FAKEBOOK and GOOBLE ASSAULT FREE SPEECH TO BUILD THE GLOBALISTS’ BILLIONAIRES’ DICTATORSHIP FOR THE RICH
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/10/facebook-and-google-assault-free-speech.html
Analysis conducted last year reveal that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers.
New revelations about Hunter will hit President Joe Biden's already plummeting popularity
Zuckerberg’s FWD.us Claims No Amnesty Ensures Midterm Defeat for Democrats
17 Dec 20213
5:13
The Facebook-funded FWD.us investor advocacy group is touting the claim that Democrat turnout will drop in 2022 if the party cannot pass an amnesty through Congress.
But that claim is toothless, in large part because recent polls show that many Americans of Latino ancestry are increasingly voting for the GOP, precisely because GOP leaders oppose the amnesty-amplified wave of cheap labor into their communities.
The claim is being made by pro-migration groups, including the leaders of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) which denounced the Senate’s parliamentarian’s decision to exclude the parole amnesty for 6.5 million illegals from the draft Build Back Better spending plan.
NDLON declared Thursday night:
Democrats’ excuses for their failure, for their incompetence, and for their insincerity will be the ammunition used by xenophobes in the Republican Party to retake control of the federal government in upcoming elections. Inaction on immigration legalization risks further propelling Trumpism in every possible way … No more excuses. Where there is a will, there is a way.
The NDLON group represents illegal migrants, most of whom work for very low wages, and none of whom can vote in U.S. elections.
Rep. Lou Correa (D-Calif.) is making the same claim, according to Bloomberg, which reported that he “warned that Democrats would face wrath from voters in the 2022 elections if they don’t secure a citizenship path”
But the NDLON claim is being echoed by the politically powerful investor class, who use imported workers, consumers, and renters to spike the value of their Wall Street investments.
Todd Schulte is the president of the FWD.us advocacy group for investors, which gets about $30 million a year from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to push for more migration. On Thursday night, he tweeted:
Schulte’s deputy also pushed a hard line:
Unsurprisingly, FWD.us has a hidden agenda in the amnesty debate.
The establishment media extensively cover the proposed parole amnesty for 6.5 million illegal migrants. But the media largely ignores two other proposed changes to immigration laws that would deliver huge benefits to West Coast investors who created the FWD.us advocacy group in 2013.
For example, the BBB legislation would allow the White House to provide green cards to millions of favored migrants, including perhaps three million “chain migrants” selected by recent immigrants. This open-doors policy would provide investors with millions of new profit-generating consumers, renters, and workers.
The BBB legislation would also allow President Joe Biden’s pro-migration deputies to sell green cards to at least one million migrants who have taken many of the Fortune 500 jobs sought by skilled U.S. college graduates. This change would allow Fortune 500 companies to hire many more foreign graduates with dangled offers of fast-track green cards. These workers are usually imported via the visa worker programs, such as the H-1B and Optional Practical Training program.
But those two benefits for the Fortune 500 investors may be dropped if the Democrat senators cannot also get their amnesty for illegal migrants.
On Friday, an advocacy group for corporate-funded immigration lawyers urged Congress to keep pushing the green card giveaway, even after the amnesty was nixed:
“The corporate guys are riding on perceived sympathy for the illegal alien population in order to get their immigration giveaways,” said Robert Law, the director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies. He continued:
The Hispanic population knows immigration is a pocketbook issue for them as well, and mass illegal immigration — plus legal immigration — hurts the economic opportunities of Hispanic Americans or the black community, or any people who typically are competing at the lower end of the economic spectrum.
The Senate’s debate referee has not issued any judgments on the two green card proposals.
Zuckerberg’s FWD.us network of coastal investors stands to gain from more cheap labor, government-aided consumers, and urban renters. The network has funded many astroturf campaigns, urged Democrats to not talk about the economic impact of migration, and manipulated coverage by the TV networks and the print media.
FWD.us’also spotlights many family dramas amid the inflow of border migrants. This focus helps keep reporters from recognizing the huge pocketbook impact of the establishment’s economic policy of mass migration. The resulting family-drama coverage also keeps many young progressives from noticing that the extraction migration policy drives up their rents and cuts their salaries.
The breadth of investors who founded and funded FWD.us was hidden from casual visitors to the group’s website sometime in the last few months. But copies exist at other sites.
TRAITOR BARACK OBAMA and the MEX FASCIST MOVEMENT of LA RAZA “The Race”
http://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2018/09/james-walsh-barack-obamas.html
Reconquistas Muñoz, Solis present at Obama sovereignty sellout session ...Obama was joined at the meeting [about a push to amnesty millions of border-hopping job thieves] by Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs Phil Schiliro, and White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs [and former 'Tan Klan' minion] Cecilia Muñoz...
*
"Of course none of this comes as any surprise considering that Obama's point person on illegal immigration, Cecilia Munoz, once worked for the ultra-radical National Council of La Raza [aka the Tan Klan], a racist group that is committed to staging a takeover of the American Southwest and returning it to Mexico...."
http://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2018/09/james-walsh-barack-obamas.html
Reconquistas Muñoz, Solis present at Obama sovereignty sellout session ...Obama was joined at the meeting [about a push to amnesty millions of border-hopping job thieves] by Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs Phil Schiliro, and White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs [and former 'Tan Klan' minion] Cecilia Muñoz...
"Of course none of this comes as any surprise considering that Obama's point person on illegal immigration, Cecilia Munoz, once worked for the ultra-radical National Council of La Raza [aka the Tan Klan], a racist group that is committed to staging a takeover of the American Southwest and returning it to Mexico...."
MULTI-CULTURALISM and the creation of a one-party globalist country to serve the rich in America’s open borders.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/12/em-cadwaladr-impending-death-of.html
“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR
Biden’s Chief of Staff Worked on Behalf of Big Tech for Endless H-1B Visas
Democrat Joe Biden has chosen Ronald Klain to be his chief of staff should he enter the White House in January. Klain worked on behalf of Silicon Valley executives and their interests, which include providing tech corporations with an endless supply of H-1B foreign visa workers and more free trade.
Klain, who was made Biden’s incoming chief of staff this week, served on the executive council of TechNet — a firm that promotes the interests of Silicon Valley’s tech corporations in Washington, D.C. Klain served on the council alongside executives from the Oracle Corporation, Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, Google, Visa, Apple, and Microsoft.
TechNet, most recently, joined a lawsuit against President Trump’s reforms to the H-1B visa program that sought to prioritize unemployed Americans for jobs rather than allowing businesses to continue importing foreign workers.
TechNet is one of the groups that has filed an amicus brief to oppose the new regulations on H-1B visas. https://t.co/ofY4GJ2sVR
— U.S. Tech Workers (@USTechWorkers) November 12, 2020
Trump’s seeking to force businesses to hire Americans over importing foreign visa workers is an affront to Silicon Valley’s tech corporations, those represented by TechNet, who advocate for an endless flow of H-1B foreign visa workers.
