WAS THE RUSSIAN
HOAX ONLY OBAMA’S ATTEMPT TO PUT ASIDE TRUMP FOR AN OBAMA THIRD TERM FOR
LIFE???
They Destroyed Our Country
These people were engaged in a massive political conspiracy. The
Democrats made a decision from the outset—beginning with the election campaign
of the favored candidate of Wall Street and the CIA, Hillary Clinton—that they
would not oppose Trump on his anti-working-class social policy or his
authoritarian hostility to democratic rights and promotion of anti-immigrant
racism, but on issues of imperialist foreign policy.
Barack Obama’s plot for a third term for life
Joe Biden to Campaign as
Barack Obama’s Third Term
5:12
Former vice president Joe Biden is expected to enter the 2020 presidential race soon — as Barack Obama’s third term.
The Associated Press reported Sunday: “Joe Biden is finalizing the framework for a White House campaign that would cast him as an extension of Barack Obama’s presidency and political movement. He’s betting that the majority of Democratic voters are eager to return to the style and substance of that era — and that they’ll view him as the best option to lead the way back.”
In that, Biden may face two challenges. One is that Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016 partly by campaigning against Obama’s third term, as embodied by Hillary Clinton. The other is that the Obamas seems undecided as to whether Biden represents them; several Obama alumni are already supporting other candidates.
Biden was fading to the political margins in 2008, having crashed out of the Democratic presidential primary rather early, when Obama picked him to be his running mate. Biden, it was thought, brought years of experience that Obama lacked, plus foreign policy credentials. The Obama campaign also thought having a middle-aged white male on the ticket would appeal to the white working-class voters whom the strategists feared might not want to elect a black man.
In his eight years as vice president, Biden was faithful to Obama’s left-wing agenda — and has a controversial record:
Obamacare — the “big f*cking deal.” Biden’s infamous “hot mic” moment in 2010 captured his enthusiasm for Obama’s signature domestic policy — which raised health insurance premiums dramatically, canceled millions of individual insurance policies, and failed to cover everyone, as promised. Unlike then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who preferred a more incremental policy, Biden never offered any opposition of Obama’s radical, deceptive approach.Iran deal — selling the policy. Biden not only supported the Obama administration’s faulty negotiations with the Tehran regime, but he also played a leading role in trying to convince Jewish groups to support the ill-fated deal. That effort was part of what Obama national security aide Ben Rhodes later called the “echo chamber” — a scheme to fool the country into accepting the deal, and for avoiding ratification in the Senate, as the Constitution requires.Creating “distance” with Israel — “I condemn.” In March 2010, while Biden was visiting Jerusalem, a minor functionary in the Israeli government announced plans for housing in a Jewish neighborhood in eastern Jerusalem. Obama seized the opportunity to create “distance” with Israel — and Biden was the eager messenger. “I condemn the decision by the government of Israel,” Biden said, undermining America’s most loyal ally in the Middle East.Going easy on China — the Hunter Biden scandal. As Breitbart News’ Peter Schweizer has documented in his book Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends, Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, flew to China on Air Force Two in 2013 and emerged ten days later with $1 billion in investment from the Chinese government into his private equity firm. Neither Biden has never explained how or why the deal happened.Exploiting race — “Put y’all back in chains.” During the 2012 presidential campaign, Biden told an audience of predominantly black voters that the Republican candidate would “put y’all back in chains” if he won. That remark sought to create and exploit racial tensions that the administration had already fanned with its response to the Trayvon Martin controversy in Florida. It was also just one of many racially insensitive remarks in Biden’s career.
In addition, Biden also has a controversial record from his career in the Senate. He has been at pains recently to apologize for his conduct as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Clarence Thomas hearings — not for destroying Thomas’s character, but for resisting Anita Hill’s testimony. It was also Biden who invented “Borking,” the much-maligned, now routine practice of interrogating a nominee’s constitutional views, regardless of qualifications.
Against that record, Biden has two factors in his favor. One is his folksy manner — a somewhat contrived “working-class” persona that helps him connect to ordinary people. The other is that he could reunite the party factions that backed Obama. But given the fractured state of the so-called “Resistance,” that, too, seems in doubt.
