No decline in
Michigan poverty since the Great Recession
By Debra
Watson
28 December 2017
Despite a drastic fall in the official unemployment rate for the
state the same percentage of Michigan households are living below the poverty
line today as did after the onset of the Great Recession in December of 2007.
According to new income and poverty statistics from the US Census
Bureau released in early December, Michigan’s poverty rate was 16.3 percent at
the end of 2016, the same annual rate calculated as an average for the
five-years from January 2008 through December 2012. The current rate is not
much lower than the peak annual poverty rate of 16.9 percent reported for the
five-year period of 2010-14.
Unemployment has been below five percent in the state since the
end of 2015, down from a post-recession peak of 14.5 percent in 2009. However,
this month Michigan unemployment ticked up slightly, to 4.5 percent.
The proliferation of low-paying temporary and part-time jobs in
the auto industry, a process enshrined in the sellout contract imposed by the
UAW in 2015, has been a key factor in the general decline in living standards
in Michigan. According to data recently reported by the Michigan Department of
Technology, Management and Budget wages in manufacturing jobs in the state are
down by $2.00 an hour, from a high of $22.73 before the crash.
Behind the apparent contradiction between declining unemployment
rates and the ongoing high official poverty level is the massive and increasing
income and wealth inequality in the US. As Karl Marx established over a century
ago, poverty at one pole of society is complemented by obscene levels of wealth
at the other. The three top American plutocrats, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, investor
Warren Buffet and the co-founder of Microsoft, Bill Gates, now own more wealth
than the bottom half of the US population, 160 million people.
Like Trump’s glorification of the ever-rising bubble in the stock
market, Obama pointed to job growth when characterizing his administration as
“the best time to be alive.” Michigan’s Republican Governor Rick Snyder and the
Democratic Mayor of Detroit Mike Duggan have incessantly boasted of the
declining unemployment and job creation as signals of a recovering economy.
Unsurprisingly, the Wall Street
Journal recently touted that Michigan had “increased sharply”
its “capital investment and hiring.” The paper praised policies that repealed
personal-property taxes for manufacturers and right-to-work legislation,
policies taken from the Republican playbook and implemented in the state.
The latest Census figures demonstrate that poverty remains a
chronic condition in Michigan despite this supposed resurgence in the state’s
economy. Even so, the official poverty rate grossly underestimates the depth of
economic want.
In the US the official poverty level is
not measured as a percentage of median income, as it is in many other developed
countries, but on a far narrower measure related to food costs. Poverty for a
family of three is pegged at a derisory $20,000 a year, far below sixty percent
of Michigan’s current median household income of about $52,400 and drastically
below the amount needed to support a family.
Sustained high rates of poverty over nearly a decade have had
devastating personal implications. A family’s meagre resources can dwindle as
successive years’ income deficits are never offset with rising income. They
have had an equally devastating societal impact.
The five-year Census Bureau American Community Series (ACS)
rolling averages from the December report supplement annual poverty and income
statistics released by the Census’ Current Population Series in September. The
greater sample sizes in the five-year averages allow for more accuracy and
sufficient data to communities with smaller populations.
There are smaller communities in the state where there are
indications poverty has increased dramatically. The large increases in poverty
in these small communities indicate how a relatively small economic disruption
can have a huge effect on living standards for a village or town.
For example, some villages in the Upper Peninsula with populations
in the hundreds saw double digit increases. In Baldwin, which is located toward
the middle of the state’s lower peninsula, poverty increased from a third of
its one thousand plus residents in poverty in 2008-2012 to well over half now.
The December ACS release shows that in the five-year look-back
from the end of 2016, there was an increase in poverty in half of Michigan’s
communities of all sizes over the average recorded in the five years that
followed the onset of the recession. Communities located throughout the state
saw such increases.
Flint and other cities such as Jackson, Lansing, Detroit,
Muskegon, Bay City and Ann Arbor showed small increases in their poverty rate.
Other cities with comparable population sizes had poverty rates that declined,
albeit slightly, including Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo and Saginaw.
Detroit, Michigan’s largest city, recorded a shockingly high
official poverty rate of a 39.4 percent using the five-year ACS average. The
city’s poverty rate was one percentage point higher than the 38.1 percent
average for the years 2008 through 2012.
