When Biden took office, one of his first acts was the elimination of our border security. Like a power-hungry dictator, Biden simply decided to ignore our immigration laws. His catastrophic border policy resulted in untold millions of unidentified foreign citizens from around the world pouring into our country. Its impact is now being felt in cities across the country. The worst is yet to come. PETER LEMISKA - AND WE'RE ALREADY THERE!!!
Tuesday, December 24, 2019
OBAMA EMBRACES ELIZABETH WARREN - SHE WILL FINISH OFF THE MIDDLE CLASS AND UNLEASH MEXICO ON AMERICA - THAT WILL ENABLE ME TO EASE INTO A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE
Dissing Joe Biden: That strange Obama tilt toward Elizabeth Warren
Former President Obama is still withholding that Obama endorsement that all Democrats covet, and that some, such as his former vice president, Joe Biden, see themselves as probably holding a claim to.
Obama's never been one for tradition, though, and after making a big dig on "old men" running for president, which could have only meant old Joe, and twisting the knife a second time to claim that if women ran the world, the world would be a better place - something that at the time was seen as an endorsement of his wife Michelle, we now learn that he's been bucking for Elizabeth Warren all along.
According to a sharp and interesting analysis by Hot Air's Ed Morrissey:
The former president will not endorse anyone in the primary, but that doesn’t mean Obama will remain studiously non-interventionist either. While Warren tries to score populist points with her class-warfare schtick, Obama has been working the big-ticket donor rolls to ready them for a Warren nomination, according to The Hill:
He's on. He's rooting for Warren. And that's weird stuff, because Warren and Obama have clashed on policy in the past and never really ever got along with one another. There's a reason Obama refused to allow Warren into his cabinet as anything other than a temporary advisor -- in and out -- create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and get out, much to Warren's chagrin because she really wanted to run the thing, too. Obama wasn't having that.
But politics makes weird bedfellows, and it could make sense, given that Warren and Hillary Clinton, who also never got along well, were also in some kind of undercover advisory relationship, reported earlier. Clinton and Obama are bound together by their political crimes like lips and teeth. They cover for each other, just as Hillary also covers for Bill. Which would mean that Warren might be in tight not just with Hillary but Obama, too. One hand washes the other.
But it's not just raw political advantage that ties this. Most of Obama's actual views are close to Warren's, he is a leftwing extremist, same as she is, both ivy league variety, both outsiders of sorts who made it in. They would relate on that level. (I was once an ivy leaguer, too, and recall how I related best to the non-traditional types in my class, the people who somehow made it in, rather than the legacy 'Biff' types).
Meanwhile, ideologically, Obama and Warren are twins. Obama governed within some constraints and limits of his power, but his heart was in extremism, remaking America in some new image other than what it was. "Transforming," he said. Recall how he wanted to foist single-payer onto the American public but political realities forced him to settle for Obamacare. Joe Biden may have liked it, but Obama himself wanted a full socialist bill of fare if it were up to solely him.
Here's another weird one: Obama seems to be trying to boost Warren, now that her campaign is sliding. He's getting louder and more obvious about being for her now that Warren has slipped to at least third place in the Democratic polls, Bernie Sanders holds steady and Joe Biden's lead is strengthening. And it's important to note that his early favorite, Kamala Harris, an easy roundheels for any Democratic power behind the throne to manipulate, crashed out, leaving just Warren for Obama.
Morrissey notes how stinging the whole rejection must be for Old Joe, who faithfully served him for eight long years.
Speaking of old partners, isn’t this a bit of a no-confidence vote by Obama in Joe Biden? Biden has led polling wire to wire; Warren did come closest to pushing him out of the lead for about a hot second, but she’s not even a cold second at the moment. At one point in the last couple of weeks, Warren had come into close proximity of fourth place, but Pete Buttigieg’s brief flirtation with the top tier appears to have begun to wane now, too. This is a race between Biden and Bernie Sanders, which makes one wonder why Obama’s concerned about clearing a path for Warren — and not his old partner.
As this election goes on, it gets more and more obvious that Obama is playing footsie with Joe, and not the ordinary kind. In this Obama endorsement game, Joe's the soccer ball, not the other player's foot. Obama won't endorse this guy unless he's absolutely forced to, and in the meantime, based on his sneaky actions to boost Warren, he's doing his darndest to try to make the candidate he endorses a candidate of his own picking.