Biden’s core constituency would be the party’s moderate wing — which needs and wants him to run, but is very much in retreat.
The former vice president has already run into trouble as he has struggled to dismiss allegations that he often touched women and girls inappropriately in public settings. Critics also say that he is too “moderate” for the Democratic Party today, which has moved to the left under the influence of the “Resistance” to President Donald Trump, and embraced an ideological agenda even more radical than the one Obama attempted to enact.
To that, Biden recently answered that he believes the party’s base is not as radical as some of its more outspoken leaders: “For my whole career … I was never labeled as a moderate. … [T]he definition of ‘progressive’ now seems to be changing. That is, ‘Are you a socialist?’ … The fact of the matter is, the vast majority of members of the Democratic Party are still basically liberal to moderate Democrats in the traditional sense.”
He concluded: “I’m an Obama-Biden Democrat, man. And I’m proud of it.”
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
CRONY CAPITALISM
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.
*
“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
PATHOLOGICAL LIAR BARACK OBAMA MOCKS TRUMP
Obama orchestrated the greatest transfer of wealth to
the rich in U.S. history!
THE WALL STREET BOUGHT AND OWNED DEMOCRAT PARTY
SERVING BANKSTERS, BILLIONAIRES and INVADING ILLEGALS
THE CRONY CLASS:
Income inequality grows FOUR TIMES FASTER under
Obama than Bush.
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election
in 1992, the Democratic Party had completely repudiated its association with
the reforms of the New Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare
programs to provide an ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW
MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black
capitalists, and passed the 1994 Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three
strikes” provision that has helped create the largest prison population in the
world.”
INCOME PLUMMETS UNDER OBAMA AND HIS WALL STREET CRONIES
(THERE'S A REASON WHY GEORGE SOROS RUNS OBAMA'S BID FOR A
THIRD TERM FOR LIFE).
NO PRESIDENT SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM BANKSTERS BEFORE AND
AFTER HIS PRESIDENCY THAT BARACK OBAMA.
Trump criticized
Dimon in 2013 for 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.
“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.”
Practically every cabinet appointee of Obama’s has close personal
connections to the ruling class, many having come directly from corporate
boardrooms. Under Obama’s watch not a single executive at a major financial
firm has been criminally tried, much less sent to jail, for their role in the
financial crisis.
“Attorney General Eric Holder's tenure
was a low point even within the disgraceful scandal-ridden Obama years.” DANIEL
GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE MAG
"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."
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.”
"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."
$2,198,468,000,000:
Federal Spending Hit 10-Year High Through March; Taxes Hit 5-Year Low
(Getty Images/Ron Sachs-Pool)
(CNSNews.com) - The federal government spent $2,198,468,000,000
in the first six months of fiscal 2019 (October through March), which is the
most it has spent in the first six months of any fiscal year in the last
decade, according
to the Monthly Treasury Statements.
The last time the government spent more in the
October-through-March period was in fiscal 2009, when it spent
$2,326,360,180,000 in constant March 2019 dollars.
Fiscal 2009 was the fiscal year that began with President George
W. Bush signing a $700-billion law to bailout the banking industry in October
2008 and then saw President Barack Obama sign a $787-billion stimulus law in
February 2009.
JPMorgan shares climb after the bank posts
record earnings and revenue
3h
·
JPMorgan
reported first-quarter earnings results on Friday, kicking off another earnings
season for the largest US banks.
JPMorgan Chase reported record
first-quarter results on both the top and bottom lines Friday morning. Shares
climbed 2.3% in early trading to $108.68.
Here's how the results stacked up with Wall
Street's expectations as compiled by Bloomberg.
·
Adjusted net income: $9.18 billion versus $7.7 billion expected
·
Earnings per share: $2.65 versus $2.34 expected
·
Revenue: $29.85
billion versus $28.4 billion expected
·
Expenses: $16.4
billion versus $16.7 billion expected
"In the first quarter of 2019, we had
record revenue and net income, strong performance across each of our major
businesses, and a more constructive environment," CEO Jamie Dimon said in
the earnings release. "Even amid some global geopolitical
uncertainty, the US economy continues to grow, employment and wages are going
up, inflation is moderate, financial markets are healthy, and consumer and
business confidence remains strong."