Whole cities with substantially sized populations like Detroit and
Flint have average poverty rates that are more than twice the state poverty
rate. The high rates in some cities reach the level of poverty concentration
that is utilized by social scientists to identify neighborhoods endemic to
urban areas where pervasive poverty seriously debilitates families and social
structure.
Inequality is driving communities to be
divided by income like never before in recent history. The growth in concentrated poverty nationwide was noted
in a Brookings Institution report last year. According to the report, between
2005-09 and 2010-14 the number of such high poverty neighborhoods in the US, where
more than forty percent of households are below the official poverty line, grew
by more than 4,300.
By the end of 2016 Detroit, along with Cleveland, had a poverty
rate a full ten percentage points higher than the city with the third highest
poverty rate in the country, Philadelphia. Detroit Democratic Mayor Mike
Duggan’s recent re-election campaign relied on the narrative of an ongoing
“Detroit comeback” based on highly concentrated downtown real estate
investment.
Detroit’s poverty statistics present a window into the effect of
exploding growth in temporary and part-time jobs and parallel wage stagnation
and how it has affected workers struggling in the lowest-paying jobs.
Thirty-six percent of Detroit residents now work for less than
$15,000 a year. Twenty-five percent of residents do not have access to a car.
Industrial jobs have hemorrhaged out of the city over the nine years since the
recession. Suburban jobs require serious time and expense to reach as the mass
transit system in the area is barely functional.
Two of the cities in Michigan where poverty rates were even higher
than Detroit’s are actually enclaves of Detroit and would cause a higher rate
and higher increase in the poverty rate for the Detroit inner-city area if
their data was included. Hamtramck, a small enclave of Detroit has a poverty
rate of 49.7 percent, up from 44.6 percent in the years immediately after the
recession started. The other municipal enclave, Highland Park, has a poverty
rate of 51.1 percent, up from 46.7 percent in the earlier years.
Hepatitis A outbreak
continues to impact Southeast Michigan
By
Muhammad Khan
Hepatitis A outbreak
continues to impact Southeast Michigan
By
Muhammad Khan
29 December 2017
Michigan has been hit particularly hard amid a series of ongoing
outbreaks of hepatitis A which have affected several other states including
Utah, Arizona, Kentucky, and California. California has experienced over 672
cases, with at least 430 requiring hospitalization and 21 resulting in death.
A Tale of Two Op-Eds
By Jason Richwine
The Corner at National Review Online, December 21, 2017
. . .
How about restricting low-skill immigration to encourage recruitment of Americans? No, Furman says, because — well, actually, he does not mention immigration at all, not even to dismiss its importance. Omitting the i-word in discussions of labor-force dropout is an unfortunate habit on both the left and the right. Amy Wax and I wrote our Inquirer op-ed (based on a much longer essay in American Affairs) to show that employers turned to immigrants as the native work ethic declined. As evidence, we point both to the much higher labor-force participation of low-skill immigrants compared to low-skill natives, as well as to the near-universal preference expressed by employers for immigrant labor. Restricting the flow of foreign workers would generate a major incentive for business owners, politicians, and opinion leaders to reintegrate American men into the labor force. It is, in our opinion, a crucial part of any reform strategy.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/454859/male-labor-force-participation-immigration
By Jason Richwine
The Corner at National Review Online, December 21, 2017
. . .
How about restricting low-skill immigration to encourage recruitment of Americans? No, Furman says, because — well, actually, he does not mention immigration at all, not even to dismiss its importance. Omitting the i-word in discussions of labor-force dropout is an unfortunate habit on both the left and the right. Amy Wax and I wrote our Inquirer op-ed (based on a much longer essay in American Affairs) to show that employers turned to immigrants as the native work ethic declined. As evidence, we point both to the much higher labor-force participation of low-skill immigrants compared to low-skill natives, as well as to the near-universal preference expressed by employers for immigrant labor. Restricting the flow of foreign workers would generate a major incentive for business owners, politicians, and opinion leaders to reintegrate American men into the labor force. It is, in our opinion, a crucial part of any reform strategy.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/454859/male-labor-force-participation-immigration
Study Shows E-Verify's
Effectiveness
By Preston Huennekens
CIS Immigration Blog, December 8, 2017
Their study indicates that E-Verify is one of the most important enforcement tools available to states that wish to reduce their illegal alien populations. Research shows that most illegal migration is for economic reasons, and that the adoption of E-Verify and other worksite enforcement measures effectively blocks illegal aliens from procuring employment, thereby preventing many from settling down in the United States. Faced with mandatory E-Verify, the study shows that many aliens either returned to their home countries or traveled to other states that did not have employment verification regulations.
