on a brave face, reveled with her donors, and even joined in singing ‘Hey Jude.’

While she was singing for the oligarchy’s 

money, Clinton relied on Sanders for public 

legitimacy: “To court the younger set, Hillary 

turned to an old rival who had inflicted great 

damage on her campaign: Bernie Sanders.”

Sanders “was happy to keep his promise to do whatever he could to help Hillary,” the authors write. When Sanders recorded a video urging his supporters to vote for Clinton, Clinton’s campaign demanded that Sanders remove a graph from the video which depicted the minimum wage rising to $15 an hour. Clinton’s team demanded the graph “should only go up to $12 an hour, not $15 an hour. … Bernie’s team executed.”

She also oriented toward winning support among the Republican establishment while she continued her identity-based strategy from the Democratic primaries. As for working class voters, and particularly white workers, Clinton’s campaign “was giving up on persuading voters who weren’t inclined to support Hillary because it was less efficient to go after them.” In other words, they spent their money elsewhere.

The other element of Clinton’s general election strategy relied on whipping-up anti-Russian sentiment to paint Trump as an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. This was aimed above all at laying the basis for a planned foreign policy shift targeting Russia. On October 7, when the US military-intelligence apparatus announced—without providing any proof—that the Russian government was responsible for hacking Democratic Party servers, the Clinton campaign was prepared. In the chapter titled “Red October,” Allen and Parnes write:

Putin might not be a Communist anymore, but he was a Russian autocrat who came to power after a distinguished career in the KGB. This was the kind of spy-thriller shit that would surely break through in the press. If the public saw Trump putting Russian interests above American sovereignty, Hillary’s aides thought, the story had the potential to break his back. After all, in the Red Scare days, Republicans had portrayed liberal Democrats as un-American in unflinching terms.

Several key Clinton aides “jumped on a conference call” to respond by attacking Trump for making “apologies for the Russians.”

This McCarthyite formula was to be the basis of the Democratic Party’s opposition to Trump, both before and after the election.

Shattered also explains Clinton’s hostility to then-FBI Director James Comey’s decision to announce the FBI was reopening its investigation into Clinton’s e-mails. Her campaign was deeply frustrated with the fact that the Russia “narrative” was sidetracked by the October release by Wikileaks of Clinton’s Wall Street speeches, plus internal communications detailing broader Clinton corruption.

When election results came in, giving Trump narrow wins in the industrial states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, despite losing by a wide margin in the popular vote, both the Democrats and Republicans were shocked. The Republican Party had withheld publishing favorable internal polling data because they simply didn’t believe data showing Trump could win.

The concession speech and anti-Russian hysteria

Shattered includes details as to how the White House and Clinton campaign conceded the election, despite a widespread desire on the part of her closest aides to challenge the results. The conversations that took place between Obama and Clinton on election night convey the fragility of the ruling apparatus. The ruling class was fearful that any sign of opposition from Clinton to Trump’s victory would have provoked mass protests that could have spiraled out of control.

Shattered reveals that on election night, many Clinton aides were prepared to launch a legal fight to challenge the legitimacy of the outcome. The results showed that the race was very close in several states, and the campaign wanted to wait another day to see whether key races tightened and whether the margin of Clinton’s popular vote advantage would widen.

In stepped Barack Obama, with all the power of the military and intelligence agencies behind him. First, an Obama aide called Clinton campaign manager Mook: “We can’t drag this out. The president doesn’t think it’s wise.”

When Mook passed Obama’s message on to Clinton, she said she understood, but added, “I’m not ready to go give this speech.”

Then, Obama called her personally. “The White House had been worried that Hillary might leave it all up in the air,” Allen and Parnes write. Obama told Clinton in no uncertain terms: “You need to concede.”

Many of Clinton’s aides were urging her to fight the election result, but Obama pressed her further to concede. In a fluke of tied-up phone lines, the Clinton campaign could not reach the Trump campaign to formally concede. In these confused minutes, Clinton’s top supporters begged her to fight the results.