There are about 650,000 H-1B visa workers in the U.S. at any given moment. Americans are often laid off and forced to train their foreign replacements, as highlighted by Breitbart News. More than 85,000 Americans annually potentially lose their jobs to foreign labor through the H-1B visa program.
Analysis conducted in 2018 discovered that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley, California, are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers. Up to 99 percent of H-1B visa workers imported by the top eight outsourcing firms are from India.
TechNet’s listed immigration goals include allowing corporations to dictate the annual level of legal immigration to the United States and the elimination of per-country caps that would effectively let India and China monopolize the U.S. green card system.
The group’s goals on trade are in direct opposition to President Trump’s economic nationalist agenda that has imposed tariffs on foreign imports from China, Canada, Europe, and other parts of the globe.
TechNet’s trade goals include reducing “tariff and non-tariff barriers to information, communications, and advanced energy technology products, services, and investments” as well as “protections for the free flow of data across borders…”
While Biden has vowed to flood the U.S. labor market with more foreign workers to compete against Americans for jobs, he has shied away from questions on whether he will eliminate tariffs on foreign imports that were imposed by Trump. Such elimination of tariffs would be a boon to multinational corporations that offshore their production and jobs overseas only to import their products back into the U.S. market, often with no penalties for doing so.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
90% OF THE EMPLOYEES OF BIDEN'S CRONY MARK ZUCKERBERG'S FACEBOOK WERE BORN IN INDIA!
Joe Biden Seeks Indian Votes with Amnesty, Work Permits for India’s Graduates
AP Photo/Mahesh Kumar A.
Joe Biden is promising to deliver more of India’s contract workers — plus an unlimited supply of tech graduates — to the small but growing Indian community in the United States.
“He will increase the number of visas offered for permanent, work-based immigration based on macroeconomic conditions and exempt from any cap recent graduates of Ph.D. programs in STEM fields,” says a new page on Biden’s campaign website. The page is titled “Joe Biden’s Agenda for the Indian American [sic] Community.”
The document touts his choice for Vice President, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif. Her mother was Indian, and he promises to put Indian visa workers on a fast track to green cards:
Sold Out: How High-Tech Billionaires & Bipartisan Beltway Crapweasels Are ScrewingAmerica's Best & Brightest
By Michelle Malkin and John Miano
Analysis conducted in 2018 discovered that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley, California, are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers. Up to 99 percent of H-1B visa workers imported by the top eight outsourcing firms are from India.
Joe Biden’s Donor List Includes More than 30 Executives Tied to Wall Street
Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden has more than 30 business executives on his donor list that have connections to Wall Street.
Analysis of Biden’s more than 800 big donors, those who have bundled contributions for his presidential bid against President Trump, found that more than 30 of the executives listed have ties to Wall Street.
CNBC reports:
CNBC reviewed a new list of more than 800 Biden bundlers who raised at least $100,000 for the campaign, and found that several of them had links to financial firms. A few had been mentioned on the initial list of Biden fundraisers that was released in 2019 during the Democratic primary contests. [Emphasis added]
…
Beyond those from Wall Street, Biden’s campaign saw fundraising help from leaders in Silicon Valley, including LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman and venture capitalist Ron Conway. [Emphasis added]
Those executives with ties to Wall Street funding Biden’s campaign include:
Frank Baker, Brett Barth, Jim Chanos, Mark Chorazak, David Clunie, William Derrough, Roger Altman, Blair Effron, Jon Feigelson, Mark Gallogly, John Rogers, Jon Gray, Tony James, Jon Henes, Sonny Kalsi, Orin Kramer, Brad Krap, Brian Kreiter, Marc Lasry, Nate Loewenthall, Eric Mindich, Kara Moore, Charles Myers, Alan Patricof, Deven Parekh, Robert Rubin, Evan Roth, Faiza Saeed, Rajen Shah, Jay Snyder, Rob Stavis, and Jeff Zients.
As Breitbart News reported, Biden’s campaign is being backed by nearly “all the big banks” on Wall Street, according to CNN analysis, and Wall Street executives and employees have donated more than $74 million to elect the former vice president.
Trump, on the other hand, has accepted far less money from Wall Street — taking just a little over $18 million dollars from financial firms. This is a whopping $56 million less than what Biden has accepted from Wall Street.
Despite his Wall Street, big business, Big Tech, and billionaire donations, Biden has attempted to portray himself as a small-town fighter from Scranton, Pennsylvania.
In a post on Sunday, Biden wrote that “Donald Trump sees the world from Park Avenue,” whereas he sees the world “from where I came from: Scranton, Pennsylvania.” In fact, Biden has raised over $1 million from wealthy Park Avenue donors, more than eight times the less than $130,000 that Trump has taken from Park Avenue residents.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter
Big Tech and Big Law dominate Biden transition teams, tempering progressive hopes
Alexander Nazaryan administration takes office in January.
WASHINGTON — For six years, Brandon Belford worked as an economic policy adviser to President Barack Obama in the White House and federal agencies. He moved to the Bay Area when Donald Trump became president, part of a massive flight of Obama officials from Washington to Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Hollywood. He took high-ranking positions with Apple and then Lyft, where he is currently the ride-sharing company’s chief of staff.
Now Belford is back, as part of one of the “transition teams” named by President-elect Joe Biden to restock a federal government that has been battered after four years of Trump by hiring new officials and advising the incoming administration on what its first governing steps should be.
Those steps could be timid, judging by the composition of those teams, where Obama-era centrism prevails. That has some progressives worried that Biden represents nothing more than a return to normal, at a time when many of them believe the nation is ready to embrace policy ideas well to the left of center.
“The status quo is killing us,” says former Bernie Sanders press secretary Briahna Joy Gray, who now hosts a podcast called “Bad Faith.”
Belford is joined by dozens of other Democratic operatives who have spent the past four years working at prestigious law firms and think tanks. On these “agency review teams” are high-ranking executives from Amazon, partners at white-shoe law firms like Covington & Burling and enough experts from D.C. center-left think tanks — including six from the Brookings Institution alone — to fill a center-left think tank.
Progressives knew this was coming. “I am very concerned about the role Uber executives would play in this administration,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez D-N.Y., told Yahoo News. Even though she also effusively praised the appointment of Ron Klain as the incoming White House chief of staff, Ocasio-Cortez vowed that corporate America would not “pull the wool over our eyes” when it came to crafting the Biden presidency.
Some have put it less bluntly. “Biden’s transition team is full of wealthy corporate executives who are completely disconnected from the struggles of the working class,” complains left-leaning activist Ryan Knight, whose Twitter handle is @ProudSocialist.
