What does the left want (besides Liz Warren for president)?
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN:
Did Obamanomics destroy the American middle
class and build the LA RAZA
Mexican welfare state in its place?
"Emboldened by the rise of inequality as an issue in the early stages
of the White House 2016 campaign, some of the most visible
progressives in the United States think now is the time to pull US
policy in general, and the Democratic Party in particular, more
toward their side of the political spectrum. And their agenda is an
ambitious one, stretching well beyond the traditional liberal
solutions of higher tax rates and expanded social benefits for the
disadvantaged."
"Inequality is largely a result of regulatory and legislative choices
made by Washington since the 1980s, in the view of some
prominent liberal economists, and thus it can only be remedied by a
systemic fix. That might stretch from efforts to bolster wages and
government support for families, to expanded Social Security, a
revamp of taxes on business and the wealthy, and a tough new Wall
Street regulatory regime."
THE “HOPE and CHANGE” CLOWN’S LIES
ON
UNEMPLOYMENT as more illegals jump
our borders…………..
In
fact, The Obama Administration’s policies have been aimed at reviving US
manufacturing on the basis of a significant reduction of workers’ wages.
As
a result of these policies, the National Employment Law Project concluded in
2014 that “While the manufacturing sector has grown in recent years, wages are
lower, the jobs are increasingly temporary, and the promised benefits have yet
to be realized.”
PATRICK BUCHANAN
After Obama has completely destroyed the
American
economy, handed millions of jobs to illegals and billions of
dollars
in welfare to illegals…. WHAT COMES NEXT?
Hillary Clinton’s Global Greed
How many times did she sellout America to
fill her bottomless pockets?
Another
possible explanation is that the Clintons don't believe voters will really care
that much. The renting
of the Lincoln Bedroom to people who gave $5.4 million to the Democratic
National Committee in 1995 and 1996 did no lasting damage to Bill's approval
ratings. Neither did the 1996 fundraising scandal involving illegal foreign
donations, which the Los Angeles Times reported on just before the president
easily won a second term.
We
serve our corporate paymasters!
Billary and Hillary – they’ve gone from
selling out the Lincoln Bedroom to selling out America globally!
“Another
possible explanation is that the Clintons don't believe voters will really care
that much. The renting
of the Lincoln Bedroom to people who gave $5.4 million to the Democratic
National Committee in 1995 and 1996 did no lasting damage to Bill's approval
ratings. Neither did the 1996 fundraising scandal involving illegal foreign
donations, which the Los Angeles Times reported on just before the president
easily won a second term.”
“The banks
and corporations that shelled out to one Clinton or the other included General
Electric, Cisco, eBay, Microsoft, Oracle, Deutsche Bank, Corning, Xerox, Quallcomm,
Salesforce.com, as well as trade associations.”…. THROW IN A FEW MUSLIM
DICTATORSHIPS AS WELL!
WHY SHOULD
ANY WALL STREET CORPORATION HAND OVER BRIBES TO A POL IN THE FORM OF “SPEECH”
AND THEN HAVE TO PAY ANY TAX WHATSOEVER?
THAT DOES
NOT SOUND LIKE OBAMANOMICS!
Clinton
herself is far more likely to be on speaking terms with hedge-fund managers or
Silicon Valley billionaires than with the “typical American worker.” After a
recent campaign fundraiser at the home of John Chambers, the founding
billionaire of Cisco Systems, she pronounced herself interested in his proposal
to cut the corporate tax rate for overseas earnings so that Cisco and other
corporations holding more than $1.5 trillion in profits in foreign bank
accounts!!! might !!!! repatriate the money and use it in the United States.
“It doesn’t do our economy any good to have this money parked somewhere else in
the world,” Clinton told the Wall Street Journal.
FIFTEEN
THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LA RAZA “THE
RACE” and the LA RAZA DEMS’ PUSH TO
EXPAND MEX
SUPREMACY TO BUY THE
ILLEGALS’ VOTES:
by Michelle Malkin
Only in America could critics of a group called "The
Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity
chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in
redefining all opposition as "hate."
HERE’S No. 6 OF THE FIFTEEN THINGS ABOUT HILLARY’S LA RAZA
PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS:
(FROM HER FIRST RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY)
6. Former "Race" president Raul
Yzaguirre, Hillary Clinton's Hispanic outreach adviser, said this: "U.S.
English is to Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks." He was referring to U.S. English, the nation's
oldest, largest citizens' action group dedicated to preserving the unifying
role of the English language in the United States. "The Race" also
pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised the Mexican government on
how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding the terms
"illegal" and "amnesty."
A
week later, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said the immigration bill was “far worse”
than ObamaCare: He described the bill as an attempt by Senate Democrats “to
establish another monolithic voting bloc” among Hispanic Americans.