But, Allen and Parnes explain, “Obama was determined to make sure his friend understood that the election was over. It’s done, he said. Realize that. Deal with it with dignity and move on. After Trump had questioned the legitimacy of the election, the last thing Obama wanted was for Hillary to reinforce that message. As president, it was his job to safeguard the integrity of the political process. … He didn’t see any point in prolonging the inevitable. It wasn’t a question of when she would give a concession speech but rather of making sure that she didn’t try to turn the election into a recount mess. Turning around and playing Trump’s game of questioning the institutions of American democracy wouldn’t be good for the country, he said. With his message now delivered to Hillary, Mook, and Podesta, the president hung up.”

Clinton conceded, but the vote in the key industrial states continued to tighten, and Clinton began to rack up an overwhelming margin in the popular vote. One aide told Allen and Parnes: “Had anybody known that night, no one would have conceded.”

She toned down her concession speech, eliminating statements of opposition to Trump. Clinton said these remarks were “tone-deaf,” “too charged,” and “too political.” She was concerned “she could unintentionally incite supporters who despised Trump.”

These are striking admissions. The ruling class is deeply conscious that it lacks legitimacy in the eyes of the broad masses of the population.

Clinton’s response to the election further demonstrates how the political establishment sought to divert anti-Trump sentiment in an anti-Russian direction, aimed at advancing the interests of US imperialism. Just hours after Clinton conceded, her campaign quickly spun a narrative aimed at blaming the Russian government, launching unsupported claims that Russia leaked copies of Clinton’s corrupt Wall Street speeches to Wikileaks.

“Hillary kept pointing her finger at [FBI Director James] Comey and Russia,” Allen and Parnes note. They cite a close Clinton aide: “She wants to make sure all these narratives get spun the right way.”

The campaign conceived a strategy for spreading the anti-Russia narrative “within twenty-four hours of her concession speech. Mook and Podesta assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.” In the days that followed, “her team coalesced around the idea that Russian hacking was the major unreported story of the campaign, overshadowed by the contents of stolen e-mails and Hillary’s own private server imbroglio.”

The anti-Russia narrative did not emerge out of Clinton’s head simply as a defensive cover for her own electoral catastrophe. Working with her allies from the State Department and the military-intelligence apparatus, a powerful section of the American ruling class elevated Russia’s alleged role as a mechanism to tamper social opposition, taint broad anti-Trump sentiment with the poison of American nationalism, and advance the anti-Russian agenda of US imperialism.

This narrative has been become the Democratic Party’s sole method for opposing Trump in his first months of office. Rather than any appeal to the mounting opposition to Trump’s right-wing rampage against democratic rights, social programs, environmental programs and immigrants, or his militaristic posturing, the Democrats have appealed to sections of the military-intelligence apparatus and the media wedded to the Obama administration’s policy of encircling Russia.

CAMPAIGN TO DESTROY AMERICA and take a THIRD TERM FOR LIFE….

Barack Obama’s 8 year sabotage of Homeland Security: His Crony Banksters, La Raza Drug Cartels and MS-13 are right behind his sabotage of U.S. borders!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/destroy-white-america-barack-obamas.html

“Mexican drug cartels are the “other” terrorist threat to America. Militant 

Islamists have the goal of destroying the United States. Mexican drug cartels are now accomplishing that mission – from within, every day, in virtually every community across this country.” JUDICIAL WATCH

NO PRESIDENT IN HISTORY HAS SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM CRIMINAL BANKSTERS THAN BARACK OBAMA!

The American oligarchy, steeped in criminality and parasitism, can produce only a government of war, social reaction and repression. In its blind avarice, it is creating the conditions for unprecedented social upheavals. It is hurtling toward its own revolutionary demise at the hands of the working class.

THE FINAL DAYS  OF HILLARY CLINTON BEFORE SENTENCING

 

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/10/hillary-clinton-ranked-most-corrupt.html

There’s the Clintons’ pay-to-play scheme, decorously called the Clinton Foundation. It’s foundational to the Clintons and their cronies getting rich. If you wanted time with Secretary of State Hillary, it didn’t hurt to drop some rubles in Clinton Foundation coffers. Quite a few rubles, actually.