App-based drivers from Uber and Lyft protest in a caravan in front of City Hall in Los Angeles on October 22, 2020 where elected leaders hold a conference urging voters to reject on the November 3 election, Proposition 22, that would classify app-based drivers as independent contractors and not employees or agents. (Photo by Frederic J. BROWN / AFP) (Photo by FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images)More
He was presumably referring to the two dozen agency review team officials who come from law firms like Arnold & Porter. Or to the 40 or so members of the Biden transition who are current or recent lobbyists.
The agency review teams are not exactly settling into their cubicles just yet. For one, President Trump has not yet conceded the election, and the transition has been hindered in part by Republican operatives at the General Services Administration. And agency review is an enormously complex process, one that actually began months ago. The transition teams are supposed to ensure a “smooth transfer of power,” in large part by making sure that capable officials are ready to get to work in their respective agencies the moment Biden lifts his hand from the Lincoln Bible.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, one member of the Biden campaign working on agency-related matters says teams were primarily tasked with surveying the landscape of the federal bureaucracy. She says that the transition teams would make some hiring recommendations, but only as a secondary function.
With a single exception, the agency review team members mentioned in this article did not respond to requests for comment.
One with a typically impressive biography is that of Aneesh Chopra, who served as the U.S. chief technology officer for Obama before starting his own medical data logistics company, CareJourney. Now he is on the transition team for the U.S. Postal Service, where he will presumably work to undo the alleged damage by another logistics maven: Trump appointee Louis DeJoy.
Of course, most progressives are glad that there’s a Biden transition to speak of, instead of a second Trump term. But they also recognize their own role in the Democratic candidate’s victory.
“Everyone fell into line and did everything they could to get Joe Biden elected,” says Max Berger, a progressive activist who worked for Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign and Justice Democrats, the group that helped elect Ocasio-Cortez to the House in 2018.
Berger recognizes that progressives will be a “junior partner” to the establishment Democrats with whom Biden has been ideologically and temperamentally aligned for a good half-century. They want to be partners all the same, not just the loyal opposition.
Many are cheered by some of the agency review teams. For one, they are notably more diverse, a stark contrast to Trump’s reliance on white males for so much of his advice. On the transition team for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration is Jedidah Isler, the Dartmouth professor who in 2014 became the first Black woman to earn a doctorate in astrophysics from Yale. The transition team for the Small Business Administration includes Jorge Silva Puras, a political leader in Puerto Rico who also teaches entrepreneurship at a community college in the Bronx.
“The presence of labor officials throughout many of the groups is notable,” says David Dayen, executive editor of the American Prospect. In the Department of Education team, for example, are several executives from the American Federation of Teachers.
He called the Federal Reserve and Treasury teams “all-stars,” a sentiment shared by other progressives interviewed for this article. On the Treasury team is Mehrsa Baradaran, a progressive economist who has written on the racial wealth gap. She is also on the Federal Reserve team, along with Reena Aggarwal, a corporate governance expert.
Progressive strategist Elizabeth Spiers says the finance-related teams are not “not quite Elizabeth Warren levels of aggressiveness but also not stuffed with finance people.” Biden’s advisers appear to have learned the lessons of his former boss. During Obama’s first year, he relied on banking executives to help quell the financial crisis. They did so in ways that steered the new president away from progressive proposals, such as nationalizing those very same banks.
There is not a single current executive from Citibank or Goldman Sachs on any of the transition teams. Bank of America has also been shut out. JPMorgan can boast a single toehold in the agency review process: Lisa Sawyer of the Pentagon team. A spokesman for JPMorgan told Yahoo News that the bank was “following the appropriate election laws” and that Sawyer was “not on an agency review team that will touch any banking issues.”
“I think the Biden administration is going to be surprising to progressives in some ways and disappointing in others, and the agency review teams reflect that,” Dayen says. During the summer, the American Prospect published a lengthy exposé about Biden’s foreign policy advisers’ lucrative foray into corporate America. Many are set to return to the highest echelons of official Washington.
“I have to be cautiously optimistic,” says Waleed Shahid, communications director for the Justice Democrats.
Relatively young progressives like Shahid are less likely to wax romantic about the way things were in Washington. They are less interested in experience than conviction. But for many in Biden’s camp, a lack of experience was among the several fatal flaws of the Trump years.
“Everyone — right or left — has made the mistaken assumption for years that governing is easy,” says “The Death of Expertise” author Tom Nichols, who teaches at the Naval War College and is an ardently anti-Trump Republican.
“After having a bunch of nitwits and cronies loose in the government,” Nichols wrote in an email, “I think a lot of people on the left are really giving in to the assumption that as long as you’re not Trump, or not a complete idiot, anyone can do it.”
Given the title and theme of his book, Nicholas cautioned against that approach. “It’s a childish and silly approach to government, but it’s a bipartisan problem,” he told Yahoo News.
While progressive may not see their stars like Sens. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren occupying the Treasury Department, they do very much hope that a Biden presidency amounts to more than a third Obama term. It was unaddressed economic inequality, they believe, that bred the populist resentment that gave Trump an opening in 2016. The coronavirus has only made that inequality worse. That will only increase populist resentment, they worry, to be exploited by a Trump acolyte — or perhaps Trump himself, again — in 2024.
Addressing that inequality, for now, falls to transition team officials like Mark Schwartz of Amazon and Ted Dean of Dropbox, as well as Arun Venkataraman of Visa and David Holmes of defense contractor Rebellion Defense, in which Eric Schmidt of Google is an investor. Many of these officials are veterans of the Obama administration or Democratic offices on the Hill.
“There is a lot of corporate influence there,” says Maurice Weeks, co-founder of the Action Center on Race and the Economy. “And that is troubling.” But he is encouraged by the presence of “hard-core progressives” like Sarah Miller, a former Treasury deputy who is both an anti-Facebook activist and the executive of the American Economic Liberties Project, which seeks to curb corporate power. She is now on the Treasury transition team.
In some ways, the difference is between former Obama officials who, like Miller, went on to become activists and those who moved on to become rich. The latter did only what many government officials had done before them. But at a time of mass unemployment, a stint at the corporate law firm Latham & Watkins (three transition team members) may not seem as impressive as it may have when Obama was president.
“We don’t just want to rewind the clock by four years,” Weeks says.
For many progressives, Trump was a singular threat to important institutions of the federal government, but rebuilding those institutions is simply not as important as rebuilding entire communities shattered by economic, social and racial inequalities.
