Sunday, January 5, 2020

JOE BIDEN DECLARES THAT NO DEMOCRAT WILL SELL OUT AMERICA FOR WALL STREET QUICKER THAN HE - WE ONLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE OBAMA - BIDEN RECORD TO SEE


“And then we have to get to work on the healing of our homeland, repairing the many social and cultural injuries and injustices caused by turbo-capitalism.”


WHILE THE CRONY BANKSTERS LOOTED AND PLUNDERED WITH IMPUNITY, THE GLOBALIST DEMS WERE HANDING OUR BORDERS OVER TO THE MEX INVADERS!




Yes, Luttwak’s was a lonely voice in 1994. And yet he knew that he was on to something; in 1998 he published the equally prescient Turbo-Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global EconomyDescribing the contemporary system, he noted, “It enriches industrializing poor countries, impoverishes the semi-affluent majority in rich countries, and greatly adds to the incomes of the top 1 percent on both sides who are managing the arbitrage.”

In the memorable words of Stephen K. Bannon, head honcho at the Trump presidential campaign and then for a time the top strategist in the Trump White House, “The globalists gutted the American working class and created a middle class in Asia.”

THE FRIGHTENING TAKE DOWN OF AMERICA BY THE CRIMINAL FAMILIES OF BUSH, CLINTON AND OBAMA

Virgil: How Bill Clinton and Neoliberal Trade Policies Led to the Rise of Fascism

 

https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2020/01/04/virgil-how-bill-clinton-and-neoliberal-trade-policies-led-to-the-rise-of-fascism/

PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP via Getty Images
 4 Jan 20202,346
14:11
If Virgil told you about an article arguing that the current system can’t handle the challenges of globalization—pointing to “the completely unprecedented personal economic insecurity of working people, from industrial workers and white-collar clerks to medium-high managers”—you might be inclined to react as follows: “That’s old news. I’ve read a hundred articles making that point, again and again, over the last few years—quite a few of them, in fact, at Breitbart News.” 
Okay, but what if Virgil told you that this particular article was written in…1994? As in, a full quarter-century ago? In other words, way ahead of its time?  
It’s worth recalling that back in 1994, in the wake of the end of the Cold War, the elites were in love with globalization; they were avidly consuming utopian books such as The Borderless WorldThe End of History, and The Twilight of Sovereignty.
And yes, 1994 was the year that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effect. As President Bill Clinton said as he signed the trade treaty, “NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs.” In fact, Clinton mentioned the word “jobs” a full 50 times in that speech. Indeed, all that repetition might make one think that the 42nd president was trying really hard to convince Americans that he was telling the truth about their jobs. 

BLOG: THE CLINTONS HAVE FROM DAY ONE BEEN SERVANTS OF BIG BANKS AND LA RAZA, THE MEX FASCIST PARTY THEY ENDLESSLY HISPANDER TO
Interestingly, as Clinton spoke in support of the trade deal, he was joined at the podium by former presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush; in other words, at the elite level, support for NAFTA was virtually unanimous. Everything would be wonderful, we were assured, if the globalists got their way. 
Yet back then, one observer was having none of this giddy optimism. In April 1994, veteran D.C. think-tanker Edward Luttwak, writing in the London Review of Books, argued that trade deals such as NAFTA were hollowing out Middle America—and that the elite didn’t either notice or care: “Neither the moderate Right nor the moderate Left even recognizes, let alone offers any solution for, the central problem of our days: the completely unprecedented personal economic insecurity of working people, from industrial workers and white-collar clerks to medium-high managers.” 
Luttwak’s point was that globalization and trade were a threat to the cultural and economic structures of each and every developed country. That is, long-standing and intricate systems of work and life were now being exposed to the “tidal waves of change in the global economic ocean.” 
Defenders of such planetary tidal-waving said that it was inevitable, given that countries such as Mexico and China were entering the world economy—and that as they did so, of course they would be making big waves. And yet Luttwak’s point was that the elites were neither noticing nor caring about the societal impact of these waves crashing on the home country. 

BLOG: VISIT MEXICO'S SECOND LARGEST CIT OF LOS ANGELES TO WITNESS WHAT THE CRASHING WAVES TRULY LOOKS LIKE
Luttwak was especially cutting in his dismissal of the Republican response: “In this situation, what does the moderate Right … have to offer? Only more free trade and globalization, more deregulation and structural change, thus more dislocation of lives and social relations.”
Luttwak added that Republicans were in the curious position of being economic libertarians and, at the same time, social conservatives. That is, they were more than a little schizophrenic, because wide-open economics typically pulverizes any particular cultural heritage. As he put it, the standard Republican “after-dinner speech is a two-part affair, in which part one celebrates the virtues of unimpeded competition and dynamic structural change, while part two mourns the decline of the family and community ‘values’ that were eroded precisely by the forces commended in part one.”
Okay, so Luttwak gets credit for being ahead of his time—way ahead. He had grasped the reality that economic growth and transformation is dislocating, especially when that economic growth is differentialized within the society, as owners prosper and workers suffer.  

As Luttwak put it, the voguish business-consultant jargon of the era—concepts such as “restructuring” and “re-engineering”—was mostly just code words for downsizing and outsourcing. That is, a given company might “grow” by slicing domestic employment and moving production overseas, but it was growing only its own profits, not its contribution to American society.  
Yes, Luttwak’s was a lonely voice in 1994. And yet he knew that he was on to something; in 1998 he published the equally prescient Turbo-Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global EconomyDescribing the contemporary system, he noted, “It enriches industrializing poor countries, impoverishes the semi-affluent majority in rich countries, and greatly adds to the incomes of the top 1 percent on both sides who are managing the arbitrage.”
As we all know, it took a couple of decades for people to see that Luttwak’s critique was dead-on. Back in the ’90s and ’00s, the elite consensus held that if planetary arbitrageurs—operating in financial and informational hubs such as New York City and San Francisco—were prospering, that was a good enough sign that everyone was prospering. In this reckoning, what’s good for Goldman Sachs and Google is good for AmericaAnd of course, if more immigrants—legal or otherwise—were needed to serve in the service economy, well, that was good, too.  

BLOG: THE ENTIRE REASON FOR OPEN BORDERS IS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED AND PASS ALONG THE TRUE COST OF ALL THAT "CHEAP" LABOR TO MIDDLE AMERICA. THERE IS NO BILLIONAIRE WHO IS NOT AN ADVOCATE FOR AMNESTY, NON-ENFORCEMENT AND WIDER OPEN BORDERS.

