THE SUPREME COURT CONSIDERS ITSELF TO BE THE PREMIER SERVANT OF WALL STREET. EXPECT THAT THE COURT WILL BLAME UNDERLINGS FOR ALL THE BANKSTERS' PLUNDERING CRIMES THEY FILLED THEIR POCKETS WITH!
"Back during he the financial crisis of 2008 to 2009, which wiped out trillions of dollars of the wealth and retirement savings of middle-class families, we put the two major arsonists in charge of putting out the fire. Former Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and former Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts were the co-sponsors of the infamous Dodd-Frank regulations. Readers will recall that good old Barney resisted every attempt to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and said he wanted to "roll the dice" on the housing market. That worked out well"
“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 THEAMERICAN THINKER.com
“This was not because of difficulties in securing indictments or convictions. On the contrary, Attorney General Eric Holder told a Senate committee in March of 2013 that the Obama administration chose not to prosecute the big banks or their CEOs because to do so might “have a negative impact on the national economy.”
“Attorney General Eric Holder's tenure was a low point even within the disgraceful scandal-ridden Obama years.” DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE MAG
Supreme Court Considers Who Bears Responsibility for Security Fraud
December 3, 2018 Updated: December 3, 2018
An investment banker who sent deceptive emails dramatically overstating the financial health of a failing clean energy company shouldn’t be held responsible for securities fraud because he was only following his supervisor’s directions, the man’s attorney told a skeptical Supreme Court.
U.S. securities laws forbid those offering securities for sale from making false statements or participating in fraudulent schemes. Whether a person who merely passes the bad information along is legally liable is at issue in this case.
The company, Waste2Energy Holdings Inc. of Neptune Beach, Florida, founded in 2007, went out of business in 2013 after filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company had hoped to develop technology to convert waste into energy but failed to do so.
In 2009 Francis V. Lorenzo, then the director of investment banking at the brokerage Charles Vista LLC, emailed prospective investors offering for sale $15 million in debentures secured only by W2E’s earning capacity.
The emails indicated that W2E had $10 million in assets and purchase orders north of $40 million, and that the brokerage was willing to raise money to repay investors if needed.
But at the time the emails were sent, the company had already acknowledged that an audit had determined its assets were worth much less than $1 million.
Lorenzo’s boss and the brokers settled the claims the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brought but Lorenzo refused. An SEC administrative law judge found Lorenzo’s superior drafted the emails but that Lorenzo had nonetheless broken the law by sending them because they contained false information about W2E’s financial situation.
The SEC banished Lorenzo from the securities industry for life and imposed a $15,000 civil penalty.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled against Lorenzo in 2017, finding that he participated in a scheme to defraud investors by sending the misleading emails even though he was not deemed to have made the untrue statements himself.
Lorenzo disagreed with the circuit court and the Supreme Court decided June 18 to hear his appeal. He argues that at most he may have aided and abetted a fraudulent scheme as a “secondary” violator of securities laws.
Borrowing language from the Supreme Court’s ruling in the 2011 case, Janus Capital Group Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, Lorenzo argued that because he did not have “ultimate authority over the statement, including its content and whether and how to communicate it,” he cannot be held liable under Rule 10-5(b) of the Securities Exchange Act. The rule forbids fraudulent schemes or devices, making false statements, and engaging in fraud that harms investors.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who sat on the circuit court panel at the time, dissented from its majority opinion, writing that Lorenzo hadn’t violated securities laws. “How could [petitioner] have intentionally deceived the clients when he did not draft the emails, did not think about the contents of the emails, and sent the emails only at his boss’s direction?”
Kavanaugh recused himself from the Supreme Court case, leaving the other eight justices to participate in oral arguments Dec. 3.
Justices Have Doubts
During those oral arguments, Lorenzo’s attorney, Robert Heim, said that sending the email was not an inherently deceptive act. Justice Neil Gorsuch appeared to agree that Lorenzo was not the author of the false statements in the emails.
But Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel Alito, and Sonia Sotomayor seemed to disagree with Heim.