 

HILLARY BEGS OBAMA FOR PARDON

 

http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2016/05/hillary-flees-country-with-clinton.html

FOLLOWING THE CRIMES OF BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON BECOMES AMERICA’S ROAD TO REVOLUTION

 

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/10/bill-and-hillary-clintons-global.html

Transcripts released by WikiLeaks of Clinton speeches to Wall Street bankers, for which she received six-figure paychecks, show her praising the recommendations of the 2010 Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction commission, which called for sweeping cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; the elimination of 200,000 federal jobs; a tax on employees’

  

THE DEMISE AND ULTIMATE DESTRUCTION of HILLARY CLINTON

"Hillary Clinton is a known liar, a criminal of monstrous proportions; others have gone to prison for crimes she has committed over and over: lying to Congress, lying to the FBI, violating national security laws by which she was bound as Secretary of State, etc. It's a long list."

Clinton, the candidate favored by most of Wall Street and the corporate elite and large sections of the Republican Party establishment, is seeking to assemble something akin, within the framework of the US political setup, to a grand coalition between the Democratic Party and the Republican leadership.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/10/clinton-preparing-bipartisan-government.html

Transcripts released by WikiLeaks of Clinton speeches to Wall Street bankers, for which she received six-figure paychecks, show her praising the recommendations of the 2010 Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction commission, which called for sweeping cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; the elimination of 200,000 federal jobs; a tax on employees’ health benefits; and huge cuts in income taxes for the wealthy and corporate taxes.

“But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now.”

Wikileaks exposes Obama’s bankster-infested

 

administration!

  

BARACK OBAMA …… the banksters’ RENT BOY!

 “Citigroup’s recommendations came just three days after then-President George W. Bush signed into law the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which allocated $700 billion in taxpayer money to rescue the largest Wall Street banks. The single biggest beneficiary was Citigroup, which was given $45 billion in cash in the form of a government stock  purchase, plus a $306 billion government guarantee to back up its worthless mortgage-related assets.”

MUCH MORE HERE:

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-bankster-owned-president-citigroup.html

“As president, Obama not only funneled trillions of dollars to the banks, he saw to it that not a single leading Wall Street executive faced prosecution for the orgy of speculation and swindling that led to the financial collapse and Great Recession, and he personally intervened to block legislation capping executive pay at bailed-out firms.”

“So when Clinton was hobnobbing with  Goldman Sachs CEO Blankfein in 2013, while  investigations of wrongdoing by Goldman and the other Wall Street banks were still ongoing, she was consorting with a man who belonged in prison.”

CRONY BANKSTER LOOTING OF AMERICA

 THEIR GOLDEN AGE OF PLUNDER IS NOT OVER!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-plundering-of-america-obamas-crony.html

NO PRESIDENT IN HISTORY SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM BANKSTERS NOR INFESTED HIS ADMIN WITH BANKSTER CRONIES MORE THAN OBAMA!

*

And while the Obama administration worked systematically to bail out the banks and make the financial oligarchy richer than ever, shielding the architects of the Great Recession from criminal prosecution, it did impose fines for some of the banks’ grossest swindles, including the sale of worthless subprime mortgage-backed securities, the rigging of key global interest rates such as the London Interbank Offered Rate (Libor), drug money laundering, illegal home foreclosures and other illicit activities.

BARACK OBAMA , HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTERS AND THE LA RAZA

MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS….

There’s more than one way to destroy America’s white middle class!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/08/barack-obama-money-launderer-to-mexican.html

HSBC laundered hundreds of millions and perhaps billions of dollars for drug cartels responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people over the past two decades. The bank transferred at least $881 million of known drug trafficking proceeds, including money from the Sinaloa Cartel in 

Mexico, which is known for dismembering its victims and publicly displaying their body parts.

Why did Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party lose the 2016 election?