We can add that this smug view was bipartisan: President George W. Bush shared Bill Clinton’s economic opinions; indeed, if anything, Bush was even more of an enthusiast for closer integration with Mexico. (Although, of course, Bush ended devoting most of his presidency to the folly of closer integration with Iraq and Afghanistan.) And as for Barack Obama, he was another globalist—seeking closer integration with many countries, including China.
Thus it took until the 2016 election for a presidential candidate to say, “Enough!” That candidate, of course, was Donald Trump. (And in an odd way, some of Trump’s anti-globalization arguments were echoed by another prominent ’16 candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders.)
President Donald Trump speaks to auto workers at the American Center for Mobility March 15, 2017, in Ypsilanti, Michigan. Trump discussed his priorities of improving conditions to bolster the manufacturing industry and reduce the outsourcing of American jobs. (Bill Pugliano/Getty Images)
In the memorable words of Stephen K. Bannon, head honcho at the Trump presidential campaign and then for a time the top strategist in the Trump White House, “The globalists gutted the American working class and created a middle class in Asia.”
By now, most national politicians, in both parties, pay at least lip service to the Luttwak-Bannon argument; there’s a realization that the American middle class paid the price while the bi-coastal elite reaped the reward. And that’s why the various trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific trade deals favored by the Obama administration, and Hillary Clinton, seem to be dead. 
And as an aside on the 2020 presidential campaign, post-Clinton Democrats, having finally soured on Bill-and-Hill-style neoliberalism, are now targeting White House hopeful Pete Buttigieg for his association with McKinsey & Co. That’s the notorious and scandal-plagued “management consulting” firm that’s been at the forefront of so many corporate decisions to lay off and to outsource, among other forms of international skullduggery. Buttigieg is easily recognized as the candidate most likely to revive those globalist trade deals, in keeping with his overall Harvard mentality; no wonder he’s so popular with the Sonoma crystal wine-cave fundraisers.
Okay, so Luttwak stands as a prophet. However, let’s hope that he isn’t proven to be right about everything that he wrote back in 1994. After all, the headline atop Luttwak’s piece, a quarter-century ago was scary. It bannered, “Why Fascism is the Wave of the Future.” That’s right, the “F” word, Fascism.  
Luttwak was careful to point out that Fascism started out separate and distinct from Nazism. That is, the Fascist movement of Benito Mussolini, who took power in Italy in 1922, may have been un-democratic and illiberal, but it was not Hitlerian in its war-mongering, antisemitic, and genocidal evil. In fact, within the early Italian Fascist movement, Jews were well represented. But then, of course, Mussolini took on a catastrophic turn in the 1930s, after Hitler came to power in Germany, and Italy signed on to Hitler’s Axis.
September 1937: Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, the leader of Nazi Germany, in Munich. (Fox Photos/Getty Images)
Mussolini was later fully and criminally complicit in Hitler’s wickedness, and yet still, Luttwak is right to draw a distinction between early Fascism and Nazism.  
And so it’s with the early-Mussolini model in mind that Luttwak argued, back in ’94, that severe economic dislocation would open the door to unpleasant political reaction: 
… and that is the space that remains wide open for a product-improved Fascist party, dedicated to the enhancement of the personal economic security of the broad masses of (mainly) white-collar working people. Such a party could even be as free of racism as Mussolini’s original was until the alliance with Hitler, because its real stock in trade would be corporativist restraints on corporate Darwinism, and delaying if not blocking barriers against globalization.
Luttwak himself is no Fascist, and yet as a learned historian and acute observer, he could see, a quarter-century ago, that global trends were pushing Americans toward the point where an anti-liberal backlash would come in full force.
Interestingly, in that 1994 article, the American figure that Luttwak pointed to, as an early indicator, was Ross Perot, the businessman-turned-populist. Perot was no Fascist, but his success as a political outsider was, indeed, a stark repudiation of the liberal and bipartisan status quo. Just two years earlier, Perot had, of course, run for president as an independent, winning an impressive 19 percent of the national vote. And what was one of Perot’s signature issues? Why, it was his opposition to NAFTA. That trade deal, he said, would create a “giant sucking sound,” as American jobs went south of the border.  
U.S. independent presidential candidate Ross Perot delivers his concession speech to the crowd gathered November 3, 1992, at his election night headquarters. (PAUL RICHARDS/AFP via Getty Images)
Perot was mocked at the time, and yet, of course, he has been proven right, and Clinton—plus fellow NAFTA cheerleaders Bush 41 and Bush 43—have been proven wrong. Just as Luttwak said it would, NAFTA turbo-charged North America, enriching the fat cats of Wall Street and Silicon Valley, while sending regular jobs from Ohio to Mexico. 

BLOG: MOST OF WALL STREET AND ALL BILLIONAIRES ARE GENEROUS DONORS TO THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY OF LA RAZA "The Race" NOW CALLING ITSELF UNIDOSus  - UNDER OBAMA, LA RAZA WAS FUNDED WITH TAX DOLLARS AND OPERATED OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE.
But okay, just one last thing: What about that “F” word, “Fascism”? If Luttwak was correct in his economic and social predictions, might he be correct, too, in his political prediction, about the coming of a “product-improved Fascist party”?
Today, many on the left have their answer: Donald Trump is a Fascist. A Google search of “Donald Trump” and “Fascist” elicits millions of hits, including an October 2016 Washington Post op-ed entitled, “How fascist is Donald Trump?” And just on December 21, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, speaking to an audience in California, declared, “It is fascism, what we’re evolving into.”
Of course, the left was playing the “Fascist” smear game long before Trump. Both Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan were routinely labeled as Fascists, as was George W. Bush. And in 2004, the leading liberal group Moveon.org went there, equating Bush to, yes, Hitler.
Indeed, as the liberal Atlantic magazine acknowledged in 2016, it’s been a standard tactic of the left to smear just about every Republican as a “Fascist.” So as we can see, the left’s demagoguery has cheapened the word “Fascist” to the point of irrelevance; today, the “F” word is simply just one more insult in the left-wing arsenal.  
So no, Trump is not a Fascist, and neither are Republicans. In fact, come to think of it, if we wanted to envision Fascism in the 21st century—allowing for changes in style and fashion—we might think of Antifa, which is the hipster name for Anti-Fascist. 
As Breitbart News has pointed out, Antifa ideologists believe that violent thuggery on the streets is a key part of their strategy for provoking civil strife—and that, of course, is classic Fascism. So in other words, when we see the word “Antifa,” we should just delete the “Anti” and know that we’re seeing “Fa.”
An unidentified Rose City Antifa member flicks off to the police during a demonstration between the left and right at Pioneer Courthouse Square on June 29, 2019 in Portland, Oregon. (Moriah Ratner/Getty Images)
Andy Ngo, a Portland-based journalist, is seen covered in unknown substance after unidentified Rose City Antifa members attacked him on June 29, 2019 in Portland, Oregon. (Moriah Ratner/Getty Images)
An Antifa demonstrator has a heated exchange with a pro-Trump supporter during the Denver March Against Sharia Law in Denver, Colorado on June 10, 2017. (JASON CONNOLLY/AFP via Getty Images)
Of course, there’s more going wrong with American society than just Antifa hooliganism. The sort of churn that Luttwak lamented a quarter-century ago has been profoundly damaging to the social fabric, and we see it in the worsening of societal indicators, including flattened wages, family breakdown, opioid use, and gun violence, including mass shootings.  
And yes, it’s possible that if the deterioration continues, some sort of strong antidote—more precisely, a horrible “antidote”—could emerge. 
So if we want to make sure we can fend off even the threat of Fascism, we should start with leadership that’s both strong and wise. Strong leaders stand up to extremist Antifa-type violence, of course, and yet, at the same time, they are wise enough to solve the underlying social conditions that contribute to extremism. 
After all, Italian Fascism emerged from the wreckage of World War One. And we can add that Communism—another terrible extremism that’s a kind of mirror to Fascism—emerged in Russia at around the same time, in the wake of the same war. And a decade later, Nazism emerged from the war, too, as well as from the Depression.
So obviously we start our anti-Fascism plan with a commitment to overall peace and prosperity. That is, no stupid foreign wars, no crazy economic policies. And then we have to get to work on the healing of our homeland, repairing the many social and cultural injuries and injustices caused by turbo-capitalism.