During Obama’s presidency, everyone joked that he selected Biden for VP because Biden’s incompetency insured that Obama would never be impeached. Yes, Obama was bad, but Biden would be worse. Now that Biden’s the president, that joke was 100% correct. Sadly, he’s multiple times worse than anyone imagined. Biden has more failures in one year than most presidents have in a lifetime – the Afghanistan debacle and surrender, huge crime spikes due to Democrat “defund the police” insanity, actively working to destroy the petroleum industry while supporting Russia’s, soaring inflation, open support and deference to China, and his weakness being directly responsible for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine -- to name just a few epic failures. As bad as Biden is as president, it’s obvious he selected Harris for the same reason that Obama selected him -- to insure he’s never removed from office. If you think things can’t possibly get worse, just look at Harris and you instantly realize – yes, they can. She would be multiple times worse than Joe.
Worst president ever? Let's find out
Kakistocracy: noun, government by the worst persons; a form of government in which the worst persons are in power.
The old saying goes that even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally. So you might think that during a 50-year political career, the odds would dictate that Joe Biden would, once in a blue moon, make a correct decision — just based on the odds. But you'd be mistaken. Biden has stumbled and bumbled from one disastrous decision to the next. Disastrous, that is, for America. Biden himself has prospered handsomely in spite of his glaring incompetence and corruption.
BLOG EDIOR: WORKING WITH JOE AND THEIR BANKSTERS WAS CHINA'S OLD WHORE DIANNE FEINSTEIN, WAR PROFITEER AND ONE OF THE MOST CORRUPT POLS IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY. HARDLY SURPRISING FEINSTEIN WAS FIRST TO ENDORSE OL' JOE FOR THE PRESIDENCY. FEINSTEIN CAN ALWAYS SMELL MONEY DOWN THE HALL.
Biden's long Senate career was based on being the credit card companies' man in Washington. While crowing endlessly about the working class being "his people," Biden sponsored bills allowing bank issuers to charge egregious interest rates and to make it harder for working men to escape the credit trap through bankruptcy.
When Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, he turned the confirmation of Clarence Thomas into a political smear campaign that descended into a degenerate three-ring circus. In his first campaign for president, he failed to garner a single percentage point before having to withdraw when confronted with his past lies and blatant plagiarism. He literally stole a speech detailing a British politician's life story. He ran again in 2008 but again failed to reach even one percent of the vote.
BLOG EDITOR. OBOMB KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING WHEN HE BROUGHT 'CREDIT CARD' BIDEN ON BOARD HIS BANKSTER REGIME WITH THE BANKSTERS' RENT BOY ERIC HOLDER. IT WAS 8 YEARS OF BANKSTER LOOTING AND PLUNDERING OF THE AMERCAN PEOPLE AND NO PRISON TIME. IT CONTINUES TO THIS DAY!
When Barack Obama took him off the primary trash heap to make him vice president, Biden first made a hash out of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, wasting hundreds of billions on boondoggles and giveaways to Democrat cronies. Little of the recovery billions was spent on anything useful to America. Biden went on to manage our relations with China and Ukraine, pocketing untold millions for himself and his family by selling out America's security interests.
By the time he ran for president again in 2020, he was a spent husk of his former corrupt and incompetent self, delivering asinine performances in the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary. When the Democrat establishment propped him up to once again stop Bernie Sanders, Biden was set up for the strangest presidential campaign in modern history. While Donald Trump barnstormed the nation with packed, enthusiastic rallies, Biden cowered in his basement, occasionally venturing out to speak with a few dozen voters sitting in circles drawn on the floor.
For his vice presidential pick, he chose — if you can believe it — an even more buffoonish candidate than himself.
Had it not been for Mark Zuckerberg buying and staffing government election offices in swing states, and the media and Big Tech's censorship of the Biden family's corruption, Biden would now be enjoying his dotage in Delaware, creeping on unsuspecting children with yarns of Corn Pop and South African arrests.
Instead, the man with one of the most astonishing records of abject failure in Washington was installed in the White House, and he has remained true to form. As one of a hundred senators and then as vice president, there was a limit to how much damage he could do. But as president, the shackles have been removed.
His first agenda item was to throttle our oil and gas sector, offshoring tens of thousands of good paying jobs to Russia and the Middle East — along with our energy independence. He threw open our southern border and encouraged virtually unlimited illegal immigration — during a global pandemic.
He sponsored trillions of dollars in wasteful spending, pushing our national debt to over $31 trillion. Were it not for two Democratic senators who had not yet taken leave of their senses, it would have been even worse. As it is, Biden has sparked the largest one-year increase in inflation in 40 years.
Biden's "defund the police" rhetoric delivered us soaring violent crime in Democrat-run cities, while he sicced federal law enforcement on parents who object too strenuously to their children being indoctrinated with anti-White racism and LGBTQIA+ ideology.
It can truly be said that as president, Biden's record of failure remains unblemished.
But now comes what may be the capstone on Biden's long history of buffoonery and corruption. In Ukraine, we have an armed conflict that threatens to plunge the world into an economic depression and raises the specter of nuclear war. Not only did Biden set the stage for this calamity when, as vice president, he was in charge of Ukraine policy and led Kiev to believe that NATO membership was in Ukraine's future, but on the eve of the Russian invasion, he refused to admit that it was not. Then Biden all but admitted to Vladimir Putin — on live TV, no less — that NATO would not defend Ukraine if Russia chose to invade.
In the aftermath of Russia's invasion, Biden and his administration have crafted sanctions that seem almost designed to boomerang on America's and Europe's fragile post-pandemic economies, while forcing Russia into a deeper alliance with China.
With the U.S. over $31 trillion in debt, Biden seems totally oblivious to the perilous position of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency and the consequences should that privileged position end.
Economists predict that food and gasoline will cost the average U.S. household an additional $3,000 this year, and inflation threatens to push millions of lower-middle income-earners into abject poverty.
And bumbling, corrupt Joe Biden isn't yet halfway through his first — and please God, last — term.
Jim Daws is a recovering talk radio host at jimdaws.com.
Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.
Kamala Proves the Peter Principle
Most of my life, I assumed that we elected serious politicians and appointed competent people to deal with the country’s complex problems -- the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights Movement, the economy, immigration, terrorism, foreign policy, natural disasters, etc. -- major problems that required competent people, serious about addressing (and fixing) the issues.
That was then, this is now. America is no longer a serious country, and the West is not a serious culture. Proof of how far we’ve fallen -- boys claim they’re girls, girls claim they’re boys and we must accept the new biology or be cancelled; racism is openly taught in public schools under the lie called Critical Race Theory (thank you, teachers unions); schoolchildren are taught to hate the country’s very founding claiming more racism; the military is focused on white rage (not defeating our enemies); and we installed an imbecile (as president) who mumbles the words his handlers put on the teleprompter. Vice President (VP) Kamala Harris is further proof that, as a nation, we’re unserious.