Ginsburg asked Heim why it wasn’t “inherently deceptive to send a succession of untruths?”
“Lorenzo is essentially a conduit,” Heim replied. “He’s somebody that’s transmitting statements … on behalf of another … simply sending an e-mail is not enough to transform Frank Lorenzo into a primary violator from, perhaps, somebody who gave substantial assistance.
The language of the statutes and the rules make “a clear distinction between statements and … conduct.”
Alito asked why Lorenzo’s behavior wouldn’t “fall squarely” within the language of the rule used by the SEC.
Sotomayor was just as blunt, telling Heim: “I’m having a problem from the beginning. Once you concede … that you’re not challenging that your client acted with an intent to deceive or defraud, that you aren’t challenging the D.C. Circuit’s conclusion to that effect? Is that correct?”
Heim replied, “Yes, Your Honor.”
Sotomayor continued: “I don’t understand, once you concede that mental state, and he has the act of putting together the email and encouraging customers to call him with questions, not to call his boss with questions, how could that standing alone give away your case?
“That makes him both the maker of a false statement, but it’s also engaging in an act, practice, or course of conduct which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit.”
The Trump administration argues the treatment Lorenzo received at the hands of the SEC was just.
“I don’t think you’re likely to see a … more egregious fraud than this,” Christopher Michel, assistant to the solicitor general, told the justices.
REVOLUTION STIRS IN AMERICA
“It will more likely come on the heels of
economic dislocation and dwindling wealth to redistribute.”
"Between 2002 and 2015
annual earnings for the bottom 90 percent of Americans rose
by only 4.5 percent, while earnings for the top 1 percent grew by
22.7 percent, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Under the
Obama administration, more than 90 percent of income gains since the
so-called “recovery” began have gone to the top one percent."
“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 THEAMERICAN
THINKER.com
"A defining expression of
this crisis is the dominance of financial speculation and parasitism, to the point where
a narrow international financial aristocracy plunders society’s resources in order to
further enrich itself."
THE BILLIONAIRES’S GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY FOR WIDER
OPEN BORDERS
the true cost of all that “cheap” labor is passed
along to the middle class.
"This doesn't include the costs
of illegal immigration to society, which provides health care, housing, education, child
care, and legal services to illegal aliens. Even though immigration
advocates claim that illegal aliens do indeed pay taxes, the dollar
amount pales
in comparison to
the cost of the many services they receive."
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-globalist-democrat-party-for-wider_29.html
Meanwhile, despite the
highest taxes in the nation, California is $1.3 trillion in debt – unemployment
is at a staggering 11%. California's wacko giveaways to illegals
include in-state tuition, amounting to $25 million of financial
aid. Nearly a million illegals have California driver's
licenses. L.A. County has
144% more registered voters than there are residents of legal voting
age. Clearly, illegals are illegally
voting.
BEL AIR MAXINE WATERS
AND HER CRACK ALLEY CONSTITUENTS
WALL STREET BANKSTERS
AND THEIR BOUGHT DEMOCRAT POLS PREPARE FOR THE NEXT WAVE OF BOTTOMLESS
NO-STRING BANKSTER BAILOUTS…
Will this one finish
off the American economy?
Considering
her record and documented history of poor ethical and moral fitness, it’s
outrageous that Maxine Waters is up for chair of the ultra-powerful House
Financial Services Committee, which has jurisdiction over the country’s banking
system, economy, housing, and insurance.
"Wall Street billionaires are pushing a new plan to swipe the
profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from U.S. taxpayers–and in the process
revive the system of privatized-profits and public-risk that contributed to the
severity of the Great Financial Crisis."
The Moelis plan stands out as a strikingly bold grab for control of the
companies and their profits. It calls for the dividend payments to the Treasury
to cease so that the companies can rebuild capital. Shockingly, it also calls
for the cancellation of the senior preferred stock altogether–with no compensation for the past
risk and future profits currently due to taxpayers. It is as if a company
proposed to do a stock buyback by proposing to cancel its shares rather than
purchasing them for cash.