GRIFTER AND PHONY CHARITY FOUNDATION FRAUDSTER HILLARY CLINTON’S LONG SERVICE TO AMERICA’S MOST EVIL BANKSTERS


The judge found these releases, together with the publication of Clinton’s secret speeches to Wall Street banks, in which she pledged to be their representative, were “matters of the highest public concern.” They “allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election.”

SUCKING IN THE BANKSTERS’ BRIBES: DID THEY SERVE THEIR BANKSTERS WELL?


“Clinton also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street bankers.”

GEORGE SOROS AND THE CLINTON GLOBALIST AGENDA FOR BANKSTERS AND WIDE OPEN BORDERS

NEW YORK — Demand Justice, an organization founded by former members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and associated with a “social welfare organization” financed by billionaire activist George S oros, is raising money for an eventual court fight against what the group describes as President Trump’s proposed “racist, unnecessary wall.”


“Obama would declare himself president for life with Soros really running the show, as he did for the entire Obama presidency.”

“Hillary was always small potatoes, a placeholder as it were. Her health was always suspect. And do you think the plotters would have let a doofus like Tim Kaine take office in the event that Hillary became disabled?”

THE GRIFTERS: HILLARY, BILLARY and CHELSEA… global looters!


"But there is no doubt in my mind that the Clintons, thoroughly practiced

grifters that they are, as well as their increasingly shady daughter, will not

hesitate to use such classified information as they may be able to access for 

personal and political enrichment.  They've been doing it for decades, and

they're not about to stop now." RUSS VAUGHN


CLINTON MAFIA AND THEIR BANKSTERS AT GOLDMAN SACHS
WHO IS TIGHTER WITH THE PLUNDERING BANKSTERS? CLINTON, OBAMA or TRUMP?


The Clinton White House famously abolished the Glass–Steagall legislation, which separated commercial and investment banking. The move was a boon for Wall Street firms and led to major bank mergers that some analysts say helped contribute to the 2008 financial crisis.

Bill and Hillary Clinton raked in massive speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, with CNN documenting a total of at least $7.7 million in paid speeches to big financial firms, including Goldman Sachs and UBS. Hillary Clinton made $675,000 from speeches to Goldman Sachs specifically, and her husband secured more than $1,550,000 from Goldman speeches. In 2005 alone, Bill Clinton collected over $500,000 from three Goldman Sachs events.
Hillary Clinton is simply the epitome of the rabid self – a whirlpool of selfishness, greed, and malignance.


It may well be true that Donald Trump has made his greatest contribution to the nation before even taking office:  the political destruction of Hillary Clinton and her infinitely corrupt machine. J.R. Dunn

"Hillary will do anything to distract you from her reckless record and the damage to the Democratic Party and the America she and The Obama's have created."

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S BILLIONAIRES’ GLOBALIST EMPIRE requires someone as ruthlessly dishonest as Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to be puppet dictators.

http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2018/09/google-rigged-it-so-illegals-would-vote.html

1.     Globalism: Google VP Kent Walker insists that despite its repeated rejection by electorates around the world, “globalization” is an “incredible force for good.”

2.     Hillary Clinton’s Democratic party: An executive nearly broke down crying because of the candidate’s loss. Not a single executive expressed anything but dismay at her defeat.

3.   Immigration: Maintaining liberal immigration in the U.S is the policy that Google’s executives discussed the most.

HILLARY CLINTON’S GLOBALIST VISION:

SURRENDER OF OUR BORDERS WITH NARCOMEX AND SUCKING IN GLOBAL BRIBES FOR THE PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION


Even though it has gone virtually unreported by Corporate media, Breitbart News has extensively documented the Clintons’ 
longstanding support for “open borders.” Interestingly, as the Los Angeles Times observed in 2007, the Clinton’s praise for 
globalization and open borders frequently comes when they are 
speaking before a wealthy foreign audiences and donors.


The list of predicate crimes is extensive and includes bribery, embezzlement, fraud, theft, money laundering, and obstruction of justice. 