. . .
https://cis.org/Huennekens/Study-Shows-EVerifys-Effectiveness
By Preston Huennekens
CIS Immigration Blog, December 8, 2017
Their study indicates that E-Verify is one of the most important enforcement tools available to states that wish to reduce their illegal alien populations. Research shows that most illegal migration is for economic reasons, and that the adoption of E-Verify and other worksite enforcement measures effectively blocks illegal aliens from procuring employment, thereby preventing many from settling down in the United States. Faced with mandatory E-Verify, the study shows that many aliens either returned to their home countries or traveled to other states that did not have employment verification regulations.
. . .
https://cis.org/Huennekens/Study-Shows-EVerifys-Effectiveness
Whom Does Congress Work For?
By John Miano
CIS Immigration Blog, December 12, 2017
. . .
When Disney replaced 350 Americans with foreign workers, forcing them to train their replacements, did we see any Florida members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
When Southern California Edison and the University of California replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any California members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
When Toys "R" Us replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any New Jersey members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
When Cargill and Best Buy replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any Minnesota members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
No.
Yet when illegal aliens working under the DACA program are threatened with losing their jobs, members of Congress spring into action:
. . .
https://cis.org/Miano/Whom-Does-Congress-Work
By John Miano
CIS Immigration Blog, December 12, 2017
. . .
When Disney replaced 350 Americans with foreign workers, forcing them to train their replacements, did we see any Florida members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
When Southern California Edison and the University of California replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any California members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
When Toys "R" Us replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any New Jersey members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
When Cargill and Best Buy replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any Minnesota members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?
No.
Yet when illegal aliens working under the DACA program are threatened with losing their jobs, members of Congress spring into action:
. . .
https://cis.org/Miano/Whom-Does-Congress-Work
AMERICA'S CRIMINAL BANKSTERS LOOTED MORE THAN A TRILLION DOLLARS OF AMERICA'S REAL ESTATE WITH THEIR TOXIC MORTGAGES AND WERE REWARDED WITH NO-STRINGS BAILOUTS AND NO (REAL) REGULATION.... THEY'RE STILL LOOTING AMERICA!
"It would inevitably be met with massive and overwhelming
opposition on the part of the financial oligarchy, which
controls all levers of the state power, and has at its disposal
not only the courts and politicians, but, even more decisively,
the police and the army."
EVEN BEFORE HE TOOK OFFICE, BARACK OBAMA HAD SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM CRIMINAL BANKSTERS THAN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN HISTORY!
Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors
are employees of financial industry giants -Goldman Sachs
($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207)
and Citigroup ($358,054).
Socialism and the problem of the super-rich
28 December 2017
Nearly one hundred and fifty years ago, Karl Marx, citing the early 19th century French economist Jean Charles Léonard de Sismondi, observed that “the Roman proletariat lived at the expense of society, while modern society lives at the expense of the proletariat.”
Never has this been so true as today, as day after day, week after week, reports are published showing the massive social wealth piled up by the financial oligarchy at the expense of the working class.
The latest of these is the Bloomberg Billionaires
Index published on Friday, which showed that the
fortunes of the world’s wealthiest 500 billionaires
rose 23 percent over the past year, making them $1
trillion richer than at the end of 2016. The combined
wealth of this group reached $5.3 trillion. The gain
of $1 trillion was four times last year’s increase.
Index published on Friday, which showed that the
fortunes of the world’s wealthiest 500 billionaires
rose 23 percent over the past year, making them $1
trillion richer than at the end of 2016. The combined
wealth of this group reached $5.3 trillion. The gain
of $1 trillion was four times last year’s increase.