AMERICA: No
Legal Need Apply!!!
But we still
get the tax bills for Mexico’s crime tidal wave and anchor baby welfare state
in our open borders!
“Meanwhile,
millions of native-born Americans, especially men, have abandoned the job
market altogether. The percentage of men aged 25 to 54 who are working or
looking for work has dropped to the lowest point in recorded history.”
JUST LOOK AROUND YOU… when do you see a job not
held by a Mexican?
Labor
statistics show that foreign-born workers account for all net gains in U.S.
employment in the past seven years, according to a group that advocates low
immigration.
The Center for
Immigration Studies issued
a report Friday that found 1.5 million fewer U.S.-born workers employed in 2014
than prior to the recession in 2007. Foreign-born employment for
both legal and illegal immigrants increased by more than 2 million workers
during the same time period.
THE UNLEASHING OF WALL STREET’S BIGGEST
MONSTERS and
the ASSAULT ON the AMERICAN
MIDDLE-CLASS STARTED
WITH BILL CLINTON.
You think Hillary’s any different? Obama’s
crony banksters don’t!!!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-democrat-partys-assault-on-american.html
THE ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS BY
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY
JOE LEGAL v LA RAZA JOSE ILLEGAL…. which one
has it good under the Dems???
OBAMANOMICS:
The massive transfer of the American economy to the 1% and total devastation of
the AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS to build a DEM DICTATORSHIP…..
and the
banksters are investing massive amounts of loot in Hillary Clinton, a disciple
of OBAMANOMICS!
Income inequality
grows FOUR TIMES FASTER under Obama than Bush.
LIKE EVA AND JUAN PERON, THE MONEY JUST KEEPS
ROLLING IN!
Clinton Foundation reveals up to $26 million in
additional payments
Clinton Foundation reveals up to $26
million in additional payments
The Clinton Foundation reported Thursday
that it has received as much as $26.4 million in previously undisclosed
payments from major corporations, universities, foreign sources and other
groups. THE OTHER “GROUPS” ARE THE MUSLIM DICTATORS WHOSE BORDERS HILLARY HAS
VOWED TO PROTECT AS WELL AS OBAMA!
The disclosure came as the foundation faced questions over
whether it fully complied with a 2008 ethics agreement to reveal its donors and
whether any of its funding sources present conflicts of interest for Hillary
Rodham Clinton as she begins her presidential campaign.
The
money was paid as fees for speeches by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton.
Foundation officials said the funds were tallied internally as “revenue” rather
than donations, which is why they had not been included in the public listings
of its contributors published as part of the 2008 agreement.
According
to the new information, the Clintons have delivered 97 speeches to benefit the
charity since 2002. Colleges and universities sponsored more than two dozen of
these speeches, along with U.S. and overseas corporations and at least one
foreign government, Thailand.
The
payments were disclosed late Thursday on the organization’s Web site, with
speech payments listed in ranges rather than specific amounts. In total, the
payments ranged between $12 million and $26.4 million.
The
paid appearances included speeches by former president Bill Clinton to the Nigerian
ThisDay newspaper group for at least $500,000 and to the
The
money was paid as fees for speeches by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton.
Foundation officials said the funds were tallied internally as “revenue” rather
than donations, which is why they had not been included in the public listings
of its contributors published as part of the 2008 agreement.
According
to the new information, the Clintons have delivered 97 speeches to benefit the
charity since 2002. Colleges and universities sponsored more than two dozen of
these speeches, along with U.S. and overseas corporations and at least one
foreign government, Thailand.
The
payments were disclosed late Thursday on the organization’s Web site, with
speech payments listed in ranges rather than specific amounts. In total, the
payments ranged between $12 million and $26.4 million.
The
paid appearances included speeches by former president Bill Clinton to the Nigerian
ThisDay newspaper group for at least $500,000 and to the
The
money was paid as fees for speeches by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton.
Foundation officials said the funds were tallied internally as “revenue” rather
than donations, which is why they had not been included in the public listings
of its contributors published as part of the 2008 agreement.
According
to the new information, the Clintons have delivered 97 speeches to benefit the
charity since 2002. Colleges and universities sponsored more than two dozen of
these speeches, along with U.S. and overseas corporations and at least one
foreign government, Thailand.
The
payments were disclosed late Thursday on the organization’s Web site, with
speech payments listed in ranges rather than specific amounts. In total, the
payments ranged between $12 million and $26.4 million.
The
paid appearances included speeches by former president Bill Clinton to the Nigerian
ThisDay newspaper group for at least $500,000 and to the
The foundation, which has raised
$2 billion since Bill Clinton left the White House, has emerged as a
political headache for Hillary Clinton amid recent controversies over
donations. The foundation, along with the Clintons’ paid speaking careers, have
provided additional avenues for foreign governments and other interests to gain
entrée to one of America’s most prominent political families. Some Republicans
have charged that Hillary Clinton, during her tenure as secretary of state, was
in a position to reward foundation donors.