A deeper look into the numbers showed the
trading and investment-banking businesses exceeded expectations, though trading
declined 17% from the year earlier:
·
FICC sales & trading revenue: $3.73 billion versus $3.67 billion
expected
·
Equity sales & trading revenue: $1.74 billion versus $1.73 billion
expected
·
Investment-banking revenue: $1.75 billion versus $1.63 billion
expected
"The
Federal Reserve is a key mechanism for perpetuating this whole filthy system,
in which "Wall Street rules."
Wall
Street rules
The Federal Reserve
sent a clear message to Wall Street on Friday: It will not allow the longest
bull market in American history to end. The message was received loud and
clear, and the Dow rose by more than 700 points.
Hundreds of thousands
of federal workers remain furloughed or forced to work without pay as the
partial government shutdown enters its third week, but the US central bank is
making clear that all of the resources of the state are at the disposal of the
financial oligarchy.
Responding to
Thursday’s market selloff following a dismal report from Apple and signs of a
manufacturing slowdown in both China and the US, the Fed declared it was
“listening” to the markets and would scrap its plans to raise interest rates.
Speaking at a
conference in Atlanta, where he was flanked by his predecessors Ben Bernanke
and Janet Yellen, both of whom had worked to reflate the stock market bubble
after the 2008 financial crash, Chairman Jerome Powell signaled that the Fed
would back off from its two projected rate increases for 2019.
“We’re listening
sensitively to the messages markets are sending,” he said, adding that the
central bank would be “patient” in imposing further rate increases. To
underline the point, he declared, “If we ever came to the conclusion that any
aspect of our plans” was causing a problem, “we wouldn’t hesitate to change
it.”
This extraordinary
pledge to Wall Street followed the 660 point plunge in the Dow Jones Industrial
Average on Thursday, capping off the worst two-day start for a new trading year
since the collapse of the dot.com bubble.
William McChesney
Martin, the Fed chairman from 1951 to 1970, famously said that his job was “to
take away the punch bowl just as the party gets going.” Now the task of the Fed
chairman is to ply the wealthy revelers with tequila shots as soon as they
start to sober up.
Powell’s remarks were
particularly striking given that they followed the release Friday of the most
upbeat jobs report in over a year, with figures, including the highest
year-on-year wage growth since the 2008 crisis, universally lauded as
“stellar.”
While US financial
markets have endured the worst December since the Great
Depression, amid mounting fears of a looming recession and a new
financial crisis, analysts have been quick to point out that there are no
“hard” signs of a recession in the United States.
Both the Dow and the
S&P 500 indexes have fallen more than 15 percent from their recent highs,
while the tech-heavy NASDAQ has entered bear market territory, usually defined
as a drop of 20 percent from recent highs.
The markets, Powell
admitted, are “well ahead of the data.” But it is the markets, not the “data,”
that Powell is listening to.
Since World War II,
bear markets have occurred, on average, every five-and-a-half years. But if the
present trend continues, the Dow will reach 10 years without a bear market in
March, despite the recent losses.
Now the Fed has stepped
in effectively to pledge that it will allocate whatever resources are
needed to ensure that no substantial market correction takes place. But
this means only that when the correction does come, as it
inevitably
must, it will be all
the more severe and the Fed will have all the less power to stop it.
From the standpoint of the
history of the institution, the Fed’s current more or less explicit role as
backstop for the stock market is a relatively new development. Founded in 1913,
the Federal Reserve legally has had the “dual mandate” of ensuring both maximum
employment and price stability since the late 1970s. Fed officials have
traditionally denied being influenced in policy decisions by a desire to drive
up the stock market.
Federal Reserve
Chairman Paul Volcker, appointed by Democratic President Jimmy Carter in 1979,
deliberately engineered an economic recession by driving the benchmark federal
funds interest rate above 20 percent. His highly conscious aim, in the name of
combating inflation, was to quash a wages movement of US workers by triggering
plant closures and driving up unemployment.
The actions of the Fed
under Volcker set the stage for a vast upward redistribution of wealth,
facilitated on one hand by the trade unions’ suppression of the class struggle
and on the other by a relentless and dizzying rise on the stock market.