Bloomberg found that the world’s richest 500 people as a group added an average of $2.7 billion to their fortunes every day in 2017. This means that, on average, each of these individuals added $5,400,000 every day, or $225,000 every hour—roughly equivalent to the combined income of five working-class households in the US over the course of a year.
The rapid expansion of the wealth of the financial oligarchy accompanies growing indicators of social misery at the other pole of society, exemplified in the report this month by the Centers for Disease Control that life expectancy in the US fell for the second year in a row.
Wealth concentration on the scale reflected in these reports has immense social implications. It is impossible to seriously address a single social issue without confronting the problem of economic inequality. The colossal diversion of resources into private wealth accumulation by the financial oligarchy effectively starves society of the resources it needs to deal with the most basic problems.
The United Nations estimates that it would cost $30 billion a year to eradicate world hunger, a small fraction of the wealth monopolized by the world’s billionaires. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos alone added $34.2 billion to his fortune in 2017.
America’s 159 billionaires added $315 billion to their fortunes last year, giving them a collective net worth of $2 trillion. This is double the $1 trillion spent by the US government in 2015 on health care ($980 billion), education ($70 billion) and housing ($63 billion) combined.
The funneling of these vast sums into the bank accounts of the super-rich, combined with the nearly $1 trillion set aside every year to fund the military machine that protects the oligarchy’s financial interests around the world, leaves virtually nothing to address the crumbling social and physical infrastructure (roads, bridges, rail, mass transit) of the United States.
The tax bill just passed by the Trump administration will fuel a further growth of social inequality in the US and around the world beyond what are already the highest levels since the Gilded Age at the turn of the 20th century.
The economic life of the planet is determined by the drive of the ruling elite for ever greater self-enrichment. The policies of all capitalist governments and parties, whether right-wing or nominally “left,” are driven by this requirement. The unprecedented rise in the stock market has been engineered by the world’s central banks, led by the US Federal Reserve, to enable the capitalist class to recoup its losses and increase its share of wealth and income in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. The Fed, first under Bush and then under Obama, led the way in organizing bank bailouts and the infusion of trillions into the financial markets by means of ultra-low interest rates and “quantitative easing” money-printing operations.
To provide a certain context, the total of $5.3 trillion in assets controlled by the richest 500 people is greater than the combined GDPs of the UK and France. The $2 trillion owned by US billionaires is almost twice the GDP of Mexico, a country of 128 million people. It is also more than double the combined GDPs of Argentina, Chile and Peru.
Bezos’ gain for the year is itself only slightly less than the combined GDPs of Jamaica ($14 billion), Niger ($7.5 billion) and Zimbabwe ($16 billion), with a combined population of 40 million.
The financial elite has definite social interests, which it enforces through the wholesale buying of political parties and politicians, making democracy under capitalism nothing but a hollow shell.
What would happen in response to any serious effort to reform this state of affairs, to pursue a modest reallocation of social resources, within the framework of the capitalist system, to ensure that all people received the basic rudiments of nutrition, health care, and education?
It would inevitably be met with massive and overwhelming opposition on the part of the financial oligarchy, which controls all levers of the state power, and has at its disposal not only the courts and politicians, but, even more decisively, the police and the army.
When social reform is impossible, social revolution becomes inevitable. There is no way to avoid the conclusion that it is necessary to expropriate the wealth of the financial oligarchy.
These resources are derived from the social labor of the working class, which produces all the wealth of society. The working class is the only social force that can and must carry out this historic task. The only answer to the growth of poverty and immiseration for the masses alongside ever more obscene levels of wealth for a tiny minority is socialism, based on common ownership and democratic control of the productive forces and the rational, planned international coordination of economic life.
Barry Grey
MICHAEL BARONE:
THE OBAMA YEARS: A LEGACY OF SCANDAL AND DECEPTION
Joe Biden’s bizarre disconnect regarding his scandal-ridden former boss.
December 27, 2017
On December 13, former vice president, Joe Biden, appeared on CBS with the hosts of “This Morning” where he peddled his new book and showered his former boss with praise. During the course of the interview, he was asked about his relationship with Obama and responded with the following; “I’ve served with eight presidents and I’ve gotten to know four of them very well. I’ve never met any president that has more character, more integrity, and more backbone than this guy does.” Then he went completely off the rails when he absurdly added; “And eight years, not a hint — not a hint — of a scandal.”