3 May 2017

In a public appearance Tuesday with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton attributed her loss to Donald Trump last November to two main factors: misogyny within the electorate and Russian interference. She also placed emphasis on FBI Director James Comey’s October announcement that the FBI was re-opening its investigation of her use of a private email account while she was secretary of state.

Misogyny “played a role,” she said, claiming that “it would have been a really big deal” to elect the first woman president. She also blamed Russian President Vladimir Putin, claiming he “clearly interfered in our election, and it was designed to hurt me and help my opponent.” As proof of Russian meddling, Clinton pointed to WikiLeaks’ release of emails from Clinton aide John Podesta, which included transcripts of some of her paid speeches to Wall Street bankers.

Clinton’s claims are belied by the facts. In a May 1 article titled “Why did Trump Win? New research by Democrats offers a worrisome answer,” Washington Post columnist 

Greg Sargent cites poll data showing that Trump’s

election was the product of widespread economic 

hardship in the working class and popular 

opposition to the pro-corporate policies of the 

Democratic Party.

The poll, commissioned by the Democratic Party-linked firm Priorities USA, was conducted in the working class suburbs outside of Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Detroit, Michigan, as well as in Tampa, Florida. All three of these traditional “swing states” supported Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, but swung for Trump in 2016. The poll targeted two types of voters: those who voted for Obama in 2012 but for Trump in 2016 (“Obama-Trump voters”) and those who voted for Obama in 2012 but did not vote in 2016 (“drop-off voters”).

The picture that emerges from the poll is of a working class that is under tremendous financial strain, is growing disillusioned with both parties, and is deeply opposed to cuts in social programs such as health care.

“A key commonality” of these voters is that “they are struggling economically,” the pollsters conclude. Of Obama-Trump voters, 50 percent say their income is falling behind the cost of living and 31 percent say their income is just equal to rises in the cost of living. Conditions are even worse among drop-off voters. Forty-three percent say their income is falling behind the cost of living and 49 percent say their income is only staying even with the cost of living—that is, 92 percent are either falling behind or barely staying afloat.

In a confused and contradictory manner, Obama-Trump voters express the growth of social opposition to the political establishment from the left. According to these voters, the government’s most important priorities should be protecting Social Security and Medicare (85 percent for both), creating good-paying jobs (84 percent) and providing everyone with access to affordable health care (80 percent).

The poll shows these voters’ lowest priority is building a wall between the US and Mexico. They are least concerned that Trump will “be too close to Putin and won’t stand up to Putin.” They are substantially more concerned that Trump will involve the US in foreign wars and will put the interests of corporate executives ahead of working people.

Among drop-off voters, 87 percent support raising taxes on corporations, 89 percent support infrastructure spending, 79 percent support raising the minimum wage, 75 percent support raising taxes on the rich and 73 percent support paid family leave for child care. Drop-off voters are by far most concerned with the economy and access to health care. Only 6 percent say Russia is the most important issue, with 5 percent citing immigration and 2 percent citing terrorism/national security.

As their economic conditions deteriorate, those polled view the policies of the Democratic Party as favoring the wealthy. The Washington Post’s Sargent notes, “One finding from the polling stands out: A shockingly large percentage of these Obama-Trump voters said Democrats’ economic policies will favor the wealthy—twice the percentage that said the same about Trump. I was also permitted to view video of some focus group activity, which showed Obama-Trump voters offering sharp criticism of Democrats on the economy.”

Sargent explained that when focus group respondents were asked what the Democratic Party stands for, they responded: “the one percent” and “the status quo.” Among those who voted for Obama in 2012 but didn’t vote in 2016, the most common reasons given for abstaining include: “It makes no difference,” “I did not like either candidate,” “I voted for Bernie Sanders in the primary; I couldn’t support Clinton for the general election,” and “I’m tired of voting for the lesser of two evils.”

These poll results confirm what the World Socialist Web Site stressed in its initial analysis of the US election results: Clinton’s loss was the product of mass abstention by workers—and particularly African American workers—in key industrial cities such as Cleveland, Detroit and Milwaukee, plus swings by all racial groups toward the Republican candidate in 2016 compared with 2012. Clinton’s claim that she lost the election due to misogyny is refuted by the fact that exit polls show the Democratic Party lost the votes of over a million working class women from 2012 to 2016.