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S GLOBALIST AGENDA AS WRITTEN BY BILLIONAIRES: Open Borders
The U.S. is on track to import about 15 million new foreign-born voters in the next two decades should current legal immigration levels continue. Those 15 million new foreign-born voters include about eight million who will arrive in the country through chain migration, whereby newly naturalized citizens can bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country. UNDER OBAMA'S BANKSTER-INFESTED ADMINISTRATION, BANKS LOOTED A TRILLION DOLLARS FROM THE U.S. ECONOMY WITH IMPUNITY AND WERE REWARDED WITH INTEREST-FREE LOANS.
Former adviser to President Obama and investor Robert Wolf told Politico that the financial industry has changed over the last few decades and that Wall Street-types are vastly more aligned with the Democrat establishment than Trump’s GOP.
Wall Street Warms Up to Elizabeth Warren: ‘She’s the Smartest,’ ‘Most Policy-Oriented’ Democrat
Wall Street is warming up to the idea of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) being the Democrat nominee for president against President Donald Trump in the 2020 election, interviews with executives and bankers reveal.
A Politico report details how Wall Street insiders are becoming comfortable with Warren as the potential nominee to go up against Trump and his “America First” agenda:
“I think she is going to get the nomination because she’s the smartest, she’s charismatic and she’s the most policy-oriented,” said one former top executive at a large Wall Street bank who, like several interviewed for this story, declined to be quoted on record saying anything nice about Warren. “Wall Street is very good at accommodating itself to reality and if the reality is the party is going to be super-progressive, they may not like Warren but she’s a better form of poison than Bernie.” [Emphasis added]
…
“If she were the nominee, there will certainly be people who will say that Donald Trump represents everything that I’m against,” said Orin Kramer, a hedge fund manager who is raising money for Buttigieg. “And they will find stuff that they like about her and will vote for her.” [Emphasis added]
BLOG: THE DEMOCRAT PARTY OF CRONY CAPITALISM IS THE PARTY OF BANKSTERS AND BOTTOMLESS BANKSTER BAILOUTS... AND NO PRISON TIME!
Former adviser to President Obama and investor Robert Wolf told Politico that the financial industry has changed over the last few decades and that Wall Street-types are vastly more aligned with the Democrat establishment than Trump’s GOP.
“I don’t think the stereotypes of the industry serve the same purpose as they used to,” Wolf said. “People who work in corporate America and financial services may have the same views that she does on 95 percent of the issues such as income inequality, student loans, climate change, and others.”
Wall Street and Warren have at least one major policy initiative in common: A full repeal of Trump’s illegal and legal immigration reforms.
This month, Warren released her immigration platform that includes increasing overall legal immigration to the U.S. to provide business with an even greater flow of foreign workers to hire over Americans, as well as a decriminalization of illegal immigration, an amnesty for all illegal aliens in the country, and an end of Trump’s reforms such as his immigration ban from terrorist-sponsored countries and reduction of the refugee resettlement program.
Like Warren, Wall Street executives have railed against Trump’s immigration agenda — demanding that his zero-tolerance policy at the U.S.-Mexico border be ended and opposing his travel ban.
JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon has supported amnesty for illegal aliens since at least 2016 when he announced support for the infamous “Gang of Eight” amnesty, saying, “Let them stay and let them build companies.”
Last month, Dimon said amnesty for illegal aliens was necessary to grow the economy, saying, “If we do these policies right, America will be growing a lot faster.”
Some of the top multinational banks — JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley — have come out against Trump’s travel ban that effectively stopped all immigration from a handful of foreign countries that sponsor terrorism.
“This is not a policy we support, and I would note that it has already been challenged in federal court, and some of the order has been enjoined at least temporarily,” former Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein wrote in a letter at the time. “Let me close by quoting from our business principles: ‘For us to be successful, our men and women must reflect the diversity of the communities and cultures in which we operate … Being diverse is not optional; it is what we must be.'”
Meanwhile, Citigroup has promoted mass immigration as a necessary component to growing the American economy in terms of increasing GDP. A report released by executives last year championed migration into the U.S., the United Kingdom, and Germany.
For decades, the big business lobby, Wall Street, and donor class have said mass immigration is crucial to growing GDP in the U.S. though research has shown that increasing legal immigration levels to an enormous ten million admissions a year would only grow GDP by about 2.5 percent. Meanwhile, Trump’s low-migration, high-wage economy has translated to 3.2 percent annual economic growth.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Report: Obama Hyping Elizabeth Warren to Top Donors
2:47
Former President Barack Obama is reportedly telling wealthy donors behind the scenes presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is a formidable contender and could win the White House in 2020.