What was perhaps even more outrageous than the statement itself was the fact that none of This Morning’shosts challenged the veracity of that statement and allowed it to pass without a scintilla of scrutiny, exposing yet again an extreme bias existing within elements of the establishment media. In fact, the Obama administration was among the most corrupt and scandal-ridden in recent memory. Biden’s comment merits further examination so let’s buckle up and take a stroll down memory lane.
Solyndra Scandal – The Obama administration provided this failing solar company with a $535 million stimulus-funded loan, courtesy of the American taxpayer. Taxpayer money kept pouring in despite the fact that the Office of Management and Budget warned that Solyndra was not a profitable or viable company. But it gets worse. The family foundation of billionaire George Kaiser, an Obama fundraiser, was one of Solyndra's main investors. Can you say quid pro quo?
Veterans Affairs Scandal - Over 40 veterans needlessly died while waiting to be seen by doctors at a Phoenix VA facility. Another 1,700 veterans were forced to wait for months before being seen by medical personnel. An audit of the VA confirmed that VA officials systematically altered records and appointment schedules in a deliberate and methodical VA scheme to manipulate data to meet fabricated goals.
Operation Chokepoint Scandal – The Obama DOJ utilized the power of big government to pressure banks to cease doing business with industries with which the administration had ideological differences. Gun manufacturers and gun stores were prime targets even though they had not violated any laws. Eventually, the FDIC admitted to misconduct, bowed to pressure and significantly curtailed the discriminatory regulations after affected businesses threatened legal action.
Gibson Guitar Scandal – Armed federal agents executed four search warrants on Gibson Guitar Corp. facilities in Nashville and Memphis, Tenn., seizing guitars, electronic files and other inventory including wood that was purchased in India and Madagascar. The DOJ alleged that Gibson’s had violated an obscure law known as the Lacey Act which made it a crime to violate the environmental laws of another country. Gibson produced an affidavit from government officials in Madagascar stating that Gibson had violated none of that nation’s laws. Gibson also alleged that the DOJ was misinterpreting Indian law. Gibson’s CEO was a major donor to the GOP but his competitors, who purchased the same materials and were not GOP donors, were untouched by Obama’s DOJ. As part of a settlement to drop criminal charges, Gibson was required to pay a $250,000 fine and was required to donate $50,000 to an environmental group. Gibson was eventually able to retrieve its inventory from the clutches of the DOJ.
Fast & Furious Scandal – A scheme concocted by the Obama administration that went horribly wrong. The administration lost track of some 1,400 guns that made their way into the stream of criminal enterprises including those of the Mexican drug cartels. Two of the guns were found at the scene of the shooting of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Attorney General Eric Holder was cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over documents relating to the scandal. It was the first time Congress had taken such an action against a sitting Cabinet official. Seventeen Democrats joined Republicans in voting in favor of the criminal contempt resolution.
DOJ-James Rosen Scandal – FOX News journalist, James Rosen became the target of Obama’s DOJ in yet another example of extreme government overreaching. Believing that Rosen was responsible for a leak concerning a policy decision on North Korea, AG Eric Holder sought a subpoena for Rosen’s emails claiming that Rosen had broken the law “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.” The government’s affidavit also accused Rosen of possibly violating the Espionage Act. It appeared that the DOJ was acting like the East German Stasi in chasing fictitious enemies of the state. In a rare instance of bipartisanship, Holder was roundly criticized from all sides of the political spectrum and Holder himself was later forced to acknowledge that he regretted the episode.
Gruber-Obamacare Scandal – To establish Obamacare’s validity, Obama hired economist and academic Jonathan Gruber to give the plan his seal of approval. Gruber was later caught on video and audio making several disparaging remarks about Americans, stating that Obamacare’s passage rested on the “stupidity of the American voter.” Democrats later tried to distance themselves from him and tried to minimize his role in formulating Obamacare but there was no debating that he was one of Obamacare’s chief architects and was paid nearly $400,000 for his services. Gruber confirmed what most of us already knew; that Obamacare passed as a result of a concerted effort by the administration to deceive the American people.