Secretary Hillary Clinton and the Deep State: A RICO Criminal Conspiracy


We who elected President Trump understood our elected officials and the Deep State were sandbagging Trump and self-dealing public funds. It was no secret that President Trump is no angel, unpresidential, blunt, and crude, and a disruptor. Trump was hired to drain the swamp.
I watched this kabuki theater unfold over the last several years. Through my eyes as a shopworn gumshoe, I will explain what is happening. My investigative curiosity was first piqued by the ATF Fast and Furious scandal and continues through the recent House impeachment show trial. There is a common element running through all of these cons — the actions of an organized crime conspiracy.   A group of people either acting alone or in concert with others committed crimes with a common purpose - a criminal enterprise as described in "CRIMINAL RICO: 18 USC. §§1961-1968 A Manual For Federal Prosecutors."
The players acted together – in the usurpation of power, the abuse of power by public officials, bribery, thefts by fraud including federal funds, money laundering, perjury and the obstruction of justice, the violations of fundamental of civil rights, aided and abetted in the commission of these crimes and or to conceal these crimes. Criminals will lie and can't keep their lies straight. Their methods and behaviors are the same, whether engaging in street crimes or elaborate white-collar financial schemes. The only difference is when more money is involved, the perps are more adept in concealing, covering up their sins, and hiding where the money went. Many of these scandals are well known to the American Thinker readers. I will focus my comments on Hillary's home brew sever and the Clinton Foundation as an example of how RICO can be used to prosecute the players.
FBI Director James Comey indicted Hillary Clinton for her home brew server at his press conference. Comey then egregiously concluded that there was no evidence of criminal intent purportedly “required” to prosecute. Comey bastardized the Federal Espionage Act in absolving Hillary Clinton. FBI's investigation of Clinton's emails was low-balled. There was never a real search for the truth. The outcome was preordained. My jaw dropped wide open. I knew the fix was in. FBI Director Comey lied to the people with a straight face. Why?
The chance meeting of Bill Clinton and AG Loretta Lynch on the airport tarmac was no mere coincidence. This chat was not about the grandkids. Bill Clinton was there to convey a specific message to Lynch that there would be no indictment of Hillary. Hillary Clinton's email case must tank. This would have constituted bribery, if AG Lynch was assured she would continue as AG in  Clinton Administration. This meeting took place only weeks before Comey's press conference dumping Hillary Clinton's email case.
The Deep State needed Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 presidential election, or the dike holding back the truth would burst. Trump, the disruptor, was an immediate threat to both the Republicans, Democrats, and the Deep State. If the truth were laid bare, it would expose the Obama Administration, Hillary Clinton, the Senate and House, and many executive departments for these abuses of power, corruption, bribery, frauds, and thefts of public funds.
High-level government officials and the Deep State committed many serious felonies either in furtherance of or to conceal the crimes committed in the pay to play scam. In exchange for favorable consideration by Secretary Clinton, those who benefited would donate to the Clinton Foundation. The FBI started and stopped investigations into the Clinton Foundation at least twice as reported by the Washington Post. Peter Schweizer's book, Clinton Cash, is the most damning. Dinesh D'Souza slammed the Foundation in the National Review, as did The Federalist.
The status of the investigation of the Foundation by US Attorney John Huber's is unknown. Rudy Giuliani said there was enough to pursue "Clinton Inc" as racketeering under RICO. The Foundation and its affiliated nonprofits require a real investigation with an in-depth forensic audit to determine where the money went. In financial crimes investigation, the prime rule is "follow the money, honey." Illicit nonprofits have many ways to divert funds by inflating salaries, expenses, and money laundering.
Illegal nonprofit schemes are difficult to prosecute without hard evidence and the testimony of insiders. The motive of Hillary Clinton's use of the home brew server was to conceal emails from FOIA requests that would provide the hard evidence. Hillary Clinton destroyed the data on her server and cell phones with the knowledge of the FBI. It took years for Judicial Watch and others to pry and recover some of these damning emails from the foot-dragging executive departments that were complicit and knew what was going on.
RICO initially was used to target mob families. RICO is also a useful tool to fight white collar conspiracies. They both have the same hierarchy of low-level crooks led by the top players, linked together with a common purpose. RICO has tools to squeeze the low-level operatives to gather evidence to prosecute, jail, and seize assets of the conspirators. The critical element required is a pattern of criminal or racketeering activity. This pattern is proved by showing two predicate crimes were committed within ten years. The list of predicate crimes is extensive and includes bribery, embezzlement, fraud, theft, money laundering, and obstruction of justice. The typical five-year statute of limitations for most federal felonies is extended to ten years from the last criminal act or acts committed to conceal the conspiracy, i.e., lying under oath and similar actions to obstruct justice. The prison sentences are steep. The effect is to cut off the head of the organization and not just the low-level players.
The criminal activity extends back to the ATF's Fast and Furious program through the House impeachment show trial to cover up the illegal acts of the Obama Administration, Hillary Clinton, the Department of State, the DOJ, the FBI, and the CIA. A telltale sign that the DOJ under US Attorney General Barr is willing to play hardball and may use RICO, came when he spoke to the Federalist Society: "Barr accuses liberal 'resistance' of trying to 'sabotage' Trump." AG Barr said this, "shows FBI launched Trump campaign investigation on the 'thinnest of suspicions." AG Barr is the new sheriff in town, he wears a badge, has guns and will travel, can impanel grand juries, indict and arrest people, and is not limited in his jurisdiction, like DOJ IG Horowitz.
The collective actions of the Deep State are and were a silent coup to delegitimize a Presidential candidate. Once elected to impede and resist the duly elected President. The President's law enforcement and intel agencies were corrupted at the highest level and went rogue.
Organized crime can't exist without corrupt law enforcement. As I wrote in a letter to President Trump earlier this year:
. . . I believe you understand the gravity of the situation and of its importance to the very survival of our Country as we know it. If the people involved are not held accountable for their actions, we will be no different than some Third World Banana Republic.
Failure to act will destroy our founding principle of the Rule of Law as stated by President John Adams, "We Are a Nation of Laws, Not of Men" and we cannot allow a two-tiered justice system to prevail.
Ron Wright is a retired detective from Riverside PD, CA. BA in political science CSUF, M. Adm. University of Cal, Riverside. Facebook at Ron T. Cop.

Soros-Linked Group Gets Six GOP Governors to Resettle More Refugees

 