The American working class does not hate Hillary Clinton because of her gender, it hates her because she embodies, both personally and politically, everything rotten about American capitalism. More specifically, the dislike of Clinton expresses the growing perception that the Democratic Party is the most naked representative of the banks and corporations.

For the first half of the 20th century, the Democratic Party based its national presence on an alliance of sections of better-off professionals with Tammany Hall city machines in the North, segregationists across the former slave states in the South, and the trade union bureaucracies, first the American Federation of Labor and later including the Congress of Industrial Organizations. The Stalinist Communist Party played a critical role in bringing the mass strike movement of the 1930s and the industrial unions that arose out of it under the control of the Democratic Party. Even into the 1960s, the Democrats’ domestic program was based on a series of mild social reforms—a partial cooptation of the platforms of the pre-Depression populist and progressive movements.

A key turning point came in the late 1960s, when the contradictions embedded in the party’s anti-communist and pro-capitalist foundations burst into the open as President Lyndon Johnson drained resources intended for Great Society social programs to fund the war in Vietnam.

Deeply discredited by the disastrous impact of the war and the administration’s crackdown on anti-war demonstrations and inner-city riots, the Democratic Party began to reorient itself toward a wealthy section of African-American and other racial minorities who benefited from the Democratic Party-backed civil rights legislation of the mid-1960s.

As the chasm between rich and poor widened in the subsequent decades, the Democrats began to abandon even the pretense of appealing to working class voters on the basis of a program of social reform. Increasingly tied to Wall Street and the military-intelligence agencies and increasingly unpopular within the working class, the Democratic Party sought to build a broader electoral base in the privileged upper-middle class, where the politics of race, gender and sexual preference dominate.

Clinton’s presidential campaign represented the ugly culmination of this rightward trajectory. Her campaign married the military-intelligence apparatus and finance capital to the politics of racial and gender identity, while Clinton consciously ignored the economic struggles of the working class and opposed the demagogue Trump from the right on questions of war and state surveillance.

Figures like Bernie Sanders and his pseudo-left supporters play a most pathetic role in shoring up support for the Democratic Party. Speaking on his swing-state tour with Democratic Party Chairman and Clinton-confidante Thomas Perez, Sanders recently told a crowd that they had “come to the right place” to talk about “political revolution,” and that “our job is to radically transform the Democratic Party.”

What Sanders, Clinton and the entire political establishment fear most is that the growing opposition that found an initial and distorted reflection in the 2016 election will develop in a consciously left-wing, socialist direction.

Eric London

THE MEXICAN INVASION: BY INVITATION OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY

THE MAP OF LA RAZA MEXICAN OCCUPATION of what was America

AZTLAN FASCISM AT OUR DOOR

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-la-raza-mexican-invaders-jump.html

"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning 

to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."  -- 

- EXCELSIOR --- national newspaper of Mexico

 LOS ANGELES IS THE WESTERN GATEWAY FOR LA RAZA HEROIN!

MEXICAN HEROIN POURS OVER THE NARCOMEX-U.S. BORDER

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/while-these-filthy-politicians-cant.html

Americans die young, poor and addicted while politicians angle for more amnesty and wider open borders with the LA RAZA cartels.

IMAGES OF THE PROPOSED OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY

 

AND MASSIVE MUSLIM MINERET TO CALL MUSLIMS TO PRAYER

 

AND HATRED OF AMERICA.

 

The Obama Presidential Library Will Be Funded by America's 9-11 Invading Saudis  Who Ban Christians and Jews From Their Dictatorship.

 http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-obama-presidential-library-will-be.html

The Obama Presidential Monument to a Psychopath Will Provide Call to Prayers in the Muslim Tradition With One Massive Minaret

 THE SINS OF THE FATHERS: THEIR GLOBAL LOOTING of the POOR

THE OPEN BORDERS PARTY of GEORGE SOROS, HILLARY & BILLARY CLINTON, BARACK OBAMA and DONALD TRUMP

DONALD TRUMP, HIS PARASITIC FAMILY, HIS GOLDMAN SACHS

REGIME and GOD FATHER, GEORGE SOROS… .global looters of the poor!