Watching Kamala, Biden, Tony Blinken, Pete Buttigieg, etc. it’s obvious that the Peter Principle is at work. The Peter Principle says that people rise to the level of their incompetence. During Obama’s presidency, everyone joked that he selected Biden for VP because Biden’s incompetency insured that Obama would never be impeached. Yes, Obama was bad, but Biden would be worse. Now that Biden’s the president, that joke was 100% correct. Sadly, he’s multiple times worse than anyone imagined. Biden has more failures in one year than most presidents have in a lifetime – the Afghanistan debacle and surrender, huge crime spikes due to Democrat “defund the police” insanity, actively working to destroy the petroleum industry while supporting Russia’s, soaring inflation, open support and deference to China, and his weakness being directly responsible for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine -- to name just a few epic failures. As bad as Biden is as president, it’s obvious he selected Harris for the same reason that Obama selected him -- to insure he’s never removed from office. If you think things can’t possibly get worse, just look at Harris and you instantly realize – yes, they can. She would be multiple times worse than Joe.
It’s difficult to believe that Biden could find someone less competent than himself, but he did. Among the vast numbers of very unintelligent politicians, VP Kamala is perhaps the least competent and least intelligent of them all. Her diminished mental acuity is Biden’s insurance against replacing him. Kamala’s incoherent statements are legendary. Following are some examples:
- She told us her pronouns are “she, her, and hers.” What should a woman’s pronouns be? Oh, that’s right, in Democrat world, boys can be girls and vice versa. Only Dems and Leftist understand such nonsense.
- Months after Kamala was appointed the immigration/border security czar, she was challenged why she had not visited the Mexican border. Her snarky response, “and I haven’t been to Europe either.” Say what?
- January 2022, Harris was asked if it’s time to change COVID strategy. Kamala responded, “It’s time for us to do what we have been doing, and that time is every day. Every day it is time for us to agree that there are things available to us.” I have no clue what she said. Unfortunately, neither does she.
- Last month, at a NATO conference held to discuss Russia’s massed troops threatening to invade Ukraine, Kamala made the following comment, “Perhaps this is a moment, as life presents us with these moments, that challenge us to ask what is our reason for being? I think we all know the history of NATO and its reason for being. The spirit behind this term we use “the transatlantic community”, the word community meaning a collection, not a collection of individuals who see themselves as a collection, than as one.” Despite such incoherent babble, Putin invaded Ukraine two days later.
- When NBC asked her about sanctions on Russia’s oil industry, Harris said, “As it relates to what we need to do domestically as well as what we need to do in terms of this issue generally, we have, as the president said, reevaluated what we’re doing”
- Finally, further proof that Biden is not serious, he appointed Kamala as point person on Ukraine. Why not Biden, you ask? Good question, but he goes home to Delaware most weekends; perhaps that’s why he delegates war and Ukraine to Kamala. To demonstrate her superior knowledge on Europe (she’s now been once), a radio show asked her to explain the Ukraine situation to its audience. Harris said, “Ukraine is a country in Europe. It exists next to another country called Russia. Russia is a bigger country. Russia is a powerful country. Russia decided to invade a smaller country called Ukraine. So, basically that’s wrong.”
Yes, those were her words. Her condescending answers tell us everything about her. She belittles the audience. She can’t talk normally to people because she thinks we’re too dumb to understand the situation. Then again, who’s surprised? Our elite leftists (Hillary, Obama, NY Times readers, academics, Hollywood, the media, etc.) think we’re beneath them because we haven’t been educated at Harvard or Yale. They demand we defer to their superior education to save us uneducated bumpkins out here in places like rural Georgia. With Kamala, Biden, and his entire administration, the Peter Principle is alive and well. Between Biden’s and Harris’ constant idiotic statements, it’s almost impossible to quantify which one is the least capable.
However, we still have three more years for one or the other to rise (or fall) to their ultimate level of incompetence.
Image: National Archives
Kamala Saves The Day
DESTROYING AMERICA - THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AT WORK
JOE BIDEN = MENTAL ON THE LOSE
President Biden delivered the ‘stumbles of a feeble man’ at SOTU address
Victor Davis Hanson: Biden is the most dangerously radical President in US history
Watters: The Five (CRIME) Families of the Democrat Party
New revelations about Hunter will hit President Joe Biden's already plummeting popularity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILb8RkPTBPg
WHICH IS A GREATER DANGER TO AMERICA? THE GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY OR THEIR BILLIONAIRE CLASS?
Exclusive— Josh Mandel: ‘Big Tech Oligarchs’ Like Mark Zuckerberg Must Be Criminally Investigated
“Big Tech oligarchs” such as Mark Zuckerberg should be criminally pursued to stop large technology companies’ anti-competitive conduct, Josh Mandel, a Republican candidate running for election to the U.S. Senate to represent Ohio, said on Friday’s edition of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily with host Alex Marlow.
“You’ve got to go after them criminally because they don’t care about paying fines,” he remarked. “For them, it’s just a cost of doing business, but you see what’s going on with Zuckerberg, right now — the fact that he might have tripped Wisconsin bribery laws with the 400-plus million that he spread around the country.”
He continued, “When they violate any criminal laws, they need to be investigated and prosecuted aggressively because that is, at the end of the day, the only thing that will make them wake up and make them listen and make them change their behavior.”
The U.S. must “take on these Big Tech oligarchs and thugs,” he added.
He went on, “I think part of the strategy needs to be just to attack their absolute power from 100 angles at once. It’s like blitzkrieg, and they won’t know where it’s coming from. We’ve got to attack from different angles simultaneously all at once.”
Technology companies such as Facebook and Google should not continue benefiting from liability exemptions provided by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, Mandel held.
“We need to push removing their immunity and exemption from liability in Section 230 and on either code, any other parts of the code, there’s no reason whatsoever that they should have any immunity or exemption from liability.”
He urged political observers to read about Wisconsin’s investigation of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s funding of election operations in 2020, ostensibly “to ensure voters could cast their ballots safely and securely.”
Wisconsin state Special Counsel Michael Gableman said $8.8 million worth of funding from Zuckerberg is considered election bribery in the Badger State. He said, “When I started this process, when I started this whole procedure, I had no other goal in mind than to find the truth. And while we don’t have it entirely yet, we’re getting it. One of the important truths that has to be mentioned is recited in Chapter 1 of our report. And that is that the Center for Tech and Civic Life [received] $8,800,000 [from a] Zuckerberg-planned grant with the cities of Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha, and Green Bay facially violates the Wisconsin law prohibiting election bribery.”
Mandel concluded by calling for the application of anti-monopoly measures against Big Tech companies. He said, “I think they should be broken up — Facebook, Google, and some of these other companies. They are obviously, I believe, violating monopolistic standards for American commerce, and I think they need to be broken up.”
Breitbart News Daily broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.