So will Maxine Waters be the crusading financial
protector of our 401k plans and save America from the next financial bubble?
Well, there will certainly be lots of harassment and shakedowns. But don't
count on her steering us clear of Wall Street excesses. If history is any
guide, Mad Maxine will be way too busy raising money from the people she is now
in charge of regulating. Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at The Heritage
Foundation
Waters, who represents some of Los Angeles’ poorest
inner-city neighborhoods, has also helped family members make more than $1
million through business ventures with companies and
causes that she has helped, according to her hometown newspaper. While she and
her relatives get richer (she lives in a $4.5 million Los Angeles mansion),
her constituents get poorer. JUDICIAL WATCH
THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOYS & GIRLS IN CONGRESS GATHER ROUND
TO UNLEASH THE WHOLESALE LOOTING OF THEIR BANKSTER PAYMASTERS EVEN MORE….
BOTTOMLESS
BAILOUTS AROUND THE
CORNER WAITING!
After eight years of the
Dodd-Frank bank “reform,” the American financial oligarchy exercises its
dictatorship over society and the government more firmly than ever. This
unaccountable elite will not tolerate even the most minimal limits on its
ability to plunder the economy for its own personal gain.
“Democrats Move Towards
‘Oligarchical Socialism,’ Says
Forecaster Joel Kotkin.”
NO POL IN HISTORY SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM BANKSTERS THAN BARACK
OBAMA, AND HE DID IT BEFORE HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE. What did the Wall Street
banksters know that took us so long to find out???
"One of the premier institutions of
big business, JP Morgan Chase, issued an internal report on the
eve of the 10th anniversary of the 2008 crash, which warned that
another “great liquidity crisis” was possible, and that a
government bailout on the scale of that effected by Bush and Obama
will produce social unrest, “in light of the potential impact
of central bank actions in driving inequality between
asset owners and labor."
Obama, of course, covered up his own
role, depicting his presidency as eight years of heroic efforts to
repair the damage caused by the 2008 financial crash. At the end of those
eight years, however, Wall Street and the financial oligarchy were
fully recovered, enjoying record wealth, while working people were
poorer than before, a widening social chasm that made possible the
election of the billionaire con man and Demagogue in November 2016.
“The response of the administration was to
rush to the defense of the banks. Even before coming to power, Obama expressed
his unconditional support for the bailouts, which he subsequently
expanded. He assembled an administration
dominated by the interests of finance
capital, symbolized by economic adviser Lawrence Summers and Treasury
Secretary Timothy Geithner.”
supposedly contributing to the
country’s economic downturn.
“I’m not Jamie Dimon, who pays $13
billion to settle a case and then pays
$11 billion to settle a case and who I
think is the worst banker in the United
States,” he told reporters.
10 years after the financial crisis,
Americans are divided on security of
U.S. economic system
A decade after
the 2008 financial crisis, the public is about evenly split on whether the U.S.
economic system is more secure today than it was then. About half of Americans
(48%) say the system is more secure today than it was before the 2008 crisis,
while roughly as many (46%) say it is no more secure.
Opinions have
changed since 2015 and 2013, when majorities said the economic system was no
more secure than it had been prior to the crisis (63% in both years), according
to the new survey, conducted Sept. 18-24 among 1,754 adults.
Republicans are
now far more likely to view the system as more secure than they were during
Barack Obama’s presidency. Three years ago, just 22% of Republicans and
Republican-leaning independents said the economic system was more secure than
before the crisis. Today, the share saying the same has increased 48 percentage
points to 70%.
Views among
Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have moved in the opposite
direction. Today, Democrats are less confident that the economy is more secure
than it was before the 2008 financial crisis: Just a third say the economy is
more secure – a drop of 13 percentage points from 2015 (46%).
Meanwhile, the
public’s views of current economic conditions – and the trajectory of the U.S.
economy over the next year – have changed little since March.
About half of
Americans (51%) now rate the national economy as excellent or good, among the
most positive measures in nearly two decades.