 

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-jared-kushner-donald-trump-george.html

 THE OBAMA DOCTRINE:

DESTROY AMERICA TO BUILD A MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP WHERE LA RAZA MEXICANS VOTE HIM PRESIDENT FOR LIFE

"He is intent on maximizing the damage he inflicted on the country during the two terms of his faux presidency, having now set up shop in Washington to pursue a post-presidency agenda advancing a left-wing insurgency, civil unrest, racial
conflict and the destabilizing activities of a shadow."

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/barack-obama-psychopath-who-defrauded.html

THE TRUMP AMNESTY… BUILT ON THE OBAMA AMNESTY and endorsed by NARCOMEX

Open the floodgates of our welfare state to the uneducated, impoverished, and unskilled masses of the world and in a generation or three America, as we know it, will be gone.

Those most impacted are middle class and lower middle class. It is they whose jobs are taken, whose raises are postponed, whose schools are filled with non-English speaking children that absorb precious resources for remedial English, whose public parks are trashed and whose emergency rooms serve as the local clinic for the illegal underground. 

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/mike-stopa-america-what-ever-happened.html

BARACK OBAMA:

BUILDING HIS RETURN TO POWER PARTY WITH ILLEGALS!

FUNDER AND LEADER OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA “The Race”

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-racist-mexican-fascist-party-of-la.html

During Obama’s 8 year bankster regime, he openly operated and funded the Mexican fascist racist party of LA RAZA “The Race” from the White House under La Raza VP Cecilia Munoz…. Google Obama and LA RAZA!

CALIFORNIA UNDER MEXCIAN OCCUPATION

California: The sick man of the United States…. A STATE UNDER MEX OCCUPATION!

PUS-SPEWING XAVIER BECERRA…. Is what happens when illegals vote LA RAZA FASCISM.

By Andrew Solomon

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/california-attorney-general-pus-spewing.html

“As one attorney general, Kamala Harris, steps down to replace Barbara Boxer, another attorney general is secreted out of the glands of selfsame power in the form of pus-spewing Xavier Becerra.”

It didn’t stop Becerra, a prominent Latino rights  advocate who has served in Congress since 1993, from pushing for the dealer’s release at the request of his father, Horacio. The elder Vignali, a rich Los Angeles businessman, contributed thousands of dollars to Becerra’s various campaigns and a favor was in order. 

CALIFORNIA UNDER LA RAZA SIEGE:

                  

Mexico’s looting and ethnic cleansing of a once American state.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2012/11/california-mexicos-looted-welfare-state.html

                                                      

*

TRUMPERNOMICS: IMPLEMENTING OBAMA-CLINTONIMCS

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/trumpernomics-cut-social-security-to.html

 “CRIMINAL BANKSTERS WILL CONTINUE TO RULE AMERICA!”  Twitter Trumper

OBAMA-CLINTON-TRUMPERnomics: The Massive Transfer of Wealth to the Super Rich Ratcheted up!

*

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-goldman-sachs-regime-of-donald.html

The American oligarchy, steeped in criminality and parasitism, can produce only a government of war, social reaction and repression. In its blind avarice, it is creating the conditions for unprecedented social upheavals. It is hurtling toward its own revolutionary demise at the hands of the working class.

*

BUT WE KNOW WHERE THEY LIVE!

“The massive transfer of wealth will not go to investment, but to acquiring bigger 

diamonds; more luxurious mansions, yachts and private jets; new private

islands; more  security guards and better-protected gated  communities to

segregate the financial nobility from the masses whom they despise 

and fear.”

 “Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike,

has become a kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes.