Richard Wolff | AMERICA'S DEBT SCAM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRIrAqk9gXE
When Billionaires Don’t Pay Taxes, People “Lose Faith in Democracy”
In an interview, Senate Finance Chair Ron Wyden described the effect of the tax dodging revealed in “The Secret IRS Files” and argued that his stalled efforts to make the ultrawealthy pay what he calls “their fair share” could still bear fruit.
The Secret IRS Files
Inside the Tax Records of the .001%
Last year, ProPublica began publishing “The Secret IRS Files,” a series that has used a vast trove of never-before-seen tax information on the wealthiest Americans to examine their tax avoidance maneuvers.
Since then, the Biden Administration and Democrats in Congress have been trying to close loopholes in the code and raise taxes on the rich to fund their legislative priorities. But the efforts have stalled, amid claims by Republicans that tax increases on billionaires would “destroy investment in America and punish success in America” and resistance from key Democrats, Sen. Joe Manchin, who called such a plan divisive, and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, who has opposed tax increases more broadly.
Ron Wyden, the Oregon Democrat who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, is one of the top experts in Congress on tax matters and an advocate of raising taxes on the rich. He has proposed a bill that would build on his past efforts to tax the wealthiest. The most recent legislation would tax people with $1 billion in assets (or $100 million in income for three years in a row) not just on their income as it is traditionally defined but also on the growth of their wealth each year. It would take a bite out of so-called unrealized gains, taxing a rise in the value of the stocks, bonds and other assets owned by the ultrawealthy — even if they didn’t sell the assets. For assets that are not readily traded, Wyden’s bill would impose a deferred tax, an annual interest charge that would be added to any capital gains tax owed when the wealthy person sells the asset.
Wyden’s bill seeks to counteract a technique that the ultrawealthy can use to avoid income taxes: They hold on to their assets and simply avoid the income — and tax — that comes when they sell them. The rich can live lavishly by employing a technique known as “Buy, Borrow, Die,” in which they buy or build assets, borrow against them and then avoid estate and gift taxes when they die.
We checked in with the senator to ask about his proposal and the prospects for any new laws in the coming year.
The interview that follows has been edited and condensed for clarity.
As you know, we’ve been reporting on how little tax the ultrawealthy in America pay. Our reporting for the first time has put names and faces and specifics on this issue by pointing out that Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk and the like have paid zero in taxes in recent years. And that the ultrawealthy really pay a low rate when compared to their wealth growth. I’m wondering if seeing these numbers has had an effect on your thinking, and if you think there’s been an effect on colleagues of yours who may not have had this full appreciation the way you did?
The answer is really yes and yes. It has affected me, and it’s affected, I believe, other senators. And the fact is my bill raises $557 billion, and it does so by simply requiring billionaires to pay taxes every year, the way nurses and firefighters do. At the same time, I feel very strongly — and this is the point where I think we’ve made real headway — this is about more than revenue. This is about fixing a thoroughly broken tax code and showing working people in America that billionaires don’t get to play by a different set of rules. My view is the big scandal is what’s legal. When you walk these people through it, it causes people to lose faith in government, lose faith in democracy.
What really causes people to lose faith? I think the fact that billionaires occasionally pay zero in taxes will strike most people as wrong. But are there other things that strike you as really jeopardizing their faith in the system?
The fact is it’s so brazen. Some of the leading conservative publications write articles: “Buy, Borrow, and Die if you want to pay little or nothing. Here is the plan.” I tell people about this at my town hall meetings and everybody starts hollering: “Don’t let people back here get played as suckers by letting billionaires pay little or nothing for years on end while those of us who represent a vast majority of Americans get hammered.”
We’ve been struck that some of the most loyal and closest readers of our stories have been the wealth advisory industry, figuring out a how-to manual. This is not what we intended ...
You have a proposal, which you alluded to, that would raise in your estimate almost $600 billion over 10 years. What are the prospects for that? Because you re-upped a version of that last year and it was quickly shot down by Joe Manchin, as I understand.
A couple of things, first of all, Joe Manchin has always said that he believes that the wealthiest should pay their fair share. And that’s very much in sync with what we say. And I go on to say that paying your fair share and being successful are not incompatible. That’s one of the things that special interests that have opposed my proposal say: “Oh, this is going to keep people from being successful.” Are you kidding me?
We know that there are lots of lobbyists and PR firms working around the clock to protect the status quo. There are terrific organizations like Patriotic Millionaires and Americans For Tax Fairness, but they just don’t have the same resources that the billionaires have. That’s why we’re trying to get the message out and lay out that this is basically a fairness issue. This is fundamentally about fairness so the affluent pay their fair share and it is not going to unravel the American dream of being successful.
The other part about this is the double standard. We had another hearing last week, and some of the conservative Republicans were talking about Earned Income Tax Credit recipients being the problem with tax evasion and noncompliance. The reality is you can be a tax cheater, a wealthy tax cheater. You can have one of these very large passthroughs and you are more likely to get hit by a meteor than you are to get audited.
In another part of our series, we focused on the ways that fortunes can persist from generation to generation. We wrote a story about the Scrippses and Mellons and their heirs getting vast amounts of income from fortunes that were created over 100 years ago. We also wrote about how many of the current 100 wealthiest people in the country are using GRATs [Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts] and other trusts to avoid paying income taxes. Is that on the agenda in DC? I know there was a proposal out of the House with the original version of Build Back Better, but is fixing that on the agenda, still?
I’m glad you asked that question. We get around that and stepped-up basis [the provision that, at the time of a person’s death, wipes out any increases in the value of their holdings for tax purposes, allowing people to pass on assets without paying capital gains tax] and all these things [with my proposal], because the billionaires could pay taxes each year and their heirs no longer get to wipe out billions and billions of dollars worth of gain. And I support proposals to fix GRATs. We’ve worked on them, and the bottom line is the overarching change, which is that billionaires are going to pay taxes every year.
So you’re saying under that proposal all these other fixes like stepped-up basis wouldn’t be as important. But is something like ending stepped-up basis, which was floated earlier this year, still on the table?
I’ll give you an example. I worked for a long time on the idea of making it crystal clear that farms and family-owned small businesses were fully exempt from [my proposal to end] stepped-up basis. But the ultrawealthy just kept saying, “Oh, the sky’s going to fall” once we allow this. Everybody is going to get hit with their farm and their small business and the like, and basically what they do is they play to people’s fears and try to create enough lobbying pressure. The billionaires try to get these small guys out in front to do their bidding for them.
And one quick thing. This is about a billionaires income tax. It’s a very important differentiation. This is about paying every year. They’ve got a stock account, for example, and this year it’s $20 billion and next year it goes up to $23 billion. They pay the capital gains tax on three billion bucks, because we feel that they’re basically evading capital gains taxes. And this is the way we respond with a billionaires income tax. And we chose that word very specifically.
Right. It’s a definition of income. It’s a definition that some economists have embraced. It’s not the orthodox definition. It’s not the definition that is in the current tax system, of course.