Volcker’s recession,
together with the Reagan administration’s crushing of the 1981 PATCO air
traffic controllers’ strike, ushered in decades of mass layoffs,
deindustrialization and wage and benefit concessions, leading labor’s share of
total national income to fall year after year.
These were also decades
of financial deregulation, leading to the savings and loan crisis of the late
1980s, the dot.com bubble of 1999-2000, and, worst of all, the 2008 financial
crisis.
In each of these
crises, the Federal Reserve carried out what became known as the “Greenspan
put,” (later the “Bernanke put”)—an implicit guarantee to backstop the
financial markets, prompting investors to take ever greater risks.
In 2008, this resulted
in the most sweeping and systemic financial crisis since the Great Depression,
prompting Fed Chairman Bernanke, New York Fed President Tim Geithner and
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (the former CEO of Goldman Sachs) to
orchestrate the largest bank bailout in human history.
Since that time, the
Federal Reserve has carried out its most accommodative monetary policy ever,
keeping interest rates at or near zero percent for six years. It supplemented
this boondoggle for the financial elite with its multi-trillion-dollar
“quantitative easing” money-printing program.
The
effect can be seen in the ever more staggering wealth of the financial
oligarchy, which has consistently enjoyed investment returns of between 10 and
20 percent every year since the financial crisis, even as the incomes of
workers have stagnated or fallen.
American capitalist
society is hooked on the toxic growth of social inequality created by the stock
market bubble. This, in turn, fosters the political framework not just for the
decadent lifestyles of the financial oligarchs, each of whom owns, on average,
a half-dozen mansions around the world, a private jet and a super-yacht, but
also for the broader periphery of the affluent upper-middle class, which
provides the oligarchs with political legitimacy and support. These elite
social layers determine American political life, from which the broad mass of
working people is effectively excluded.
The Federal Reserve is
a key mechanism for perpetuating this whole filthy system,
in which “Wall Street rules.” But its services in behalf
of the rich and the super-rich only compound the fundamental
and insoluble contradictions of capitalism, plunging the system
into ever deeper debt and ensuring that the next crisis will be
that much more violent and explosive.
In this intensifying
crisis, the working class must assert its independent interests with the same
determination and ruthlessness as evinced by the ruling class. It must answer
the bourgeoisie’s social counterrevolution with the program of socialist
revolution.
the depression is already here for most of us below the
super-rich!
Trump and the GOP created a fake
economic boom on our collective credit card: The equivalent of
maxing out your credit cards and saying look how good I'm doing right
now.
*
Trump criticized
Dimon in 2013 for 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.
*
"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."
*
"Overall, the reaction to the decision
points to the underlying fragility of financial markets, which have become
a house of cards as a result of the massive inflows of money from the
Fed and other central banks, and are now extremely susceptible
to even a small tightening in financial conditions."
*
"It
is significant that what the Financial
Times described as a “tsunami of money”—estimated to reach $1
trillion for the year—has failed to prevent what could be the worst year for
stock markets since the global financial crisis."
*
"A decade ago, as the
financial crisis raged, America’s banks were in ruins. Lehman Brothers,
the storied 158-year-old investment house, collapsed into bankruptcy in
mid-September 2008. Six months earlier, Bear Stearns, its competitor, had
required a government-engineered rescue to avert the same outcome. By
October, two of the nation’s largest commercial banks, Citigroup and Bank
of America, needed their own government-tailored bailouts to escape
failure. Smaller but still-sizable banks, such as Washington
Mutual and IndyMac, died."
*
The GOP said the "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" would reduce
deficits and supercharge the economy (and stocks and wages). The White
House says things are working as planned, but one year
on--the numbers mostly suggest otherwise.
Obama's Wall
Street cabinet
6 April 2009
A series of articles published over
the weekend, based on financial disclosure reports released by the Obama
administration last Friday concerning top White House officials, documents the
extent to which the administration, in both its personnel and policies, is a
political instrument of Wall Street.