As has been the
case since Donald Trump took office, Republicans are far more positive than
Democrats about economic conditions: 73% of Republicans and Republican-leaning
independents say economic conditions are excellent or good while just 35% of
Democrats and Democratic leaners agree.
Partisans also
are divided in their expectations for the economy. Republicans (57%) are much
more likely than Democrats (12%) to say they expect the national economy to get
better in the next year. Partisan differences in opinions about the economy –
current and future – are about as wide as they were in March.
Similarly, there
has been little recent change in Americans’ views of their own financial
situations. About half (49%) say their finances are in excellent or good shape.
Partisan
differences in people’s assessments of their personal finances, which were
modest during most of Obama’s presidency, have increased since then.
A majority of
Republicans (61%) say their personal financial situation is excellent or good,
compared with about four-in-ten Democrats and Democratic leaners (41%).
Most Americans
remain optimistic about their personal financial future. Almost seven-in-ten
adults (68%) expect their financial situation to improve some or a lot over the
next year.
Republicans (79%) more than Democrats (59%) are optimistic about
their finances getting better next year.
Note: See full topline results and methodology here (PDF).
Fannie Mae and
'Freddie Maxine'
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/stephen-moore/fannie-mae-and-freddie-maxine
Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters of
California appears a lock to become the next chairman of the House's powerful
Financial Services Committee. Waters is pledging to be a diligent watchdog
for mom and pop investors, and recently told a crowd that when it comes to
the big banks, investment houses and insurance companies, "We are going
to do to them what they did to us." I'm not going to cry too many tears
for Wall Street since they poured money behind the Democrats in these midterm
elections. You get what you pay for.
But here we go again asking the
fox to guard the henhouse.
Back during he the financial
crisis of 2008 to 2009, which wiped out trillions of dollars of the wealth
and retirement savings of middle-class families, we put the two major
arsonists in charge of putting out the fire. Former Democratic Sen. Chris
Dodd of Connecticut and former Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts
were the co-sponsors of the infamous Dodd-Frank regulations. Readers will
recall that good old Barney resisted every attempt to reign in Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac and said he wanted to "roll the dice" on the housing
market. That worked out well.
Meanwhile, Dodd took graft
payments in the form of low-interest loans from Countrywide, while greasing
the skids for the housing lenders in these years. Instead of going to jail or
at least being dishonorably discharged from Congress, he wrote the Dodd-Frank
bill to regulate the banks.
Enter Maxine Waters. Back in
2009, I had a run-in with "Mad Maxine," as she is called on Capitol
Hill. The two of us appeared together on HBO's "Real Time With Bill
Maher," and when she pontificated about the misdeeds of the housing
lobby, I confronted her on the money she took from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
PACs for her campaign.
Here is how the conversation
went:
MAHER: Don't you think Wall
Street needs regulation? That's where the problem is: that there was no
regulation.
MOORE: Well, let's talk about
regulation. One of the biggest institutions that have failed this year was
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is an institution that your friends, the
Democrats, in fact, you, Congresswoman Waters, did not want to regulate. You
said it wasn't broke five years ago at a congressional hearing, and you took
$15,000 of campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie.
WATERS: No, I didn't.
MOORE: Yeah, you did. It's in the
FEC (Federal Election Commission) records.
WATERS: No, it's not.
MOORE: And so did Barney Frank.
And so did Chris Dodd.
WATERS: That is a lie, and I
challenge you to find $15,000 that I took from Fannie PAC.
I have to confess that Waters is
very persuasive. I feared when the show was over that I had gotten my numbers
wrong and that I had falsely charged the congresswoman of corruption. But
several fact-checking groups looked it up, and sure enough, I was right. She
took $15,000 from the PAC and another $17,000, all told.
I was also right about her
statements during a 2004 congressional hearing when she said:
"Through nearly a dozen
hearings, we were frankly trying to fix something (Fannie and Freddie) that
wasn't broke. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and
particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin
Raines."
We learned the hard way just four
years later; this was all a fraudulent claim to avoid oversight of her
campaign contributors. Imagine if a Republican had said these things.