A pro-mass immigration organization with links to billionaire George Soros has successfully lobbied six Republican governors to resettle more refugees in their states.
For Fiscal Year 2020, President Donald Trump will continue cutting refugee admissions by reducing former President Barack Obama’s refugee inflow by at least 80 percent. This reduction would mean a maximum of 18,000 refugees can be resettled in the U.S. between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020. This is merely a numerical limit and not a goal federal officials are supposed to reach.
Coupled with the refugee reduction, Trump signed an executive order that gives localities, counties, and states veto power over whether they want to resettle refugees in their communities.
Executives at World Relief and the Evangelical Immigration Table — an organization with links to the Soros-funded National Immigration Forum — have been lobbying governors across the country to bring more refugees to their states. So far, six Republican governors have signed off to resettle refugees in their states, including North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum and Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey.
The New York Times notes:
Jenny Yang, vice president for advocacy at World Relief, an evangelical agency whose work includes resettlement, has been steering an effort to lobby governors to keep their states open to refugees. [Emphasis added]
She said about 16 governors have submitted written consent, six of them Republicans. Gov. Doug Ducey, Republican of Arizona, agreed after receiving a letter supporting resettlement signed by 250 evangelical leaders. Gov. Greg Abbott, Republican of Texas, who leads the state that received the most refugees last year, has not yet offered his view, despite a plea from the mayor of Fort Worth to continue accepting refugees. [Emphasis added]
Refugee contractors, like the Lutheran Social Services organization, have deployed a campaign to get mayors, local officials, and governors to admit more refugees to their states. Those contractors’ budgets every year are reliant on ensuring that as many refugees are resettled across the U.S. as possible.
It remains unclear which six Republican governors, aside from Burgum and Ducey, have been successfully lobbied by the Soros-linked group.
This week, the Evangelical Immigration Table sent letters to the governors of California, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin to ask them to bring refugees to their states.
The federally mandated refugee resettlement program has brought more than 718,000 refugees to the U.S. since January 2008 — a group larger than the entire state population of Wyoming, which has 577,000 residents. In the last decade, about 73,000 refugees have been resettled in California, 71,500 resettled in Texas, nearly 43,000 resettled in New York, and more than 36,000 resettled in Michigan.
Refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers nearly $9 billion every five years, according to the latest research. Over the course of five years, an estimated 16 percent of all refugees admitted will need housing assistance paid for by taxpayers.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

 

 

AXIS OF EVIL, GREED AND CORRUPTION: THE SOROS – OBAMA – CLINTON CONSPIRACY

 

“The Lawlessness of the Obama Administration: A never-ending story.” Michael
Barone – American Historian – Washington Examiner

His ambition is without borders -- “The Soviet Empire is now the Soros Empire.” “I’m the Pope’s boss now.” And so on, ad nauseum. Yet, like other tyrants, he is untouchable. Those he has made richer and more powerful protect him.

‘Deplorable’ Americans however confounded Soros by not voting for “What can we do for you, George?” Hillary Clinton.

 

GEORGE SOROS AND THE CLINTON GLOBALIST AGENDA FOR BANKSTERS AND OPEN BORDERS

NEW YORK — Demand Justice, an organization founded by former members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and associated with a “social welfare organization” financed by billionaire activist George Soros, is raising money for an eventual court fight against what the group describes as President Trump’s proposed “racist, unnecessary wall.”


THE PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION CHARITY slush fund


“There is no controlling Bill Clinton. He does whatever he wants and runs up incredible expenses with foundation funds,” states a separate interview memo attached to the submission.

“Bill Clinton mixes and matches his personal business with that of the foundation. Many people within the foundation have tried to caution him about this but he does not listen, and there really is no talking to him,” the memo added.

GLOBALIST BARACK OBAMA AND NANCY PELOSI’S CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY AND KEEP AMERICA FLOODED WITH DEM VOTING ILLEGALS

"Along with Obama, Pelosi and Schumer are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the eight years of that administration." PATRICIA McCARTHY

 

One of the most disgusting things to come out of the Obama administration was "Operation Fast and Furious," where members of the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) allowed illegal gun sales to go through – commonly referred to as "gun walking" – in order to track buyers and sellers they believed were connected to the Mexican drug cartels. Nearly 2,000 firearms were sold and were eventually found throughout the United States and Mexico. Two of them were used to k ill Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. BETH BAUMANN


THE CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY

The Democrat Party’s secret agenda for wider open borders, more welfare for invading illegals, more jobs and free anything they illegally vote for…. All to destroy the two-party system and build the GLOBALISTS’ DEMOCRAT PARTY FOR WIDER OPEN BORDERS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED.

https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/frontpage-hidden-agenda-of-pueblo-sin.html

 

Demonstrably and irrefutably the Democrat Party became the party whose principle objective is to thoroughly transform the nature of the American electorate by means of open borders and the mass, unchecked importation of illiterate third world peasants who will vote in overwhelming numbers for Democrats and their La Raza welfare state. FRONTPAGE MAG
CLOSET MUSLIM BARACK OBAMA’S CONSPIRACY FOR A THIRD TERM FOR LIFE

First, destroy Trump and put Hillary away if she doesn’t end up in jail.


HE PARTNERS WITH ZUCKERBERG, SOROS AND LOUIS FARRAKHAN

“Obama would declare himself president for life with Soros really running the show, as he did for the entire Obama presidency.”

“Hillary was always small potatoes, a placeholder as it were. Her health was always suspect. And do you think the plotters would have let a doofus like Tim Kaine take office in the event that Hillary became disabled?”

“Obama has the totalitarian impulse. After all, he went around saying he didn't have Constitutional authority to legalize the illegals, and then he tried anyway. The courts stopped him.”

“The bottom line 2 is this: Barack Obama is a Communist. This was all an Obama operation. Why is anyone surprised that a communist (Obama) tried to subvert an election. That is what Communists do. It is Barack Obama and his people like Brennan and Clapper behaving to type. That's what Maduro does in Venezuela. That's what the Castro brothers did. That's what every communist and socialist nation does. THEY FIX ELECTIONS!!”

Hillary kept a secret server overflowing with national security info which, more than likely, was hacked. June 28, 2016, on a Phoenix tarmac, Bill Clinton met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch to seal a deal insuring Hillary would not be prosecuted.”

Obama, of course, covered up his own role, depicting his presidency as eight years of heroic efforts to repair the damage caused by the 2008 financial crash. At the end of those eight years, however, Wall Street and the financial oligarchy were fully recovered, enjoying record wealth, while working people were poorer than before, a widening social chasm that made possible the election of the billionaire con man and Demagogue in November 2016.”

David Bernstein & The Heritage Foundation - “Lawless: The Obama Administration’s Unprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law.”

“The Lawlessness of the Obama Administration: A never-ending story.” Michael
Barone – American Historian – Washington Examiner

 

 

George Soros: A New Kind of Tyrant?