Policies that are extraordinarily
favorable to the financial elite that were put in place over the past month by
the Obama administration have fed a surge in share values on Wall Street. These
include the scheme to use hundreds of billions of dollars in public funds to
pay hedge funds to buy up the banks’ toxic assets at inflated prices, the Auto
Task Force’s rejection of the recovery plans of Chrysler and General Motors and
its demand for even more brutal layoffs, wage cuts and attacks on workers’
health benefits and pensions, and the decision by the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) to weaken “mark-to-market” accounting rules and permit
banks to inflate the value of their toxic assets.
At the same time, Obama has campaigned against restrictions on bonuses
paid to executives at insurance giant American International Group (AIG) and
other bailed-out firms, and repeatedly assured Wall Street that he will slash
social spending, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
The new financial disclosures reveal that top Obama advisors
directly involved in setting these policies have received millions from Wall
Street firms, including those that have received huge taxpayer bailouts.
The case of Lawrence Summers,
director of the National Economic Council and Obama’s top economic adviser,
highlights the politically incestuous character of relations between the Obama
administration and the American financial elite.
Last year, Summers pocketed $5
million as a managing director of D.E. Shaw, one of the biggest hedge funds in
the world, and another $2.7 million for speeches delivered to Wall Street firms
that have received government bailout money. This includes $45,000 from
Citigroup and $67,500 each from JPMorgan Chase and the now-liquidated Lehman
Brothers.
For a speech to Goldman Sachs
executives, Summers walked away with $135,000. This is substantially more than
double the earnings for an entire year of high-seniority auto workers, who have
been pilloried by the Obama administration and the media for their supposedly
exorbitant and “unsustainable” wages.
Alluding diplomatically to the
flagrant conflict of interest revealed by these disclosures, the New York Times
noted on Saturday: “Mr. Summers, the director of the National Economic Council,
wields important influence over Mr. Obama’s policy decisions for the troubled
financial industry, including firms from which he recently received payments.”
Summers was a leading advocate of
banking deregulation. As treasury secretary in the second Clinton
administration, he oversaw the lifting of basic financial regulations dating
from the 1930s. The Times article notes that among his current responsibilities
is deciding “whether—and how—to tighten regulation of hedge funds.”
Summers is not an exception. He is rather typical of the Wall Street
insiders who comprise a cabinet and White House team that is filled with
multi-millionaires, presided over by a president who parlayed his own political
career into a multi-million-dollar fortune.
Michael Froman, deputy national
security adviser for international economic affairs, worked for Citigroup and
received more than $7.4 million from the bank from January of 2008 until he
entered the Obama administration this year. This included a $2.25 million
year-end bonus handed him this past January, within weeks of his joining the
Obama administration.
Citigroup has thus far been the
beneficiary of $45 billion in cash and over $300 billion in government
guarantees of its bad debts.
David Axelrod, the Obama campaign’s
top strategist and now senior adviser to the president, was paid $1.55 million
last year from two consulting firms he controls. He has agreed to buyouts that
will garner him another $3 million over the next five years. His disclosure claims
personal assets of between $7 and $10 million.
Obama’s deputy national security
adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, was paid $3.9 million by a Washington law firm
whose major clients include Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and the private equity
firm Apollo Management.
Louis Caldera, director of the
White House Military Office, made $227,155 last year from IndyMac Bancorp, the
California bank that heavily promoted subprime mortgages. It collapsed last
summer and was placed under federal receivership.
The presence of multi-millionaire
Wall Street insiders extends to second- and third-tier positions in the Obama
administration as well. David Stevens, who has been tapped by Obama to head the
Federal Housing Administration, is the president and chief operating officer of
Long and Foster Cos., a real estate brokerage firm. From 1999 to 2005, Stevens
served as a top executive for Freddie Mac, the federally-backed mortgage
lending giant that was bailed out and seized by federal regulators in
September.
Neal Wolin, Obama’s selection for
deputy counsel to the president for economic policy, is a top executive at the
insurance giant Hartford Financial Services, where his salary was $4.5 million.
Obama’s Auto Task Force has as its
top advisers two investment bankers with a long resume in corporate downsizing
and asset-stripping.
It is not new for leading figures
from finance to be named to high posts in a US administration. However, there
has traditionally been an effort to demonstrate a degree of independence from
Wall Street in the selection of cabinet officials and high-ranking presidential
aides, often through the appointment of figures from academia or the public
sector. In previous decades, moreover, representatives of the corporate elite
were more likely to come from industry than from finance.