She took in more than $100,000
from Wall Street this year as well. None of this is illegal, but it calls
into question her shakedown tactics. First, she threatens to put their head
in a noose as chairman of the Financial Services Committee — as she is
getting them to pony up campaign contributions. Pay to play? You decide.
Waters has had run-ins with the
House Ethics Committee because of fundraising tactics and insider wheeling
and dealing. Back during the financial crisis, she was suspected of helping
arrange meetings with Treasury Department officials and getting bailout money
for OneUnited, a troubled bank that her family owned major stock holdings in.
She beat the rap of corruption, but it sure smelled bad.
So will Maxine Waters be the
crusading financial protector of our 401k plans and save America from the
next financial bubble? Well, there will certainly be lots of harassment and
shakedowns. But don't count on her steering us clear of Wall Street excesses.
If history is any guide, Mad Maxine will be way too busy raising money from
the people she is now in charge of regulating.
Stephen Moore is a senior
fellow at The Heritage Foundation and an economic consultant with
FreedomWorks. He is the co-author of "Fueling Freedom: Exposing the Mad
War on Energy."
|
|
Fannie Mae and 'Freddie
Maxine'
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/stephen-moore/fannie-mae-and-freddie-maxine
Democratic
Rep. Maxine Waters of California appears a lock to become the next chairman of
the House's powerful Financial Services Committee. Waters is pledging to be a
diligent watchdog for mom and pop investors, and recently told a crowd that
when it comes to the big banks, investment houses and insurance companies,
"We are going to do to them what they did to us." I'm not going to
cry too many tears for Wall Street since they poured money behind the Democrats
in these midterm elections. You get what you pay for.
But
here we go again asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
Back
during he the financial crisis of 2008 to 2009, which wiped out trillions of
dollars of the wealth and retirement savings of middle-class families, we put
the two major arsonists in charge of putting out the fire. Former Democratic
Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and former Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of
Massachusetts were the co-sponsors of the infamous Dodd-Frank regulations. Readers
will recall that good old Barney resisted every attempt to reign in Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac and said he wanted to "roll the dice" on the housing
market. That worked out well.
Meanwhile,
Dodd took graft
payments in the form of low-
interest loans from Countrywide,
while greasing the skids for the
housing lenders in these years.
Instead of
going to jail or at least
being dishonorably discharged
from Congress, he wrote
the Dodd-
Frank bill to regulate the banks.
Enter
Maxine Waters. Back in
2009, I had a run-in with "Mad
Maxine," as she
is called on Capitol
Hill. The two of us appeared
together on HBO's "Real
Time With
Bill Maher," and when she
pontificated about the misdeeds of
the
housing lobby, I confronted her
on the money she took from Fannie
Mae and Freddie
Mac PACs for her
campaign.
Here
is how the conversation went:
MAHER:
Don't you think Wall Street needs regulation? That's where the problem is: that
there was no regulation.
MOORE:
Well, let's talk about regulation. One of the biggest institutions that have
failed this year was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is an institution that
your friends, the Democrats, in fact, you, Congresswoman Waters, did not want
to regulate. You said it wasn't broke five years ago at a congressional
hearing, and you took $15,000 of campaign contributions from Fannie and
Freddie.
WATERS:
No, I didn't.
MOORE:
Yeah, you did. It's in the FEC (Federal Election Commission) records.
WATERS:
No, it's not.
MOORE:
And so did Barney Frank. And so did Chris Dodd.
WATERS: That is a lie, and I
challenge you to find $15,000 that I took from Fannie PAC.
I
have to confess that Waters is very persuasive. I feared when the show was over
that I had gotten my numbers wrong and that I had falsely charged the
congresswoman of corruption. But several fact-checking groups looked it up, and
sure enough, I was right. She took $15,000 from the PAC and another $17,000,
all told.
I
was also right about her statements during a 2004 congressional hearing when
she said:
"Through
nearly a dozen hearings, we were frankly trying to fix something (Fannie and
Freddie) that wasn't broke. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac,
and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin
Raines."