 

The venomous careers of Hitler and Stalin provoked the study of totalitarian regimes as the very epitome of evil, depriving their citizens of freedom and of life itself. A state captured by a demagogue is considered a sure sign of danger ahead -- hence the alleged justification by the Left for their hysteria over “rabble rouser” Donald Trump’s election. Overlooked until more recently are the unelected, bloated bureaucratic fiefdoms and regulatory encroachments of both national and global government and non-governmental institutions, which have created the opportunity for a sinister, large scale violation of political power.
This new abuse was foreshadowed in the career of FBI architect and director, the corrupt J. Edgar Hoover. It has been notched up to a planetary level of hyper-coordination by George Soros as preliminary to the installation of his global Open Society. In this grandiose plan, state governments (specifically the USA) will be reduced to the level of relay stations for a supranational, Sauron-like centralization of power.
What unites the totalitarian and the new tyrant are three personality characteristics, proposed by Professor John D. Mayer in his 1993 article, “The Emotional Madness of the Dangerous Leader.” The first is indifference. The tyrant is consumed by a single-minded, fanatical purpose and has no regard for the suffering wreaked on others during its implementation. The second is intolerance of those whose opinions differ, facilitated through control of the media, secret and insider knowledge, revenge against anyone who thwarts, and a paranoid mania to shut down all opposition. The third character trait (the foundation of the previous two), is psychopathic grandiosity. The power-abuser assumes a messianic pose of unifying society under a utopian plan and persuading others to participate. The very intensity of the tyrant’s narcissism is transferred to vulnerable supporters eliciting a narcotic rush of enthusiasm.
What is easily overlooked is that the sham scheme is not a political health remedy, but a device for maintaining the megalomaniac’s sense of personal omnipotence. In Soros’ own words, “Next to my fantasies about being God, I also have very strong fantasies of being mad. In fact, my grandfather was actually paranoid.” Soros seems disarming in his frankness. But delusions of grandeur preclude self-knowledge, as Soros’ next statements reveal. “I have a lot of madness in my family. So far I have escaped it.”
Soros has spilled bucketloads of words proclaiming he is “amoral,” “self-interested,” and that “normal rules do not apply” to him. “I am unnatural. I am a sort of deux ex machina. I’m very comfortable with my public persona, because it is the one I have created myself.” And this from the man who controls politicians and bureaucrats like a boss giving dictation to his secretary. This is the man who has perfected the subversion of governments, who has robbed failing states, and lavishly endowed every organization and movement destructive of traditional Western society, from abolishing the Electoral College to abolishing life itself if it is in utero, drug-addicted, or senile. His ambition is without borders -- “The Soviet Empire is now the Soros Empire.” “I’m the Pope’s boss now.” And so on, ad nauseum. Yet, like other tyrants, he is untouchable. Those he has made richer and more powerful protect him.
In March 1933 the Germans voted. They could have voted for the moderate Center Christian party. Instead they voted in Hitler. ‘Deplorable’ Americans however confounded Soros by not voting for “What can we do for you, George?” Hillary Clinton. Yet where are the congressional and Senate investigations into Soros? Where is the RICO indictment? Governments have been bought. The media has been bought. The Soros NGO empire operates an invasive, parasitic web currently devouring the body politic of the USA and many other nations besides.
What Trump’s election has revealed is the limitation of the Presidency in withstanding the transfer of power to unelected, publicly unaccountable bureaucrats, and venal politicians, more concerned with their benefices than their constituents. That void has allowed Soros to install himself as de facto puppet-master. We require bureaucracy, and we cannot prevent the existence of associations, but there is an urgent need for reform by abolishing permanency in government and establishing citizens’ tribunals of appeal against abuses of administrative power. 
Recently in an interview on his simpering NPR, Soros confessed he was unprepared for the populist opposition to his insurrectionary agenda. Let us continue our opposition. Let us demand Soros be investigated and brought to justice as conditional for obtaining our vote. Those with connection to him must be banned from public office, and his assets frozen. Then his parasitical minions will shrivel, like leeches desiccated by a pinch of salt. If not, although we may escape the mass slaughter of the twentieth century, it will be at the cost of vassalage beneath a tyrant like George Soros.
“Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes.  This is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” ---- Karen McQuillan  AMERICAN THINKER.com

 

Book deals. The way to get rich upon leaving public office, just as congressional insiders make themselves rich in public office by trading on insider information, as described by Peter Schweizer in "Throw Them All Out."

 

#1 New York Times Bestseller!
Peter Schweizer has been fighting corruption―and winning―for years. In Throw Them All Out, he exposed insider trading by members of Congress, leading to the passage of the STOCK Act. In Extortion, he uncovered how politicians use mafia-like tactics to enrich themselves. And in Clinton Cash, he revealed the Clintons’ massive money machine and sparked an FBI investigation.
Now he explains how a new corruption has taken hold, involving larger sums of money than ever before. Stuffing tens of thousands of dollars into a freezer has morphed into multibillion-dollar equity deals done in the dark corners of the world.
An American bank opening in China would be prohibited by US law from hiring a slew of family members of top Chinese politicians. However, a Chinese bank opening in America can hire anyone it wants. It can even invite the friends and families of American politicians to invest in can’t-lose deals.
President Donald Trump’s children have made front pages across the world for their dicey transactions. However, the media has barely looked into questionable deals made by those close to Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Mitch McConnell, and lesser-known politicians who have been in the game longer.
In many parts of the world, the children of powerful political figures go into business and profit handsomely, not necessarily because they are good at it, but because people want to curry favor with their influential parents. This is a relatively new phenomenon in the United States. But for relatives of some prominent political families, we may already be talking about hundreds of millions of dollars.
Deeply researched and packed with shocking revelations, Secret Empires identifies public servants who cannot be trusted and provides a path toward a more accountable government.

 

Schweizer: Biden Needs to Address Ukraine Accusations ‘Front and Center’

11 Oct 201910
1:18
Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer, author of “Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends,” on Friday stressed the importance of 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden addressing the Ukraine issue involving him and his son, Hunter.



Barack Obama is rather typical of the Wall Street insiders who comprise a cabinet and White House team that is filled with multi-millionaires, presided over by a president who parlayed his own political career into a multi-million-dollar fortune.

Banks, hedge funds and other financial firms lavishly backed Barack Obama his presidential bid, giving him considerably more than they gave to his Republican opponent, Senator John McCain.

Trump criticized Dimon in 2013 for supposedly contributing to the country’s economic downturn. “I’m not Jamie Dimon, who pays $13 billion to settle a case and then pays $11 billion to settle a case and who I think is the worst banker in the United States,” he told reporters.

“The response of the administration was to rush to the defense of the banks. Even before coming to power, Obama expressed his unconditional support for the bailouts, which he subsequently expanded. He assembled an administration dominated by the interests of finance capital, symbolized by economic adviser Lawrence Summers and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.”

Practically every cabinet appointee of Obama’s has close personal connections to the ruling class, many having come directly from corporate boardrooms. Under Obama’s watch not a single executive at a major financial firm has been criminally tried, much less sent to jail, for their role in the financial crisis.