Skolkovo Scandal – While serving as secretary of state, Clinton oversaw a program meant to “reset” relations with Moscow and improve ties. The program centered around the Russian city of Skolkovo near Moscow with the stated aim of “identifying areas of cooperation and pursuing joint projects and actions that strengthen strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between the American and Russian people.” The program transformed Skolkovo into a technology hub akin to a Silicon Valley. Sensitive American technology was transferred to the Russians, substantially enhancing their military and cyber capabilities. The US Army and the FBI concluded that Russia had exploited the program for military applications. The FBI warned American technology companies doing business in Skolkovo that the Skolkovo project was a means by which the Russians would acquire dual use technologies and apply them for military ends. According to investigative author Peter Schweizer, Russian and American companies and individuals involved in the Skolkovo fiasco “had major financial ties to the Clintons.” Moreover, during the Russian reset period, those entities provided the Clintons with “tens of millions of dollars” in the form of “contributions to the Clinton Foundation, paid for speeches by Bill Clinton, or investments in small start-up companies with deep Clinton ties.”
Benghazi Scandal - U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed during an attack on the American consulate office. The Obama administration initially denied that the attack was terror related and instead peddled the now false and discredited narrative that it was triggered by a reaction to an anti-Muslim film. However, emails later confirmed that administration officials were well aware that it was a well-orchestrated, premeditated attack planned by Islamist terrorists and had nothing to do with an internet film. In addition, a congressional committee found that the delay in deploying military assets to the theater, which it attributed to needless bureaucratic bungling, almost certainly cost those men their lives.
IRS Exemption Scandal – IRS officials, taking their cues from the White House delayed, ignored or rejected nonprofit status applications from groups deemed to be right-wing or pro-Israel. Eventually, Former IRS senior executive Lois Lerner, one of the key actors in the scandal was held to be in contempt of Congress, though Holder’s DOJ refused to prosecute.
Iran Ransom Scandal – In deal to secure the release of four Americans held hostage by Iran, the Obama administration gave the Iranian government $1.7 billion in unmarked, untraceable cash, stacked in pallets. The money promptly went to finance Iran’s terrorist activities. Attorney General Loretta Lynch was required to sign off on the ransom deal but no paper bearing her signature was ever produced despite congressional calls compelling her to do so.
Bergdahl-Guantanamo Scandal – Obama released 5 hardened Taliban terrorists for convicted deserter Bowe Bergdahl. The release of the terrorists was in violation of the National Defense Authorization Act. Obama was required to provide Congress with 30-days’ notice prior to releasing the Guantanamo detainees but he only provided notice on the actual day of the exchange. Consequently, the chief counsel for the Government Accountability Office determined that the Pentagon had illegally spent the money used to facilitate the prisoner exchange. In addition, like Benghazi, the administration tried to spin the story and portrayed Bergdahl as a soldier who “served with honor and distinction.” Lastly, at least 3 of the 5 detainees released for Bergdahl have reverted to their terrorist habits placing America and its allies at risk.
Dossier Scandal – Elements within the FBI and DOJ who were hostile to Trump and friendly to Clinton obtained a salacious and unverified dossier on Trump which was compiled by a British foreign agent from Russian sources. In addition to being unverified, unreliable and based exclusively on Russian sources, the dossier amounted to opposition research because it was obtained by agents and operatives working directly and indirectly for the Clinton campaign. Despite this knowledge, the FBI dressed up the dossier to appear as if it was a legitimate intelligence document and then used it to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on American citizens.
Clinton Email Server Scandal – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used an unsecured bathroom server to send and receive classified information. It is a virtual certainty that many of Clinton’s emails were compromised by foreign, hostile governments. Over 33,000 emails belonging to the State Department were deleted and some of Clinton’s state department emails ended up on a registered sex offender’s laptop. Clinton was criminally exonerated by the FBI and Loretta Lynch’s DOJ blindly accepted the FBI’s findings and recommendations without conducting an examination of its own. FBI agent Peter Strzok, who maintained a visceral hatred toward Trump and was deeply involved in the email investigation, later changed the wording of a memo exonerating Clinton to “extremely careless” from “grossly negligent.” The change was significant because the latter language tracked the wording of the criminal statute. FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who was also involved in investigating Clinton, failed to disclose that his wife had accepted $500,000 for her state senate campaign from long-time Clinton ally, Terry McAuliffe.