It’s particularly important when people say, “Oh, well, what are we going to do if it goes down?” Well, our proposal would account for losses as well.
But the fact is that extra $3 billion that they have this year that they didn’t have last year, they can use for all kinds of things. They can borrow against it. They can have a wonderful lifestyle, they can do all kinds of things. It’s very real to them in terms of how they can use it. And it’s immediate.
Now, I was interested in the counterarguments because one of those is that if they take a loss, how does that get accounted for in the system? The other is that you don’t want to force people into having to sell to raise cash to pay the tax. Another argument is that this will push people into illiquid, hard-to-value assets and out of the public markets. And I’m curious how you address all these objections.
We technically make that unlikely because the hard assets, they pick up interest charges as time goes along.
Washington seems to be very focused on marginal rates, on income tax with the traditional definition of income. I wonder what you think of that, if that’s kind of frustrating to you?
There can be that argument for raising those marginal rates, particularly on, again, wealthy people. But here’s an example of the kind of bizarre reality you get. I went to school on a basketball scholarship, dreaming of playing in the NBA — pretty ridiculous idea because I’m 6-foot-4 and made up for it by being kind of slow. I still kind of follow basketball. And as we heard about the fact that some members wanted to raise marginal rates and weren’t going to do anything on billionaires, it became clear to me that you could have a young basketball player, first one to go to college, get a scholarship. They come out, get a big contract. It’s all income. They’re going to come out under the marginal rate. Meanwhile, the owner of the club who is a billionaire doesn’t pay, themselves. an income tax, gets off scot-free. How is that fair?
That is the other point that you guys are raising.
What could be the basis of some kind of compromise that could shift this dynamic, because it sort of stalled last year?
We have looked at virtually every other approach to ensure a sense of fairness, that billionaires would pay taxes every year, like nurses and firefighters. And a number of the people who are most knowledgeable on the other side have actually committed candor when they said, [your bill] will actually require that we pay something every year, and everything else that’s been put out there can basically be gamed. People in the industry who are the advocates for the billionaires said that it’s going to be hard to avoid.
I’m not sure anything is going to get a perfect solution, but this is the one they’re really worried about because I can explain it pretty straightforwardly. If you make $3 billion between ’22 and ’23, you pay a capital gain rate at 23.8%.
One other point: We had folks say that they were concerned about founders of companies, and so we’ve made some adjustments to allow founders of companies to designate some stock as nontradable.
We’re always listening to members and trying to respond to their concerns.
People would say, “Well, what about philanthropy?” Well, philanthropy is terrific. We encourage it, but you have Medicare and Social Security and these critical needs that need to get addressed. Because if we’re all in this together, philanthropy is not going to take care of Medicare and Social Security.
These proposals, and your proposal in particular, are being blocked by members of your own party. Do you have any understanding of what Joe Manchin would support or what Kyrsten Sinema would support?
I’m not going to speak to the concerns of any one member, but let’s put it this way: No member is saying that they are publicly opposed to the idea of billionaires paying their fair share.
I’m not underestimating the power of the billionaires. You got to get everybody on board, got to hit 50 votes. And that’s what we’re focused on. But nobody has publicly said that billionaires shouldn’t pay their fair share. And the reason why is because this idea has enormous potency with people.
Do you think that anything can be done before the midterm elections?
We’re doing everything we can to come back as soon as possible from what happened in December. It kind of went off the rails. The next round of discussion will be built on health care, particularly holding down the cost of prescription drugs and filling in gaps in the Affordable Care Act like Medicaid coverage, our Clean Energy for America bill, which says for the first time the more you reduce carbon emissions, the bigger your tax savings, and then revenues evaded by tax avoidance and closing loopholes.
Gotcha. And another big problem here is that the IRS is in profound straits with the budget problems and tens of thousands of employees having left. How dire a situation is that, and where is the consensus to fund the IRS adequately?
So, first of all, as the chairman of the finance committee, I have led the effort, the pushback against Republican cuts in the IRS budget for years. Republicans in their big 2017 tax bill didn’t do anything to deal with the IRS budget cuts.
Now, I also want to take this opportunity because people have asked about the ability to administer our bill. There isn’t any issue with the IRS valuation because the value of stocks and the like is easily known and nontradable assets are only taxed when sold, just like today, so that “oh my God, Western civilization is going to end,” the IRS can’t administer it, I think is just contradicted by the facts which I just gave you. And, by the way, when billionaires said it’ll be difficult to comply, they got armies of accountants and lawyers to help them avoid taxes, paying as little as possible. They can just use their accountants and lawyers to comply and pay what they owe.
I’ll just for my closure say that, when you really look at the challenges for democracy, tax fairness is one of the keys and that’s what this is all about. Yes, it’s about raising over $550 billion — no question, it’s the biggest revenue raiser in the package — [but] this is about core issues of fairness.
Scarborough: Zuckerberg, Musk ‘Robber Barons’; Tax Cuts ‘Grotesque’
0 seconds of 1 minute, 59 secondsVolume 90%
16 Dec 20210
MSNBC “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough blasted Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Tesla founder and space entrepreneur Elon Musk on Thursday.
Scarborough described the two tech giants as “robber barons.” He also lamented the tax cuts from the 1980s and 1990s, which he supported, as well as the GOP’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, arguing they “created the greatest income redistribution in the history of the planet.”
“I don’t know that anybody since John Rockefeller has had as unfeathered power as Mark Zuckerberg has right now where no one stands up to him inside his company, no one stands up to him on the board, no one stands up to him in Congress, no one stands up to him at the White House, no one really stands up to him in the media. He is a robber baron. Elon Musk is a robber baron. These people are robber barons,” Scarborough proclaimed.
“And we have seen the greatest transfer of wealth, which Republicans love to say, ‘Oh, we don’t like to redistribute income.’ Oh, really? Well, the tax policies that I have supported through the ’80s and ’90s and continued to be supported by Republicans in the 21s century have created the greatest income redistribution in the history of this planet from middle-class Americans to the Elon Musks of the world,” he added. “It’s grotesque.”
Follow Trent Baker on Twitter @MagnifiTrent
‘We’re a Free Market’: Nancy Pelosi Rejects Ban on Lawmakers, Spouses Trading Individual Stocks
16 Dec 20210
2:39
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said members of Congress and their spouses should not be barred from trading individual stocks as part of the STOCK Act, citing a “free market economy.”
During a press briefing on Wednesday, in response to a report from Insider showing that 49 members of Congress (Democrats and Republicans) have failed to disclose their transactions in accordance with Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2012, Pelosi was asked if members of Congress and their spouses should be banned from trading individual stocks, thereby preventing insider trading,
“We’re a free-market economy,” Pelosi explained. “They should be able to participate in that.”