In the Obama
administration such considerations have largely been abandoned.
This will not come as a surprise to
those who critically followed Obama’s election campaign. While he postured
before the electorate as a critic of the war in Iraq and a quasi-populist force
for “change,” he was from the first heavily dependent on the financial and
political backing of powerful financiers in Chicago. Banks, hedge funds and other financial firms lavishly backed his
presidential bid, giving him considerably more than they gave to his Republican
opponent, Senator John McCain.
Friday’s financial disclosures
further expose the bankruptcy of American democracy. Elections have no real
effect on government policy, which is determined by the interests of the
financial aristocracy that dominates both political parties. The working class
can fight for its own interests—for jobs, decent living standards, health care,
education, housing and an end to war.
///
“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).”
OBAMA and HIS BANKS: THEIR PROFITS,
CRIMES and LOOTING SOAR
CRONY KING OBAMA: CURL: The Obamas
live the 1% life
OBAMAnomics:
FROM THE MAN THAT HATED AMERICAN BUT
LOVED AMERICAN BANKSTERS:
OBAMA, THE BANKSTER OWNED LA RAZA DEM
THE GLOBALIST LEGACY OF A SOCIOPATH
Obama warns against “cynicism” at
Ohio State commencement address
7 May 2013
At a commencement address on Sunday
at Ohio State University, President Barack Obama counseled students not to be
“cynical” about government and politics.
There was an almost comically
absurd element to Obama’s remarks, delivered with his characteristic demagogy
and attempted gestures at profundity. In
his first four years in office, along with the first months of his second term,
Obama proceeded to systematically repudiate every campaign pledge and to
deflate every illusion that, with the assistance of a highly coordinated
marketing campaign, led millions of people, including a large number of young
people, to vote for him in 2008.
The Obama administration handed trillions of dollars to the
banks; has overseen a massive attack on public education; is leading the campaign
to slash Social Security and Medicare, the core federal retirement and health
care programs; expanded the war in Afghanistan, led a war against Libya, and is
preparing a new war in Syria; and has asserted the right to kill anyone,
anywhere, including US citizens, without due process.
After this record of service to the
corporate elite, he declares: “When we turn away and get discouraged and
cynical… we grant our silent consent to someone who will gladly claim it.
That’s how we end up with lobbyists who set the agenda; and policies detached
from what middle class families face every day; the well-connected who publicly
demand that Washington stay out of their business—and then whisper in
government’s ear for special treatment that you don’t get.”
The references to the “whispers” of
the wealthy and well-connected is particularly rich, coming only a week after
Obama nominated Penny Pritzker for commerce secretary. The selection of Pritzker—a longtime Obama confidant, billionaire
heiress and owner of a private equity company—only underscores the fact that
the administration is a government of, by and for the financial aristocracy.
She will be the wealthiest person ever to serve in a presidential cabinet.
Previous to his appointment of
Pritzker, Obama appointed Mary Jo White to head the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC), one of the main financial regulators. White made millions of
dollars as an attorney for banks responsible for the financial crisis,
including Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase, whose CEO, Jamie Dimon, called
White the “perfect choice” to head the SEC.
Practically every cabinet appointee of Obama’s has close personal
connections to the ruling class, many having come directly from corporate
boardrooms. Under Obama’s watch not a single executive at a major financial
firm has been criminally tried, much less sent to jail, for their role in the
financial crisis.
As a whole, Obama’s speech was
characterized by a complete separation from the actual conditions facing the
graduates he spoke to, who confront joblessness, falling wages, and a lifetime
in debt. “You have every reason to believe that your future is bright,” he told
his audience. “You’re graduating into an economy and a job market that is
steadily healing.”
He added later, “The trajectory of
this great nation should give you hope.” Really? This is under conditions in
which over 11 percent of college graduates are unemployed a year after getting
out of school, and another 16.1 percent simply drop out of the labor force,
according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Most of those who do find a job
are paid barely enough to get by, let alone pay off student loans. Wages for
young adults are falling faster than any other part of the population, and are
down by 6 percent in the past four years.
Most of the students that Obama
addressed Sunday will be so burdened with debt that they will delay or have to
completely put off starting a family or buying a home.