We
learned the hard way just four years later; this was all a fraudulent claim to
avoid oversight of her campaign contributors. Imagine if a Republican had said
these things.
She
took in more than $100,000 from Wall Street this year as well. None of this is
illegal, but it calls into question her shakedown tactics. First, she threatens
to put their head in a noose as chairman of the Financial Services Committee —
as she is getting them to pony up campaign contributions. Pay to play? You
decide.
Waters
has had run-ins with the House Ethics Committee because of fundraising tactics
and insider wheeling and dealing. Back during the financial crisis, she was
suspected of helping arrange meetings with Treasury Department officials and
getting bailout money for OneUnited, a troubled bank that her family owned
major stock holdings in. She beat the rap of corruption, but it sure smelled
bad.
So
will Maxine Waters be the crusading financial protector of our 401k plans and
save America from the next financial bubble? Well, there will certainly be lots
of harassment and shakedowns. But don't count on her steering us clear of Wall
Street excesses. If history is any guide, Mad Maxine will be way too busy
raising money from the people she is now in charge of regulating.
Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation and
an economic consultant with FreedomWorks. He is the co-author of "Fueling
Freedom: Exposing the Mad War on Energy."
White House report on socialism
The specter of Marx haunts the American ruling class
6
November 2018
Last month, the Council of Economic
Advisers, an agency of the Trump White House, released an extraordinary report
titled “The Opportunity Costs of Socialism.” The report begins with the
statement: “Coincident with the 200th anniversary of Karl Marx’s birth,
socialism is making a comeback in American political discourse. Detailed policy
proposals from self-declared socialists are gaining support in Congress and
among much of the younger electorate.”
The very fact that the US
government
officially acknowledges a growth of
popular
support for socialism, particularly
among the
nation’s youth, testifies to vast
changes taking
place in the political consciousness of
the
working class and the terror this is
striking
within the ruling elite. America is,
after all, a
country where anti-communism was for
the
greater part of a century a
state-sponsored
secular religion. No ruling class has
so
ruthlessly sought to exclude socialist
politics
from political discourse as the American
ruling
class.
The 70-page document is itself an inane
right-wing screed. It seeks to discredit socialism by identifying it with
capitalist countries such as Venezuela that have expanded state ownership of
parts of the economy while protecting private ownership of the banks, and, with
the post-2008 collapse of oil and other commodity prices, increasingly attacked
the living standards of the working class.
It identifies socialism with proposals
for mild social reform such as “Medicare for all,” raised and increasingly
abandoned by a section of the Democratic Party. It cites Milton Friedman and
Margaret Thatcher to promote the virtues of “economic freedom,” i.e., the
unrestrained operation of the capitalist market, and to denounce all social
reforms, business regulations, tax increases or anything else that impinges on
the oligarchy’s self-enrichment.
The report’s arguments and themes find
expression in the fascistic campaign speeches of Donald Trump, who routinely
and absurdly attacks the Democrats as socialists and accuses them of seeking to
turn America into another “socialist” Venezuela.
What has prompted this effort to
blackguard socialism?
A series of recent polls in the US and
Europe have shown a sharp growth of popular disgust with capitalism and support
for socialism. In May of 2017, in a survey conducted by the Union of European
Broadcasters of people aged 18 to 35, more than half said they would
participate in a “large-scale uprising.” Nine out of 10
agreed with the statement, “Banks and
money rule the world.”
Last November, a poll conducted by
YouGov showed that 51 percent of Americans between the ages of 21 and 29 would
prefer to live in a socialist or communist country than in a capitalist
country.
In August of this year, a Gallup poll
found that for the first time since the organization began tracking
the figure, fewer than half of Americans aged 18–29 had a positive
view of capitalism, while more than half had a positive view of
socialism. The percentage of young people viewing capitalism positively fell from 68
percent
in 2010 to 45 percent this year, a 23-
percentage point drop in just eight
years.