In recent months, Obama has talked up Warren to donors who are concerned by her constant targeting of Wall Street and the donor class, according toThe Hill. Warren’s campaign has shunned taking contributions from high-dollar donors and Democrat bundlers, breaking with her past fundraising activities when she took money from donors for her 2018 Senate campaign.
Obama has reportedly said if she becomes the nominee to take on President Donald Trump, the party must come together to support her.
“He’s asked all of the candidates who have sought his advice three questions: Is your family behind you? Why you? And why now? She checked the box for all,” an unnamed Obama ally told The Hill. “I think he feels licensed to give an opinion on her because he’s ‘hired’ her.”
One Democrat donor said Obama views Warren as “very smart” and takes her progressive agenda seriously, adding, “he sees her running the campaign with the most depth.”
In addition to Warren, Obama has spoken warmly of his former vice president Joe Biden — who, despite his numerous gaffes, remains the race’s frontrunner. Obama infamously ruled against endorsing Biden’s 2020 bid and reportedly told another candidate that Biden lacks an “intimate bond” with voters, especially in Iowa, the first-in-the-nation caucus state.
While Obama has spoken highly of Warren and Biden, he has said he is not endorsing her or anyone else in the race until a nominee is chosen.
The report comes after Obama warned against adopting “purity tests” in the crowded Democrat primary. Speaking last month to roughly 100 donors in Los Altos Hills, California, the former president urged candidates to “chill out” and should be willing to support whoever becomes the nominee.
“We will not win just by increasing the turnout of the people who already agree with us completely on everything,” he said during a question and answer period, flanked by Democrat National Committee chair Tom Perez. “Which is why I am always suspicious of purity tests during elections. Because, you know what, the country is complicated.”
“We have a number of women candidates and we have one gay candidate. And those candidates are going to have barriers if they win the nomination, or they win the general election — just like I did,” he added. “You can overcome that resistance if the way you are framing these issues and messages indicate, ’Look, I’m part of an American tradition… of opening up opportunity.”
Study: Immigration to Redistribute 26 Congressional Seats to Blue States for 2022 Election
5:33
The nation’s illegal and legal immigration system will help shift 26 congressional seats, primarily from red states, and redistribute them to mostly blue states next year, according to new analysis.
Every year, the United States imports about 1.2 million legal immigrants who largely arrive to reunite with foreign relatives already in the country. This level of annual legal immigration is in addition to the hundreds of thousands of foreign workers who arrive on work visas every year and nearly a million illegal aliens who successfully enter the U.S.
Research by the Center for Immigration Studies’ Steven Camarota and Karen Zeigler finds that annual illegal and legal immigration to the U.S. will redistribute political power in the form of 26 House seats away from a number of red states and towards massively populated blue states like California and New York.
“To put this number in perspective, changing the party of 21 members of the current Congress would flip the majority in the U.S. House,” Camarota and Zeigler note.
Ohio, a swing state that voted for President Trump in 2016, will get three fewer congressional seats in 2020 due to mass immigration in other states. Michigan and Pennsylvania, also states that voted for Trump in 2016, will each have two fewer congressional seats. Wisconsin, a Trump-supporting swing state, will have its congressional seats cut by at least one.
Red states such as Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia, Camarota and Zeigler predict, will all get one less congressional seat in 2020. Smaller blue states such as Minnesota and Rhode Island will each receive one less congressional seat.
Those seats cut from mostly red states will be redistributed to California, the most immigration-inundated state in the country. California, by 2020, is set to gain 11 congressional seats solely due to the fact that noncitizens, rather than just American citizens, are counted in congressional apportionment.
Likewise, New York — where nearly 40 percent of residents are foreign-born — is set to gain four more congressional seats and New Jersey, with a more than 22 percent foreign-born population, will also take an additional two congressional seats.
Texas, which has become increasingly blue due to immigration and out-of-state young people, will gain another four congressional seats, as will the swing state of Florida with its foreign-born population of 4.1 million.
The deeply blue states of Illinois and Massachusetts, both of which went 55 to 60 percent for Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, will each gain one congressional seat.
As Breitbart News has chronicled for years, the counting of only American citizens to divide up congressional districts and electoral college votes would shift power away from the affluent, metropolitan coastal cities of the U.S. and towards middle America.
If congressional districts were set by the number of citizens, the overall average population needed per congressional seat could decrease to about 670,000 citizens per district. This would give a stronger advantage for states with small illegal alien populations to gain and keep their current number of congressional seats.