It is not surprising that Obama
should neglect to dwell on this disastrous situation, because his
administration bears responsibility for it. In the government-sponsored
restructuring of the auto industry, the White House insisted that the wages of
new-hires be slashed in half, setting the stage for vast reduction of wages
throughout the economy.
Obama sought to paint opposition to
the government’s violation of democratic rights as right-wing hysterics.
“Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of
government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity,” Obama said.
“They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should
reject these voices.”
This comes from a president who has
personally overseen the illegal assassination of thousands of people, including
at least three American citizens, in weekly “Terror Tuesday” meetings. The
assertions of executive power have been systematically expanded, going beyond
those claimed even by the Bush administration. The specter of a police
state—the response of the ruling class to growing social opposition—is in fact
lurking around the corner.
The moribund state of American
politics, of which the Obama administration is a principal expression, is,
according to the president, the fault of the American people. “Democracy
doesn’t function without your active participation,” he admonished. If
politicians “don’t represent you the way you want… you’ve got to let them know
that’s not okay. And if they let you down, there’s a built-in day in November
where you can really let them know that’s not okay.”
Such limp efforts to encourage
illusions in the viability of the “democratic process” in the United States
will not go very far. The experience of the past four years has not passed in
vain. Millions of people, including many of those in the audience at Ohio
State, are drawing the quite justified, if “cynical,” conclusion that the
entire political and economic system is rotten to the core.
Mounting evidence of international collusion in Libor
rigging - THE RAPE OF THE ECONOMY BY THE BANKSTERS
Mounting evidence of international collusion in Libor
rigging
OBAMA'S AND HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTER DONORS AT WORK:
JPMorgan’s
investment arm, which includes its energy group, collects $14 billion annually;
in comparison, six months’ worth of fines would amount to a paltry $180
million.
THERE IS A REASON WHY THE BANKSTERS INVESTED HEAVILY IN
OBAMA’S CORRUPT ADMINISTRATION!
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).
Obama: JPMorgan Is 'One of the Best-Managed Banks'
By Mary Bruce | ABC OTUS News – 2 hrs 31 mins ago
Obama: JPMorgan Is 'One of the …
Lou Rocco / ABC News
Just hours after a
top JPMorgan Chase executive retired in the wake of a stunning $2 billion
trading loss, President Obamatold the hosts of ABC's "The View" that
the bank's risky bets exemplified the need for Wall Street reform.
*
JPMorgan Chase investigated for manipulating California
energy market
By Oliver Richards
23 July 2012
The California Independent Systems Operator (CalISO), the
nonprofit organization that coordinates the state’s electricity market, has
alleged that JPMorgan Chase& Co. manipulated the state’s energy market,
resulting in at least $73 million in improper payments—costs passed along to
the state’s energy consumers.
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.”
OBAMANOMICS
TO SERVE BANKSTERS
AND
GLOBAL BILLIONAIRES
"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."
BILLIONAIRES, BANKSTERS AND THE RICH PARTNER WITH TRUMP TO FIGHT …
economic equality.
*
*
"JPMorgan
Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, who was known as Barack Obama’s
favorite banker and who has been a major donor to
the
Democratic Party, centered his annual letter to shareholders on a
denunciation of socialism."
*
BANKSTER SOCIALISM
Dimon’s bank received tens of billions
of dollars in government bailouts and many billions more from the
Obama administration’s ultra-low interest rate and “quantitative
easing” money-printing policies. He told his shareholders that
“socialism inevitably produces stagnation, corruption” and “authoritarian
government,” and would be “a disaster for our country.”… UNLESS IT IS
SOCIALISM FOR BANKSTERS AND WALL STREET!
*
"This paved the way for the elevation of
Trump, the personification of the criminality and backwardness of the ruling
oligarchy."
*
"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."
*
Socialism
haunts the American ruling class In the two months since Donald Trump
vowed in his State of the Union Address that “America will never be a socialist
country,” the right-wing demagogue president and the Republican Party have
embraced anti-socialism as the defining theme of their campaign in the 2020
elections.
Why Do Young People Find Socialism So Attractive?