Thursday’s
disclosure is one of a number of instances in recent weeks in which the
foundation has acknowledged that it received funding from sources not disclosed
on its Web site.
The
ethics agreement was reached between the foundation and the Obama
administration to provide additional transparency and avoid potential conflicts
of interest with Hillary Clinton’s appointment as secretary of state.
The
agreement placed restrictions on foreign government donations, for instance,
but the foundation revealed in February that it had violated the limits at one
point by taking $500,000 from Algeria.
Thursday’s
release regarding speaking fees follows earlier disclosures showing how the
lecture circuit has also made the Clintons personally wealthy.
Last
week, Hillary Clinton disclosed that she and her husband made around
$25 million since January 2014 from speeches; Bill Clinton also was paid
more than $104 million from 2001 through 2012 by delivering speeches.
The
Clintons reported that income on federally required personal financial
disclosure forms filed by Hillary Clinton as a senator, secretary of state and
now a declared presidential candidate.
But the
new disclosure indicates that the former president has also spent considerable
time speaking on the foundation’s behalf — 73 times since 2002.
Hillary
Clinton has delivered 15 such speeches, including one address to Goldman Sachs
and another to JPMorgan Chase. Chelsea Clinton, who has
taken
on an increasingly active role at the foundation, has collected fees for the
charity from nine organizations.
The
foundation did not provide dates for the speaking engagements.
Vincent
Salamone, a spokesman for the Office of Government Ethics, said this week that
speeches delivered by public officials or their spouses acting as an “agent” of
a charitable group in which the payment is made directly to the organization
need not be disclosed in financial filings of public officials.
Brian
Fallon, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said that analysis explains why
the Clintons did not disclose the speeches while Hillary Clinton was a senator
and then secretary of state.
While
the Clinton Foundation has annually disclosed its donors since 2008, the
foundation said Thursday that organizations that paid for Clinton speeches have
not before been included in those lists because they were paying for a service
and not making a tax-deductible donation.
Craig
Minassian, a spokesman for the foundation, said the new release came as part of
the foundation’s continuing commitment to transparency. Nonprofit groups are
not required by law to release any information about their funders.
“In
addition to the more than 300,000 donors who are all listed on our web site,
posting these speeches is just another example of how our disclosure policies
go above and beyond what’s required of charities,” he said in a statement.
“Like other global charities, the
Clinton Foundation receives support from
“Like
other global charities, the Clinton Foundation receives support from
individuals and organizations across all sectors of society, backgrounds and
ideologies because they know our programs are improving the lives of millions
of people around the world,” he also said.
A
foundation official indicated the speech dollars have been disclosed as revenue
in annual tax filings to the IRS. The official indicated that the foundation
will now update the public speech list four times a year, much as it has said
it will do with other donors now that Clinton’s campaign has launched.
The
Clintons have indicated that they donate significant personal funds to the
foundation each year. The foundation official said that the couple have not
considered speech revenue to be part of their personal charitable giving, and
Fallon said they have never taken a deduction on their taxes for the fees.
There
was one entity clearly associated with a foreign government that provided
speaking fees, of $250,000 to $500,000 for a speech by Bill Clinton: The energy
ministry in Thailand.
The
U.S. Islamic World Forum also provided $250,000 to $500,000 to the foundation
for a speech by Bill Clinton, according to the new disclosure. The event was
organized in part by the Brookings Institution with support from
the government of Qatar.
In
addition, the list is studded with overseas corporations and foundations.
They
included the South Korean energy and chemicals conglomerate Hanwha, which paid
$500,000 to $1,000,000 for a speech by Bill Clinton.
China
Real Estate Development Corp. paid the foundation between $250,000 and $500,000
for a speech by the former president. The Qatar First Investment Bank, now
known as the Qatar First Bank, paid fees in a similar range. The bank is
described by Persian Gulf financial press as specializing in high-net-worth
clients.
The Telmex Foundation, founded by
Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim, provided between $250,000 and $500,000 for a
speech by Hillary Clinton.
The
new data shows that a number of public education institutions paid the
foundation for speeches by Bill, Hillary or Chelsea Clinton.
Those speeches drew backlash on some campuses, as
universities paid hundreds of thousands to the Clinton
charity at
a time of rising tuitions and slashed university budgets.
After the academic sponsors, financial services and
health-industry-related firms heavily populated the list of domestic sponsors.
Rosalind Helderman is a political
enterprise and investigations reporter for the Washington Post.
Tom Hamburger covers the
intersection of money and politics for The Washington Post.