Camarota and Zeigler’s research is one component of how overall immigration is aiding in shifting power to Democrats and metropolitan cities such as Los Angeles, New York City, and San Francisco. In the upcoming 2020 election, about 1-in-10 U.S. voters will have been born outside the country.
Ronald Brownstein, senior editor for The Atlantic, noted this year that nearly 90 percent of House congressional districts with a foreign-born population above the national average were won by Democrats. This means that every congressional district with a foreign-born population exceeding roughly 14 percent had a 90 percent chance of being controlled by Democrats and only a ten percent chance of electing a Republican.
The New York Times and Axios admit that legal immigration at its current rate will continue shifting the American electorate more towards Democrat control, as discovered in the 2016 presidential election between then-candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
Among native-born Americans, Trump won 49 percent to Clinton’s 45 percent, according to exit polling data. Among foreign-born residents, Clinton dominated Trump, garnering 64 percent of the immigrant population’s vote compared to Trump’s mere 31 percent.
(CNN)
The U.S. is on track to import about 15 million new foreign-born voters in the next two decades should current legal immigration levels continue. Those 15 million new foreign-born voters include about eight million who will arrive in the country through chain migration, whereby newly naturalized citizens can bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country.
University of Maryland, College Park researcher James Gimpel has found in recent years that more immigrants to the U.S. inevitably means more Democrat voters, and thus, increasing electoral victories for the Democrat Party.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
4 of 10 Democrats back gun confiscation, reparations, open borders, unlimited abortions
Despite some calls for 2020 Democratic presidential candidates to scale back on the liberal pandering, a sizable number of party voters back the most leftist of the promises, including "Medicare for all," gun grabs from those who’ve committed no crime, and a legal open border, according to a new survey.
The latest Zogby Analytics survey, provided to Secrets, also found solid support for slavery reparations to African Americans and the Green New Deal.
The survey was a wide-ranging review of where Democrats stand on key issues and candidates.
It found that former Vice President Joe Biden continues to hold a national lead in the 2020 primary and caucus race, followed by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
The surprise is that former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who funds gun control efforts, has pushed his way into fourth place with a multimillion dollar ad campaign. He pushed South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, the leader in the Iowa caucus, to fifth.
Several of the candidates, notably Sanders and Warren, have made extravagant promises to voters on key issues and programs, and the poll found that there is a good audience for those, especially in helping illegal immigrants.
Among Democratic voters, Zogby found that:
68% support "Medicare for all."
63% would repeal the Trump tax cuts.
53% back a ban on new oil and natural gas drilling on federal land.
49% support the Green New Deal.
43% support reparations for African Americans.
39% would decriminalize illegal border crossings.
38% want taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal immigrants.
38% support unlimited abortion.
36% support the confiscation of legally owned firearms from those who have not committed a crime.
The survey was conducted online of 443 likely Democratic primary voters. Based on a confidence interval of 95%, the margin of error for the poll of 443 is plus or minus 4.7 percentage points.
GET RID OF THE ILLEGALS AND THE HOMELESS CRISIS IS OVER THAT DAY!
Activist Group Plans $3 Billion City to Solve California’s Homeless Problem
2:04
An activist group is planning a $3 billion city that includes dorm-style accommodations, communal televisions, and underground tunnels to house California’s homeless.
Daune Nason, the founder of the activist group Citizens Again, announced Thursday his proposal for a city with an estimated $3 billion price tag decked out with amenities and services to serve 150,000 of California’s homeless.
In 2018, California’s homeless population reached nearly 130,000— about one-fourth of the national total, CBS Los Angeles reported.
According to a press release, the city would include dormitory-style sleeping quarters along with communal bathrooms and private showers.
“Qualified citizens”— those who meet as-yet undisclosed criteria— will be allowed to live in the city and are free to leave whenever they wish, says Nason, who adds, “Some might want to stay forever.”
Residents of this planned city would be provided wristbands to gain access to their dorms, as well as perform tasks such as job check-ins, medicine consumption, and buying items with credits.
The city would be divided into four neighborhoods, and each neighborhood would be equipped with its own cafeteria and kitchen with multiple scheduled eating times to accommodate an 150,000-person population.
The project will also involve building underground tunnels so deliveries can be made and city workers can commute to their jobs to “minimize disruption of citizen life,” according to Nason.
“It will be a city they’ll want to live in, a community they’ll want to be part of, and for those that desire, an opportunity to gain life skills to integrate back into society,” according to the Citizens Again website.
A GoFundMe page with a goal of $50,000 for the proposed city raised just $820 as of Sunday afternoon.
No comments:
Post a Comment