This surge in interest in socialism is
bound up with a resurgence of class struggle in the US and internationally. In
the United States, the number of major strikes so far this year, 21, is triple
the number in 2017. The
ruling class was particularly terrified by the teachers’ walkouts earlier this
year because the biggest strikes were organized by rank-and-file educators in a
rebellion against the unions, reflecting the weakening grip of the
pro-corporate organizations that have suppressed the class struggle for
decades.
The growth of the class struggle is an
objective process that is driven by the global crisis of capitalism, which
finds its most acute social and political expression in the center of world
capitalism—the United States. It is the class struggle that provides the key to
the fight for genuine socialism.
Masses of workers and youth are being
driven into struggle and politically radicalized by decades of uninterrupted
war and the staggering growth of social inequality. This process has
accelerated during the 10 years since the Wall Street crash of 2008. The
Obama years saw the greatest transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top in
history, the escalation of the wars begun under Bush and their spread to Libya,
Syria and Yemen, and the intensification of mass surveillance, attacks on
immigrants and other police state measures.
This paved the way for the elevation of
Trump, the personification of the criminality and backwardness of the ruling
oligarchy.
Under conditions where the typical CEO
in the US now makes in a single day almost as much as the average worker makes
in an entire year, and the net worth of the 400 wealthiest Americans has
doubled over the past decade, the working class is looking for a radical alternative
to the status quo. As the Socialist Equality Party wrote in its program eight
years ago, “The Breakdown of Capitalism and the Fight for Socialism
in the United States”:
The change in objective conditions,
however, will lead American workers to change their minds. The reality of
capitalism will provide workers with many reasons to fight for a fundamental
and revolutionary change in the economic organization of society.
The response of the ruling class is
two-fold. First, the abandonment of bourgeois democratic forms of rule and the
turn toward dictatorship. The run-up to the midterm elections has revealed the
advanced stage of these preparations, with Trump’s fascistic attacks on
immigrants, deployment of troops to the border, threats to gun down unarmed
men, women and children seeking asylum, and his pledge to overturn the 14th
Amendment establishing birthright citizenship.
That this has evoked no serious
opposition from the Democrats and the media makes clear that the entire ruling
class is united around a turn to authoritarianism. Indeed, the Democrats are
spearheading the drive to censor the internet in order to silence left-wing and
socialist opposition.
The second response is to promote phony
socialists such as Bernie Sanders, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)
and other pseudo-left organizations in order to confuse the working class and
channel its opposition back behind the Democratic Party.
In 2018, with Sanders totally integrated
into the Democratic Party leadership, this role has been largely delegated to
the DSA, which functions as an arm of the Democrats. Two DSA members,
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York and Rashida Tlaib in Detroit, are likely
to win seats in the House of Representatives as candidates of the Democratic
Party.
The closer they come to taking office,
the more they seek to distance themselves from their supposed socialist
affiliation. Ocasio-Cortez, for example, joined Sanders in eulogizing the
recently deceased war-monger John McCain, refused to answer when asked if she
opposed the US wars in the Middle East, and dropped her campaign call for the
abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
OBAMA:
SERVANT OF THE 1%
Richest
one percent controls nearly half of global wealth
The
richest one percent of the world’s population now controls 48.2 percent of
global wealth, up from 46 percent last year.
CLINTON MAFIA AND THEIR
BANKSTERS AT GOLDMAN SACHS
WHO IS TIGHTER WITH THE
PLUNDERING BANKSTERS? CLINTON, OBAMA or TRUMP?
The Clinton White House
famously abolished the Glass–Steagall legislation, which separated commercial
and investment banking. The move was a boon for Wall Street firms and led to major bank mergers that some
analysts say helped contribute to the 2008 financial crisis.
Bill and Hillary Clinton
raked in massive speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, with CNN documenting a total of at least $7.7 million in paid speeches to big financial
firms, including Goldman Sachs and UBS. Hillary Clinton made $675,000 from
speeches to Goldman Sachs specifically, and her husband secured more than $1,550,000 from Goldman speeches. In 2005 alone, Bill
Clinton collected over $500,000 from three Goldman Sachs events.