This is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” ---- Karen

McQuillan  AMERICAN THINKER.com

BARACK OBAMA PLANS A THIRD TERM: HIS CRONY BANKSTERS, LA RAZA, MUSLIMS AND THOSE MUSLIM DICTATORSHIPS HE FUNDED ARE BEHIND HIM…. Along with George Soros!

THE OBAMA COUP TO BE DICTATOR:

THE ARMY OF ILLEGALS TO BRING AMERICA DOWN AND FORM THE OBAMA MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP THAT WILL BE OPEN BORDERS AND PRO LA RAZA FASCIST SUPREMACY.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-racism-of-barack-obama-man-who-was.html

                                                  

Daniel Greenfield, the award-winning Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, believes (OBAMA'S POLITICAL PARTY) “OFA will be far more dangerous in the wild than the Clinton Foundation ever was.”

“Barack Obama and his henchmen would not have been emboldened in their ostensible machinations to undermine an election and then a presidency if  it were not for the fecklessness of the Republican  Party and the blind eye as well as the tacit support of the mainstream media.”

BARACK OBAMA PLANS A THIRD TERM: HIS CRONY BANKSTERS, LA RAZA, MUSLIMS AND THOSE MUSLIM DICTATORSHIPS HE FUNDED ARE BEHIND HIM…. Along with George Soros!

THE OBAMA COUP TO BE DICTATOR:

THE ARMY OF ILLEGALS TO BRING AMERICA DOWN AND FORM THE OBAMA MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP THAT WILL BE OPEN BORDERS AND PRO LA RAZA FASCIST SUPREMACY.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-racism-of-barack-obama-man-who-was.html

                                                  

Daniel Greenfield, the award-winning Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, believes (OBAMA'S POLITICAL PARTY) “OFA will be far more dangerous in the wild than the Clinton Foundation ever was.”

“Barack Obama and his henchmen would not have been emboldened in their ostensible machinations to undermine an election and then a presidency if  it were not for the fecklessness of the Republican  Party and the blind eye as well as the tacit support of the mainstream media.”

THE LEGACY OF BARACK OBAMA:

 Final Death of the American White Middle Class

Under the Obama administration, more Americans have found themselves consigned to economic ghettos, living in neighborhoods where more than 40 percent subsist below the poverty level.

*

Millions more now live in “high poverty” districts of 20-40 percent poverty, according to recently released report by the Brookings Institution.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/david-solway-who-is-obama-psychopath.html

THE OBAMA BOOK DEAL: Sixty-five million dollars—or even $267.5 million—is a small price to pay for the contribution the former president made to enriching the already fabulously rich, defending the American ruling elite’s geopolitical interests around the world and continuing the assault on the wages, benefits and living standards of the working class.

Plenty of money for ILLEGALS……AMERICA’S OPEN BORDERS

HOMELESS ELDERLY in AMERICA UNDER MEX OCCUPATION

A Nation dies young, poor, addicted and homeless…. It’s the American dream as the rich get super rich!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/elderly-go-homeless-in-america-as.html

According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, the number of elderly persons who are homeless in the US will have doubled by 2050.

America’s Super-rich Live 15 Years Longer!

………….. America’s Bludgeoned Middle-Class Dies Young, Addicted and Poor!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/04/americas-super-rich-live-15-years.html

WE ARE MEXICO'S WELFARE SYSTEM

.... A Glimpse...

$640,000 and breeding anchor babies like bunnies

MURDER, RAPE, LOOT and VOTE DEM FOR MORE!

EACH ILLEGAL WILL COST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE $640,000 and then they go breed anchor babies for more!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/09/immigrants-cost-legals-640000-how.html

IMAGES OF THE PROPOSED OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY

 

AND MASSIVE MUSLIM MINERET TO CALL MUSLIMS TO PRAYER

 

AND HATRED OF AMERICA.

 The Obama Presidential Library Will Be Funded by America's 9-11 Invading Saudis  Who Ban Christians and Jews From Their Dictatorship.

 http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-obama-presidential-library-will-be.html

The Obama Presidential Monument to a Psychopath Will Provide Call to Prayers in the Muslim Tradition With One Massive Minaret