Pelosi did note that members of Congress should be revealing their stock transactions, which would show possible insider trading:
As noted by Insider, the STOCK Act of 2012, legislation Andrew Breitbart heavily backed, was designed to combat possible insider trading and conflicts of interests among members of Congress, forcing “lawmakers to be more transparent about their personal financial dealings”:
A key provision of the law mandates that lawmakers publicly — and quickly — disclose any stock trade made by themselves, a spouse, or a dependent child.
But many members of Congress have not fully complied with the law. They offer excuses including ignorance of the law, clerical errors, and mistakes by an accountant. Insider has chronicled this widespread nature of this phenomenon in a new project, “Conflicted Congress.”
Lawmakers who violate the STOCK Act could be fined up to $200, a small penalty that has led several ethics watchdog groups to call for harsher penalties or an all-out ban on lawmakers from trading stocks – a practice by which Nancy Pelosi and her husband, Paul, have become considerably wealthy. This year, for instance, weeks prior to the House Judiciary Committee’s vote on the antitrust legislation aimed at some major Big Tech companies, Paul Pelosi began “exercising call options to acquire 4,000 shares of Alphabet, the parent company of Google, at a strike price of $1,200,” according to Bloomberg. The trade netted Pelosi a $4.8 million gain.
Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer has been a heavy proponent of the STOCK Act since its inception with his 2011 book Throw Them All Out, which formed the basis for a 60 Minutes report about unethical stock trades in Congress.
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY'S BRIBES SUCKING KLEPTOCRACY
Watters' World' investigates Nancy Pelosi's financial dealings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M4QZJxb9Dw
Nancy Pelosi, a horrid woman equally as without heart and soul, on Tuesday refused to have the names of the thirteen soldiers killed in Kabul read out on the floor of the House. That should permanently indict her for being the wicked witch she is. She is more devious, more calculating than the irresponsible Biden but every bit as beyond redemption as he is. She will do anything to try to convince the American people, for whom she has only contempt, that whatever she and her party do is righteous no matter how loathsome and totalitarian. PATRICIA McCARTHY
Pelosi Pushes Electric Vehicle Subsidies As Husband’s Tesla Stock Soars
Paul Pelosi owns up to $1 million of Tesla call options
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D., Calif.) husband hit pay dirt on Monday as Tesla's valuation rose to $1 trillion.
The news comes as Pelosi spearheads legislation that doles out tens of billions of dollars in subsidies to the electric vehicle industry, including Tesla, with provisions to build charging stations for cars and incentivize electric car purchases through tax credits.
The financial dealings of Pelosi's husband, Paul, came under scrutiny earlier this year when he purchased as much as $1 million of Tesla call options, one of the largest transactions of Tesla shares disclosed by a member of Congress. At the time, Republicans charged that the House speaker was cashing in on her power.
Members of Congress and their spouses are legally allowed to buy and sell stock, as long as it is not based on insider information. Members are required to disclose their transactions to the House Committee on Ethics, as Pelosi did with the Tesla transaction on Jan. 21.
Pelosi is spearheading negotiations with the White House as Democrats look to pass Joe Biden's Build Back Better plan and a reconciliation bill that includes the electric car incentives. Tesla, a pioneer in the electric car industry, is poised to see a significant boost from the legislation, according to industry watchers.
Democrats are proposing nearly $120 billion to fund various clean energy projects, and another $34.5 billion dedicated to zero-emission vehicles. The reconciliation bill also proposes $42 billion in tax credits for purchases of electric vehicles, which Democrats hope will incentivize new car buyers to purchase electric vehicles instead of gas-powered cars. The bill offers up to $12,500 in credits for each car. It also calls for tens of billions of dollars in spending to build charging stations for electric cars across the country.
Tesla's dramatic rise is likely attributable to several factors beyond the Democrats' spending proposals. Tesla founder Elon Musk recently announced he is moving the company's headquarters from California to Texas, which has no state income tax. Tesla's cars have also gained in popularity without federal incentives.
And while Tesla and other clean energy companies stand to gain with environmentally friendly Democrats in power, the company opposes some aspects of the reconciliation proposal, such as an additional credit for the purchase of electric cars made in unionized factories. Musk has publicly opposed unionization efforts.
Pelosi's office did not respond to requests for comment.
RIDING THE DRAGON: The Bidens' Chinese Secrets (Full Documentary)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRmlcEBAiIs
CHINA’S OLD WHORE SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, AMERICA’S BIGGEST WAR PROFITEER, WAS FIRST TO ENDORSE BIDEN FOR PRESIDENT. WONDER WHY???
As Glenn Bunting of the Los Angeles Times reported in 1997, Feinstein’s husband Richard Blum “has expanded his private business interests in China – to the point that his firm is now a prominent investor inside the communist nation.” In 1995, Dianne Feinstein became a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “giving her a prominent platform for her efforts to support China’s trade privileges.”
As Ben Weingarten noted in the Federalist in 2018, Feinstein’s husband has “profited handsomely from the greatly expanded China trade she supported.” The senator also “served as a key intermediary between China and the U.S. government, while serving on committees whose work would be of keen interest to the PRC.”
For 20 years, through three election cycles, Feinstein maintained on her staff a Chinese spy who would even attend consular functions for the California Democrat. One wonders what the FBI knew, when they knew it, and what they did about it, if anything.
Other politicians with China business connections include Mitch McConnell and Nancy Pelosi, whose husband has conducted a series of deals in the Communist nation. Recall that Speaker Pelosi kept Eric Swalwell on the House Intelligence Committee even after his “PoonFang” liaisons with a Chinese spy (FEINSTEIN LONG EMPLOYED A CHINESE SPY).
Donald Trump Questions Nancy Pelosi’s Corruption
President Donald Trump questioned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s dubious participation in stock market initial public offering shares, enriching her family.
The president shared a clip Monday highlighting a CBS 60 Minutes report featuring author and Breitbart senior contributor Peter Schweizer’s investigation into Pelosi and her husband participating in at least eight different stock IPOs while in Congress.
"The House gone rogue! I want to remind you a little bit about the ring leader in this whole rogue operation against the President of the United States..." @MarkLevinShow
60 Minutes reporter Steve Kroft confronted Pelosi on the topic in 2011, but she denied any impropriety.
The report noted that Pelosi and her husband participated in an initial public offering of Visa in 2008, while credit card regulation was underway in the House of Representatives. The Pelosis bought 5,000 shares at the initial price of $44 and shares were trading at $64 just two days later, according to the report.
“Congress has never done more for consumers nor has the Congress passed more critical reforms of the credit card industry than under the Speakership of Nancy Pelosi,” Pelosi spokesman, Drew Hammill, said in a statement, according to CNN after the 60 Minutes report aired.
The clip was featured on Mark Levin’s Fox News show Life, Liberty and Levin on Sunday.
No comments:
Post a Comment