Hillary Clinton is simply the epitome of the rabid self – a whirlpool of selfishness, greed, and malignance.
It may well be true that Donald Trump has made his greatest
contribution to the nation before even taking office: the political destruction of Hillary Clinton and her
infinitely corrupt machine. J.R. Dunn
"Hillary will do
anything to distract you from her reckless record and the damage to the
Democratic Party and the America she and The Obama's have created."
Their
Looting of the Poor of Haiti IS FINALLY OVER
“The couple
parlayed lives supposedly spent in “public service”
into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in
the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political
machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of
a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the
Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes. The basic
components of the operation are lavishly paid speeches to Wall Street and
Fortune 500 audiences, corporate campaign contributions, and donations to the
ostensibly philanthropic Clinton Foundation.”
into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in
the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political
machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of
a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the
Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes. The basic
components of the operation are lavishly paid speeches to Wall Street and
Fortune 500 audiences, corporate campaign contributions, and donations to the
ostensibly philanthropic Clinton Foundation.”
IT WAS BILL CLINTON WHO UNLEASHED WALL STREET’S BIGGEST
CRIMINAL BANKSTERS…. And haven’t they sucked up the banksters’ gratuities
since?
Only Barack Obama has serviced
banksters more than Hillary
and
Billary!
“Clinton
also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after
his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in
part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street
bankers.”
TRY TO SEPARATE THE
CLINTON MAFIA AND DONALD TRUMP’S CRIMES FROM THEIR BANKSTER PAYMASTERS AT
GOLDMAN SACHS!
Can’t be done!
NEW YORK — In the midst of a public relations
nightmare, former White House Deputy National Security Adviser Dina Habib
Powell took charge of Goldman Sachs’s global charitable foundation, helping to
resurrect the big bank’s shattered image after it was implicated in practices
that contributed to the financial crisis of 2007-2008.
“Clinton
also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after
his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in
part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street
bankers.”
TOP EVIL CORPORATIONS LOOTING
AMERICA
Goldman Sachs TRUMP CRONIES – CLINTON CRONIES
JPMorgan Chase OBAMA CRONIES
ExxonMobil
Halliburton BUSH
CRIME FAMILY CRONIES
British American Tobacco
Dow Chemical
DuPont
Bayer
Microsoft
Google CLINTON CRONIES
Facebook OBAMA CRONIES
Amazon
Walmart
GET THIS BOOK!
Obamanomics:
How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends,
Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses
BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY
Editorial Reviews
Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?
Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special
interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting
handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small
businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter
Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores, and the White
House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering
corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate
America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s OBAMANOMICS TO
SERVE THE RICH AND GLOBALIST BILLIONAIRES.
OBAMA-CLINTONOMICS: You were wondering how many jobs
went to illegals and how well Obama’s crony banksters have done???
The sputtering economic recovering under
President Obama, the last to follow a major recession, has fallen way short of
the average recovery and ranks as the worst since the 1930s Great Depression,
according to a new report.
Had the recovery under Obama been the
average of the 11 since the Depression, according to the report, family incomes
would be $17,000 higher, six million fewer Americans would be in poverty, and
there would be six million more jobs.
http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2016/08/obama-clintonomics-serving-super-rich.html
OBAMA’S
CRONY BANKSTERS:
STILL
SUCKING THE BLOOD OUT OF AMERICA
This
manufactured crisis has, in turn, been exploited by the Obama administration
and both big business parties to hand over trillions in pension funds and other
public assets to the financial kleptocracy that rules America.
“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 THEAMERICAN THINKER.com
“This was not because of
difficulties in securing indictments or convictions. On the contrary, Attorney
General Eric Holder told a Senate committee in March of 2013 that the Obama
administration chose not to prosecute the big banks or their CEOs because to do
so might “have a negative impact on the national economy.”
“Attorney
General Eric Holder's tenure was a low point even within the disgraceful
scandal-ridden Obama years.” DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE MAG
No comments:
Post a Comment