Uranium 1 Scandal – While serving as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton signed off on a deal that allowed Russia to acquire 20 percent of America’s uranium mining capacity. While other members of the Obama cabinet were also required to sign off for approval of the deal, Clinton was the only cabinet figure to obtain direct pecuniary benefit, to the tune of millions of dollars, from entities with vested interests in seeing the acquisition completed. She never disclosed this conflict of interest when giving her authorization. Once in Russian hands, some of the uranium, the foundational material for nuclear bombs, was exported abroad.
Loretta Lynch-Bill Clinton Tarmac Scandal – While Hillary Clinton was being criminally investigated by the FBI, Loretta Lynch, the nation’s top law enforcement official met with Bill Clinton for 30 minutes at a Phoenix tarmac where she says they discussed “grandchildren” and “golf.” Later, it was revealed that she instructed FBI Director James Comey to refer to the investigation as a “matter” rather than an investigation, tracking the Clinton campaign’s talking points. Finally, Comey testified in a closed session before the Intelligence Committee, that he confronted Lynch with a sensitive document in which it was suggested that Lynch was going to use her authority and power of her office to thwart prosecution of Clinton irrespective of the FBI’s findings. Lynch reportedly stared at the document and then “looked up with a steely silence that lasted for some time, then asked him if he had any other business with her and if not that he should leave her office.”
Project Cassandra Scandal – In an effort to curry favor with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Obama administration delayed, obstructed and ultimately shut down a DEA initiative aimed at thwarting Hezbollah arms trafficking, drug trafficking and money laundering schemes. As a result, Hezbollah continued to import drugs into the United States, continued to supply anti-American insurgents with deadly Explosively Formed Projectiles and continued to engage in massive money laundering schemes.
The level of corruption and scandal witnessed during Obama’s tenure rivals, and perhaps even surpasses that of the Nixon years. The administration’s legacy leaves a long and wide trail of lies, deception and government overreaching. Biden’s comment on This Morning would be laughable if it wasn’t so sad. Lastly, whether one opposes or favors Trump, all can acknowledge that but for Trump’s victory, many of these scandals would have never come to light because the Clinton administration would have happily swept all the filth under the rug.
BARACK OBAMA:
THE PSYCHOPATH WHO WOULD BE DICTATOR FUNDED BY HIS
CRIMINAL CRONY BANKSTERS AND REELECTED FOR A THIRD TERM BY
MEXICO
MICHAEL BARONE:
The Lawlessness of the Obama Administration: A never-ending story
JAMES WALSH
THE OBAMA HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA
How the Democrat party surrendered America to Mexico:
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
“The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”
SOARING POVERTY AND DRUG ADDICTION UNDER OBAMA
"These figures present a scathing indictment of the social order that prevails in America, the world’s wealthiest country, whose government proclaims itself to be the globe’s leading democracy. They are just one manifestation of the human toll taken by the vast and all-pervasive inequality and mass poverty.
OBAMA-CLINTONOMICS to serve the filthy rich
The same period has seen a massive growth of social inequality, with income and wealth concentrated at the very top of American society to an extent not seen since the 1920s.
“This study follows reports released over the past several months documenting rising mortality rates among US workers due to drug addiction and suicide, high rates of infant mortality, an overall leveling off of life expectancy, and a growing gap between the life expectancy of the bottom rung of income earners compared to those at the top.”
OBAMA’S CRONY BANKSTERISM destroyed a TRILLION DOLLARS in home equity… and they’re still plundering us!
Barack Obama created more debt for the middle class than any president in US
history, and also had the only huge QE programs: $4.2 Trillion.
OXFAM reported that during Obama’s terms, 95% of the wealth created went to the top 1% of the world’s wealthy.
EVEN BEFORE HE TOOK OFFICE, BARACK OBAMA HAD SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM CRIMINAL BANKSTERS THAN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN HISTORY!
Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors
are employees of financial industry giants -Goldman Sachs
($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207)
and Citigroup ($358,054).
No comments:
Post a Comment