“Attorney General Eric Holder's tenure was a low point even within the disgraceful scandal-ridden Obama years.” DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE MAG
"One of the premier institutions of big business, JP Morgan Chase, issued an internal report on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the 2008 crash, which warned that another “great liquidity crisis” was possible, and that a government bailout on the scale of that effected by Bush and Obama will produce social unrest, “in light of the potential impact of central bank actions in driving inequality between asset owners and labor."  

This manufactured crisis has, in turn, been exploited by the Obama administration and both big business parties to hand over trillions in pension funds and other public assets to the financial kleptocracy that rules America.

“Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes.  This is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” ---- Karen McQuillan  THEAMERICAN THINKER.com

“This was not because of difficulties in securing indictments or convictions. On the contrary, Attorney General Eric Holder told a Senate committee in March of 2013 that the Obama administration chose not to prosecute the big banks or their CEOs because to do so might “have a negative impact on the national economy.”

"One of the premier institutions of big business, JP Morgan Chase, issued an internal report on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the 2008 crash, which warned that another “great liquidity crisis” was possible, and that a government bailout on the scale of that effected by Bush and Obama will produce social unrest, “in light of the potential impact of central bank actions in driving inequality between asset owners and labor."  

Biden Bashes Influence of Billionaires While Relying on their Money

JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP/Getty Images.
Former Vice President Joe Biden is bashing the outsize influence billionaires are having on the race for the 2020 Democrat nomination, despite his own campaign relying heavily upon their money.
In a fundraising email sent to supporters on Thursday, Biden’s campaign excoriated two of his Democrat rivals for using their personal fortunes to underwrite their presidential ambitions. The email, titled “the billionaires are coming,” took direct aim at Tom Steyer and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg for spending heavily to “saturate your airwaves and news feeds.”
In particular, Biden’s campaign lambasted Steyer for using his fortune to gain access to the Democrat debates, while attacking Bloomberg for skipping early primaries and spending $100 million in delegate-heavy Super Tuesday states.
“One billionaire is buying his way onto the Democrat debate stage, and one is buying his way out of it,” Biden’s campaign wrote, before proceeding to argue both billionaires were undermining “how democracy is supposed to work.”
The former vice president’s attack on the influence Steyer and Bloomberg are having is surprising given the fact his own campaign has relied heavily on billionaires to underwrite his White House hopes.
A recent report by Forbes indicates Biden has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of the billionaire donor class since launching his candidacy. In the last fundraising quarter alone, the former vice president pulled in contributions from 44 billionaires—the most of any 2020 Democrat. Many of those contributing opted to max out, giving the largest sum possible for a primary campaign under federal law.
The money rolled in from Silicon Valley titans, Wall Street elites, and some of the country’s largest real estate tycoons.
Among the donors was Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google who stirred controversy in January 2017 when claiming President Donald Trump would do “evil things” in office. Schmidt donated $2,800 to Biden’s campaign in May, less than a week after the former vice president entered the race. In the past the former Google executive has heavily backed Democrat candidates up and down the ballot, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).
Employees from Google’s parent company, Alphabet Inc., have donated more than $37,000 to Biden’s campaign to date, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The hefty contributions have ensured Alphabet is one of the former vice president’s top 20 contributors. Joining a list that includes another Silicon Valley giant, Microsoft Corp.
Biden’s support in Silicon Valley has not been confined to traditional Democrats. Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman, a one time Republican nominee for governor of California, donated $2,800 in September. In 2016, Whitman broke ranks by endorsing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over Trump. Since that time, the former eBay executive has become a consistent ‘Never Trumper.’
On America’s other coast, the former vice president has elicited prime backing from Wall Street and the real estate industry.
Topping the list of Biden’s Wall Street backers is Judy Dimon, the wife of JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon. Although her husband, himself, has not donated, Dimon maxed out to Biden in mid-September.
The contribution comes with its own controversial history. In 2008, then-Sen. Joe Biden supported the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which granted large financial institutions bailouts to survive the recession. JPMorgan was one such institution, taking more than $25 billion in taxpayer money—one of largest bailouts granted to any company under the program.
The bailout came even though JPMorgan’s mortgage lending practices helped create the housing bubble that, when it burst, ultimately led the to the recession. In 2013, the bank agreed to pay a civil fine of $13 billion for its unscrupulous lending practices.
Apart from Dimon, Biden received maxed out contributions from private equity executives, like Blackstone President Jonathan Gray. Blackstone recently made a $250 million investment in a startup that helps outsource American jobs overseas.
In total, the former vice president has filled a significant portion of his campaign account from Wall Street donors, including nearly a million dollars from the securities and investment sector.
Wall Street’s contributions, however, paled in comparison to the amount of money real estate tycoons have donated to Biden. In between April and the end of September, the former vice president garnered more than one million from real estate interests.
The funds poured in from longtime allies like Neil Bluhm, a casino and real estate magnate, and George Marcus, the leader of America’s largest commercial property brokerage firms. Although Bluhm and Marcus have only donated $2,800 each, both men have hosted lavish fundraisers on Biden’s behalf that have raised unknown amounts.
Biden’s reliance on such billionaires is one of the reasons his campaign has struggled to compete financially with the likes of Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).
Although Biden started the race with a strong funding advantage, thanks to support from high-dollar donors, he ended the most recent fundraising period well behind his competitors. In between July and the end of September, Biden only raised $15.2 million. The sum was dwarfed by that raised by Sanders ($25.3 million), Warren ($24.6 million), and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg ($19.1 million).
The former vice president’s fundraising troubles stem from an inability to make in-roads with small-dollar donors. Unlike Warren or Sanders, more than 2,900 donors have already maxed out to Biden’s campaign.
In fact, top-dollar donors make up a far higher percentage of Biden’s campaign coffers than those of his competitors. In comparison, only 38 percent of the campaign’s funds to date have come from individuals donating less than $200. Such a ratio poses a long term issue, especially when top contributors are prohibited by law from donating again until after the primary.
The disparate support between billionaires and small donors was seen as a primary motivator for Biden’s decision to jettison opposing outside help from Super PACs. Since such groups can raise and spend unlimited funds, the former vice president’s billionaire donors are no longer subject to contribution limits when supporting his campaign.
Biden, though, did not mention any of this in his email to supporters on Thursday. Instead, the former vice president kept his fire aimed at Steyer and Bloomberg, while downplaying his own support from the billionaire donor class.
“Since the day that this campaign launched, we have relied on grassroots support to power this campaign,” Biden’s team wrote.


JPMorgan shares climb after the bank posts record earnings and revenue

 

Jamie Dimon arriving to testify before Congress. Aaron P. Bernstein/Reuters

·         JPMorgan reported first-quarter earnings results on Friday, kicking off another earnings season for the largest US banks.