To anyone over the age of
40, the growing appeal of socialist policies within the younger generations can
be confusing. To us, this nation's capitalist system has provided
the highest standard of living the world has ever seen, while
"socialism" repeatedly leads to totalitarian governments like China
and the USSR and destroys once prosperous nations like
Venezuela. One must wonder if our younger generations live in the
same world as we do. Do they not see the same things we see?
The answer to these
questions is a resounding no. The younger generations are growing up
in a nation and a world vastly different from the ones in which Americans over
the age of 40 were raised. What they see is therefore filtered
through an equally offset lens.
People over the age of 40
saw their parents and grandparents work stable jobs for the entirety of their
careers — often with a single parent earning enough to support an entire
family. They saw their parents pay into Social Security, and then
those same parents drew on those funds upon retirement. Their
parents had college degrees without debt. They could access health
care without concern that it would bankrupt them. They trusted the
safety and competence of the public education system. They trusted
elected officials to be honest and to obey the laws of the offices given to
them. If their parents failed economically, there was a familial and
religious culture that could combine with government programs to help them.
American children today have
largely seen the opposite. American
workers are routinely replaced by imported foreign workers and by outsourcing
to foreign lands. Immigrants and illegal aliens massively drive down
labor costs, requiring both parents to work to sustain an ever shrinking
family. Everyone pays into Social Security, but no one under the
age of thirty believes that it will remain in place for him to draw from when
needed. The cost of college is unsustainable. No one
trusts elected officials. Everyone feels that a single injury or
illness will destroy his finances for decades. For many of us, it
feels as if the prevailing sentiment of the now multicultural society is to
cheer for our economic failure.
The America of today is
starkly divided into two groups: a group that already accesses America as a
socialist entity and a group that pays for that system but has no access to it.
For the first group, America
is already a largely socialist government. Members draw their
subsistence from government welfare programs and can receive as much as $1,000 a month
for simply not committing crimes. Health care is
largely subsidized or simply free, as the recipients either have no money or
cannot be traced due to their lack of registration with the
government. Food and housing are often subsidized as well, through
federal or state programs. They
are also given preference in
access to education and
access to programs to offset the cost of that education. Many of
them who receive those benefits are citizens of other nations residing here
illegally, but they still receive both the preferential access and offset costs
denied to citizens and even veterans.
For the second group, they
and their parents have paid into this system through taxes for their entire
lives, yet they have seen few, if any, of the benefits to that
payment. They are on no government programs. While
violent illegal aliens are protected from prosecution, members of this second
group receive harsh punishment for even minor nonviolent
offenses. Any injury results in massive costs, and they are always
fighting to keep jobs with shrinking wages and no security.
To members of this second
group, the implementation of government policies that promise them at least a
minimal return on the payments they are making into that system is a relief. This
is how the younger generation of Americans view a "socialist" model,
and this is why they see potential in it.
To young Americans, a system
that promises minimal access to equality with other classes living in the U.S.
is preferable to a capitalist model that robs them of all funds, all options,
and all dignity while providing benefits only to other
groups. Access to a terrible health care system is still better than
one that will bankrupt you if you touch it. Access to a low-quality
but free university system may still be preferable to one that is inaccessible
due to race and will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars if you are given the
ability to attend. The guarantee of a poorly funded safety net is
still better than one that isn't there at all.
The younger generation of
Americans do not fear a totalitarian state, where they pay into a system in
which the benefits can be accessed only by those with government influence,
because younger Americans are already living in that state. The only difference
is that those who are receiving the benefit of their labor are not some elite
class of rulers from among their own people, but rather those who have the
political and cultural power to redirect that wealth. This is namely
a migrant class that has become the dominant force in American politics as well
as other groups that have been able to establish power to give themselves legal
preferences in education, contracting, and protections.
To pull the younger
generation back from the lure of "socialism," we must demonstrate
both that the rule of law still applies within the U.S. and reassert equality
under the law — without delay and without exception. The government
must also provide a minimal level of care and benefits for those who pay into
the system without allowing threats of violence to pull those resources to
citizens of other nations or to be used disproportionately on those who rely
solely on those benefits for generations without efforts to rise above those
benefits.
In short, the government
must cease working for others and once again work for its citizens and stop
calling that "socialism."
No comments:
Post a Comment