JPMorgan Chase reported record first-quarter results on both the top and bottom lines Friday morning. Shares climbed 2.3% in early trading to $108.68.
Here's how the results stacked up with Wall Street's expectations as compiled by Bloomberg.

·         Adjusted net income: $9.18 billion versus $7.7 billion expected
·         Earnings per share: $2.65 versus $2.34 expected
·         Revenue: $29.85 billion versus $28.4 billion expected
·         Expenses: $16.4 billion versus $16.7 billion expected
"In the first quarter of 2019, we had record revenue and net income, strong performance across each of our major businesses, and a more constructive environment," CEO Jamie Dimon said in the earnings release. "Even amid some global geopolitical uncertainty, the US economy continues to grow, employment and wages are going up, inflation is moderate, financial markets are healthy, and consumer and business confidence remains strong."
A deeper look into the numbers showed the trading and investment-banking businesses exceeded expectations, though trading declined 17% from the year earlier:
·         FICC sales & trading revenue: $3.73 billion versus $3.67 billion expected
·         Equity sales & trading revenue: $1.74 billion versus $1.73 billion expected
·         Investment-banking revenue: $1.75 billion versus $1.63 billion expected

Obama's Wall Street cabinet

6 April 2009
A series of articles published over the weekend, based on financial disclosure reports released by the Obama administration last Friday concerning top White House officials, documents the extent to which the administration, in both its personnel and policies, is a political instrument of Wall Street.
Policies that are extraordinarily favorable to the financial elite that were put in place over the past month by the Obama administration have fed a surge in share values on Wall Street. These include the scheme to use hundreds of billions of dollars in public funds to pay hedge funds to buy up the banks’ toxic assets at inflated prices, the Auto Task Force’s rejection of the recovery plans of Chrysler and General Motors and its demand for even more brutal layoffs, wage cuts and attacks on workers’ health benefits and pensions, and the decision by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) to weaken “mark-to-market” accounting rules and permit banks to inflate the value of their toxic assets.
At the same time, Obama has campaigned against restrictions on bonuses paid to executives at insurance giant American International Group (AIG) and other bailed-out firms, and repeatedly assured Wall Street that he will slash social spending, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

The new financial disclosures reveal that top Obama advisors directly involved in setting these policies have received millions from Wall Street firms, including those that have received huge taxpayer bailouts.

The case of Lawrence Summers, director of the National Economic Council and Obama’s top economic adviser, highlights the politically incestuous character of relations between the Obama administration and the American financial elite.
Last year, Summers pocketed $5 million as a managing director of D.E. Shaw, one of the biggest hedge funds in the world, and another $2.7 million for speeches delivered to Wall Street firms that have received government bailout money. This includes $45,000 from Citigroup and $67,500 each from JPMorgan Chase and the now-liquidated Lehman Brothers.
For a speech to Goldman Sachs executives, Summers walked away with $135,000. This is substantially more than double the earnings for an entire year of high-seniority auto workers, who have been pilloried by the Obama administration and the media for their supposedly exorbitant and “unsustainable” wages.
Alluding diplomatically to the flagrant conflict of interest revealed by these disclosures, the New York Times noted on Saturday: “Mr. Summers, the director of the National Economic Council, wields important influence over Mr. Obama’s policy decisions for the troubled financial industry, including firms from which he recently received payments.”
Summers was a leading advocate of banking deregulation. As treasury secretary in the second Clinton administration, he oversaw the lifting of basic financial regulations dating from the 1930s. The Times article notes that among his current responsibilities is deciding “whether—and how—to tighten regulation of hedge funds.”
Summers is not an exception. He is rather typical of the Wall Street insiders who comprise a cabinet and White House team that is filled with multi-millionaires, presided over by a president who parlayed his own political career into a multi-million-dollar fortune.
Michael Froman, deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, worked for Citigroup and received more than $7.4 million from the bank from January of 2008 until he entered the Obama administration this year. This included a $2.25 million year-end bonus handed him this past January, within weeks of his joining the Obama administration.
Citigroup has thus far been the beneficiary of $45 billion in cash and over $300 billion in government guarantees of its bad debts.
David Axelrod, the Obama campaign’s top strategist and now senior adviser to the president, was paid $1.55 million last year from two consulting firms he controls. He has agreed to buyouts that will garner him another $3 million over the next five years. His disclosure claims personal assets of between $7 and $10 million.
Obama’s deputy national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, was paid $3.9 million by a Washington law firm whose major clients include Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and the private equity firm Apollo Management.
Louis Caldera, director of the White House Military Office, made $227,155 last year from IndyMac Bancorp, the California bank that heavily promoted subprime mortgages. It collapsed last summer and was placed under federal receivership.
The presence of multi-millionaire Wall Street insiders extends to second- and third-tier positions in the Obama administration as well. David Stevens, who has been tapped by Obama to head the Federal Housing Administration, is the president and chief operating officer of Long and Foster Cos., a real estate brokerage firm. From 1999 to 2005, Stevens served as a top executive for Freddie Mac, the federally-backed mortgage lending giant that was bailed out and seized by federal regulators in September.
Neal Wolin, Obama’s selection for deputy counsel to the president for economic policy, is a top executive at the insurance giant Hartford Financial Services, where his salary was $4.5 million.
Obama’s Auto Task Force has as its top advisers two investment bankers with a long resume in corporate downsizing and asset-stripping.
It is not new for leading figures from finance to be named to high posts in a US administration. However, there has traditionally been an effort to demonstrate a degree of independence from Wall Street in the selection of cabinet officials and high-ranking presidential aides, often through the appointment of figures from academia or the public sector. In previous decades, moreover, representatives of the corporate elite were more likely to come from industry than from finance.
In the Obama administration such considerations have largely been abandoned.
This will not come as a surprise to those who critically followed Obama’s election campaign. While he postured before the electorate as a critic of the war in Iraq and a quasi-populist force for “change,” he was from the first heavily dependent on the financial and political backing of powerful financiers in Chicago. Banks, hedge funds and other financial firms lavishly backed his presidential bid, giving him considerably more than they gave to his Republican opponent, Senator John McCain.
Friday’s financial disclosures further expose the bankruptcy of American democracy. Elections have no real effect on government policy, which is determined by the interests of the financial aristocracy that dominates both political parties. The working class can fight for its own interests—for jobs, decent living standards, health care, education, housing and an end to war.


“Records show that four out of Obama's top five

contributors are employees of financial industry giants –

Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806),

JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).”

OBAMA and HIS BANKS: THEIR PROFITS, CRIMES and LOOTING SOAR



No comments: