CUT AND PASTE YOUTUBE LINKS
JUST HAPPENED! Elon Musk EXPOSED Senator Elizabeth Warren's CORRUPTION!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_e5F6frnBc
BUT SUCK IN BRIBES!
Warren’s Anti-Corruption Plan Does Not Prevent Hunter Biden Scenario
An anti-corruption plan put forth by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) in the 2020 Democrat presidential primary would not prevent a scenario where a sitting vice president’s child is allowed to serve on the board of a foreign corporation, as former Vice President Joe Biden’s son did.
Released last month, Warren’s plan to “End Washington Corruption” seeks to end a series of loopholes where presidents, vice presidents, lawmakers, and their family members have been able to effectively sell influence to line their pockets — a scheme that the Clintons were famously accused of with the Clinton Global Foundation, and one which Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, are now accused.
In April 2014, as Breitbart News’ Haris Alic has reported, Hunter Biden was appointed to serve on the board of Ukrainian oil company Burisma despite having no qualifications do to so. At the same time, Biden led the Obama administration’s response to Russia’s invasion of Crimea, pushing billions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer aid to the Ukrainian government. Some of that money allegedly filtered out to Burisma, the corporation of which Biden’s son was a board member.
When asked last month whether her anti-corruption plan would prevent a case where a sitting vice president’s child could serve on the board of a foreign corporation, Warren evaded the question, saying “I don’t know.”
“I’d have to go back and look at the details on the plan,” Warren said.
A review of Warren’s anti-corruption plan, though, reveals that there is no explicit language preventing another case where a sitting vice president’s child can serve on the board of a corporation, let alone a foreign corporation.
The closest Warren’s plan comes to dealing with a Hunter Biden scenario is banning lawmakers and their staff from serving on the boards of corporations, domestic and foreign.
“My plan bans members of Congress and senior congressional staff from serving on corporate boards — whether or not they’re paid to do so,” the plan states.
While Warren’s plan would mandate presidential transition team members to disclose their involvement with corporations, foreign governments, and other potential conflicts of interest, this portion of the plan does not extend to members of an administration who later involve themselves in potential conflicts of interest.
“It also strengthens ethics requirements for presidential transition teams to ensure that those who are shaping our government disclose any conflicts of interest and comply with the highest ethical standards,” the plan reads.
Though the Hunter Biden question was asked of Warren almost two weeks ago, her campaign has yet to follow up on whether they would revise their anti-corruption plan to include banning the family members of sitting vice presidents from serving on the boards of foreign corporations.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Elizabeth Warren: Lying, Money-Laundering Socialist
Punishing the rich for generating – and enjoying -- their wealth.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren said on Wednesday October 13, 2021, that billionaires who have enough money to shoot themselves into space, as Jeff Bezos did this summer, will pay for the Democrats’ multitrillion-dollar reconciliation bill that is still being negotiated in Congress.
Before analyzing the pure envy and hatred of the productive benefactors of humanity that lie behind her statement, let us identify Warren for what she is: an equivocating, lying, money-laundering, Ponzi-scheming socialist who lives to expropriate the wealth of others to finance socialist programs. She’s contributed nothing in terms of productive value to society—short of being some pit-bull bureaucratic watchdog who lives for enacting legalized theft and money-laundering schemes, which is what socialism boils down to. She denies the fact that production comes before distribution, and that the wealth she so gleefully wants to appropriate was made possible by the ratified choices of individuals who endorsed Bezos’ products and made him wealthy because he added superlative value to their quality of lives. The notion that billionaires don’t pay taxes is such a case of the Big Lie, that it is not even worth refuting.
What Warren despises is that Bezos regards his personal welfare, enjoyment, and pleasure—all value-choices that comprise his pursuit of his own happiness which is his inalienable right to do with as he pleases. He neither seeks nor needs the permission of others to live optimally.
Elizabeth Warren is jealous, envious, and filled with rage that he has so much surplus income that he can dare to spend it on what she considers to be a frivolous and wasteful activity. Guess what, Warren? The liberal state by design is supposed to remain agnostic on the question of persons’ conceptions of the good life—provided such choices do not violate the rights of others. She is outraged that he’d rather spend millions on a short trip to space than fund the decrepit and corrupt government schools that teach hatred and bigotry via Critical race Theory; that he doesn’t seem to care about funding historically Black colleges which are a total disaster (they are failing abysmally and graduating semi-literate students); that her tuition-free community college education plan won’t be financed. No one should ever be compelled to finance the education of another person’s child. We are not responsible for the procreative choices of other people. The responsibility for a child’s education lies with the parents.
If you cannot afford to educate a child then don’t have one, just as you would not purchase a house or car if you could not afford to finance them. No one has a constitutional right to have children. And no one’s child can be a necessary social good for anyone but the parents of that child. State schools today (and many private schools) are bastions of indoctrination centers teaching hatred of our great republic, encouraging and practicing cancel culture, weaponizing defiance against authority, decolonizing courses by stripping them of canonical texts, and turning schools into Marxist conduits of Social Justice, radical activism, and social eugenics breeding grounds to transform America into a communist charnel house by canceling human agency, and then history, and then our Constitution. No, Sen. Warren. Some of us are going to devote our lives to defunding all public schools and shutting down government schools. She is incensed that she won’t have her drug-pricing policies and undefined “climate crises” funded and foisted on corporations that would just stifle growth and productivity.
Warren knows that she must walk a fine line with corporations and folks like Bezos. Financing socialist programs is not as simple a matter as taxing-the-rich and using their wealth to indiscriminately finance said initiatives.
What the bark-with-no-bite senator wants to do is create a certain climate of resentment against success within the culture. She wants to reorient the sensibilities of the American people, to divest them of their personal independence and the cherished principle that they hold regarding property: that one has the legal and moral right to use and dispose of one’s property according to one’s judgment and conscience, provided it does not violate the individual rights of other persons.
Warren and the progressive left want to change the vocabulary of rights entirely. They want a notion of positive rights to be sneaked in surreptitiously for us to forget the proper understanding of rights as delineated by classical liberalism. John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Ludwig von Mises, and Ayn Rand all reminded us that rights pertain to a right to pursue action in pursuit of a good, an object, a service, and values. No one has the right to a job, a house, or an education per se; only the right to pursue the means to such tangible goods. Otherwise, one is demanding that one has a right to the efforts and actions and services of another. No one has ever been able to justify on what grounds such a right to that sort of action could be legitimized.
Warren, like all socialists, is a money appropriator. She has no intention of creating real wealth in the sense of creating a real value in the world whose application is manifestly ratified by the choices of others in trading their money for that applied value. She may be a money-earner, and she has grown rich by that means; but it was through the created wealth of a producer on whose efforts she herself is parasitic. She is mostly known in politics as someone who has been responsible for policies that have led to banking regulations. This means that she strangles and aborts initiatives, innovation, and the creative capabilities of others.
And this is what she hates about corporate leaders and those who have the temerity to enjoy their wealth by traveling into space. This woman bears the trademark of every money-laundering socialist: she has a sense of entitlement coupled with hatred for talent that can be monetized. She does not even have the dignity of a pillaging humanitarian. She’s a primal thug who is going after the rich for no other reason than because they are rich, and because their sensibilities and drives are offensive to her. She feels the rich should give back. But to whom and for what reason? From whom have they stolen or taken anything that was not theirs legally? They have raised the quality of lives and standard of living of many in ways that, if such persons had been left on their own, many of them otherwise would have been condemned to a life of destitution. Bezos has nothing to give back. He and his customers have traded value for value in a reciprocal exchange of mutual advantage.
Warren desires to bring the rich and affluent down to the level of the lowest common denominator of those whom she thinks need government help; to invoke some notion that those corporate leaders and billionaires are just like everyone else. But they are not. And they should never accept the uninvited moral agenda of lesser people.
I end with words addressed to money-laundering Sen. Warren via the great economist Ludwig von Mises, spoken to philosopher Ayn Rand when he told her she had the courage to tell the masses the truth. Von Mises said: “You are inferior, and all the improvements in your condition which you simply take for granted you owe to the efforts of men who are better than you.”
These words are applicable to the money-appropriating senator who would do best to genuflect before the billionaires and pay homage to them for the gift of her paycheck, rather than have the infernal impertinence to even aspire to lecture them—let alone steal their wealth.
Jason D. Hill is professor of philosophy at DePaul University in Chicago specializing in ethics, social and political philosophy, American foreign policy, and moral psychology. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center. Dr. Hill is the author of five books, including the forthcoming book, “What Do White Americans Owe Black People: Racial Justice in the Age of Post-Oppression.” Follow him on Twitter @JasonDhill6.
HOW MANY OF THESE CULPRITS ARE GAMER LAWYERS?
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (THREE GAMER LAWYERS) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
Warren is totally invisible on matters that truly count to average Americans. Like virtually all liberals in power positions, she talks purely for public effect, but accomplishes nothing. She doesn’t even try. She has disappeared completely.
ONE MORE SOCIOPATH GAMER LAWYER!
Liz Warren’s Disappearing Act
Despite the Biden administration’s intentionally misleading, disingenuous blathering about this 50-year-high inflation being transitory, any 19-year-old freshman Econ 101 student could see that it wasn’t. Janet Yellin knew she was lying when she said it. “President” Biden read what his handlers wrote and said that this awful inflation would abate.
It’s been one lie after another from the Democrats in D.C., compounded with economic policies that could only make matters as bad as possible. When President Trump left office in January 2021, the national average for gasoline was around $2.30/gallon. Biden immediately signed a series of anti-energy executive orders restricting fracking, oil exploration, and fossil-fuel production. He did this for two reasons: 1) To counter and negate anything that President Trump had done, simply out of infantile spite; 2) To curry approval and favorable publicity with the Green New Deal faction and their supporters.
Predictably, retail gasoline pricing spiked. It was soon in the mid-$3.00 range, more than a dollar over where it was under President Trump. This was well before Russia invaded Ukraine. This was not “Putin’s price increase.” This was all Biden. As fuel went up, transportation/delivery costs increased and pricing for all goods started to go up. This was an absolutely unnecessary tax on the American public, diluting consumer’s buying power and sapping their confidence.
The Biden energy policy’s effect on overall consumer pricing would have been bad enough if that’s all that there was. But it wasn’t, not by a long shot. Biden instituted a series of government spending programs ostensibly to help American households cope with the economic hardships (layoffs, business closings, etc.) brought about by the COVID-19 crisis. However, the government’s spending was so excessive that a classic inflationary spiral resulted, as the textbook reality of “too much money chasing too few goods” manifested itself once again. Now we have 7, 8, 9% inflation, following years of 1-2% Trump-era inflation. But excessive government spending hasn’t slowed, so it’s unlikely that inflation will lessen.
The standard governmental response to high inflation is for the Fed to raise interest rates. In essence, the higher interest rates tamp down consumer and business activity by making borrowing more expensive. Businesses then get nervous that they’re losing customers when people can’t afford the higher-interest loans, so they react by lowering their prices in an effort to entice people to buy. Lower prices = an end to inflation. That’s the theory in a nutshell.
A direct effect of the Fed raising interest rates is that commercial banks also raise theirs, for both loans and interest-bearing savings accounts. Here’s where it gets interesting for those paying close attention. Banks don’t waste a nanosecond when it comes to raising their loan interest rates. When the Fed raises their rates, the commercial banks follow suit immediately. Mortgages, home equity credit lines, credit-card balances, they all go up right away. Anyone with a variable-rate mortgage or home equity loan has seen a pretty hefty increase in their monthly bill.
However, banks aren’t so quick to raise the interest they pay out on savings accounts and CDs. The best CD rates were around 4-4.25% before the last two Fed rate increases. The Fed went up .75% and then followed that with a .5% rise. You might think that of that 1.25% increase, banks might pass along, say, 1% of it to their depositors. Not so. CD rates are inching up ever so slowly, if at all. The very best CD rates in the country are barely over 4.5% and those are only for on-line accounts. The banks are keeping the higher interest mostly for themselves.
Which brings us to the nowhere-to-be-found likes of Elizabeth Warren, the so-called consumer financial advocate senator from Massachusetts. Warren has made herself famous over the years decrying the supposedly malicious behavior of large financial institutions and creating all manner of investigatory boards to search for wrongdoing. Her efforts have never actually accomplished anything productive for the average person. She just gloms a lot of favorable coverage from the liberal media and draws a lot of underserved attention to herself. Warren has mastered the art of public hand-waving and shrill histrionics, but it amounts to nothing of substance.
I wonder if Senator Warren has looked at a credit-card statement lately. A typical credit card from a large bank will charge over 22% interest on unpaid balances, but that same bank pays out less than 1% interest on savings accounts and maybe 2% on a multi-year CD. To get those 4.5% CD rates, you have to open an on-line account, something many seniors are not comfortable doing. They’d rather do their banking face-to-face, in person at their local branch. That limits them to maybe 2% on a CD, if they’re lucky.
Seniors have traditionally counted on the safety of fixed-income instruments, like bank CDs, to be the bedrock of their retirement income, after Social Security, especially now that most private companies no longer offer pensions. Let’s look at an average, normal middle-class household. They have two kids, two used cars in the driveway and a modest home. Over their 30- or 40-year marriage, they’ve managed to put away a middling $200k in the bank. At 5%, a CD would pay them $10,000/year, or $833/month. That’s an important sum to a household like this. At 2%, ($333/month), it’s a budget-breaker.
It doesn’t matter to Senator Warren. If she was even aware -- and, no doubt, she’s not -- that $500 difference ($833-$333) is just another dinner at the Capital Grille in downtown Boston.
So, where is Senator Warren on this? How come charging 23% for unpaid credit card balances while offering 1% on savings is okay with our “consumer financial watchdog?” It’s pitifully obvious that Warren and her liberal ilk have absolutely zero clue about any of this. They don’t know what financial challenges real middle-class people face on a daily basis, nor do they care in the slightest. Her kindred spirit, Bernie Sanders, owns multiple homes, is financially independent, has gotten rich from public money, yet all he does is criticize, regulate, and over-tax the private companies that employ his constituents. Greenies like John Kerry fly in private jets and rationalize it, while Gavin Newsome dines maskless in pricy French restaurants.
Warren is totally invisible on matters that truly count to average Americans. Like virtually all liberals in power positions, she talks purely for public effect, but accomplishes nothing. She doesn’t even try. She has disappeared completely.
Elizabeth Warren says she wants to get rid of corruption, but not once have I heard her complain about the massive corruption during the Obama years or at her precious CFPB, so she really doesn't care. JACK HELLNER
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (THREE GAMER LAWYERS) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SHCUMER).
BRIAN C JOONDEPH
Warren objects to one billionaire member of the PayPal mafia, but not another making those decisions because they share a common set of political views that include censorship. While Musk put billions on the line to buy Twitter to protect free speech, Omidyar committed $100 million to fight “disinformation”, “fake news” and “hate speech”. That includes funding for leftist “fact checkers” who have been used by Big Tech monopolies to censor opposing views.
Elizabeth Warren’s entire career has been built on lies. The billionaire tears mug from a politician who owes her influence to the backing of billionaires is just Liz’s latest scam.
Elizabeth Warren’s Billionaire Sugar Daddy
Who really funds the billionaire-hating senator? Soros, Gates and the Rockefeller Brothers.
[Order David Horowitz’s and John Perazzo’s new booklet: “Internal Radical Service: Abuse Of Taxpayer Dollars To Advance Leftwing Causes Illegally And Unconstitutionally”: CLICK HERE.]
Liz Warren hates billionaires. Just ask the millionaire leftist. Or don’t, she’ll be happy to virtue signal to you anyway. The Elizabeth Warren official store even sells a “billionaire tears” mug for only $28 bucks: a profit margin that would be obscene if a capitalist billionaire were doing it.
Who actually funds Warren’s political ambitions? Our investigation of her political organization reveals that it’s billionaires like Bill Gates, George Soros, Jeff Bezos’ ex-wife and eBay’s Pierre Omidyar. Advisors include Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes. Like her Cherokee heritage, Warren’s identity as a crusader against billionaires is fake. Without billionaires backing her organization, she wouldn’t have achieved so much influence in the Biden administration.
In November, Senator Warren appeared at a conference with a rant that mentioned billionaires eight times, accusing Republicans of running up the deficits with “tax cuts for billionaires” and arguing that, “Republicans will fight hard for billionaires, billionaire corporations, and conspiracy theorists. Democrats must be willing to fight even harder for working families.”
That was a little awkward because the conference was co-hosted by the Omidyar Network which is a foundation created and funded by Franco-Iranian eBay billionaire Pierre Omidyar. Of the other five co-hosts, four, Groundwork Action, Roosevelt Forward, the Economic Security Project, and Demos, also received Omidyar funding. The Economic Security Project needed some help because its creator, Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, just has a mere half-billion to his name. Warren was speaking at a billionaire’s private social justice playground.
The only billionaire tears were those of laughter from Omidyar: the richest man in Hawaii.
It’s doubtful that Warren didn’t know that she was there as the keynote speaker for a billionaire’s event since Pierre Omidyar has played a massive role in her political operation.
The Roosevelt Institute was described by Politico as “Warren-allied”: that’s an understatement.
The organization employs Warren associates, allies and past aides. It reportedly assembled the lists of appointees that Warren had demanded from Hillary Clinton and likely Biden, and who would potentially go on to fill positions in a potential Warren administration. The Roosevelt Institute doubles as Warren’s campaign operation, think tank and presidential campaign staff.
This linchpin of Warren’s political operation and future is by a billionaire. If Omidyar were to cut off funding for the Roosevelt Institute, she would be crying into her own ‘tears’ mug.
The Roosevelt Institute harbors the worst socialist economic extremists.
When Saule Omarova’s nomination to the Treasury Department, at Warren’s behest, was torpedoed by her Lenin scholarship and support for eliminating private banking, the Roosevelt Institute brought on the Moscow State University grad as a senior fellow.
Key Warren allies and personnel work for the Roosevelt Institute which is, conveniently, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. Warren has appeared at Roosevelt events and the institute has promoted her various measures with its personnel effectively acting as her spokespersons even though it’s illegal for C3 nonprofits to get involved in partisan politics or back a candidate.
But the entanglement between the Roosevelt Institute and Warren allegedly went much further.
The Roosevelt Institute had apparently assembled a list of jobs in what was expected to be the Hillary Clinton administration and “interviewed over 1,000 potential candidates”. Some version of this list was likely used for the Biden administration which is staffed with Warren allies.
Take Bharat Ramamurti, a top Warren economic policy aide and managing director at the Roosevelt Institute, who was picked by Biden’s people as a Deputy Director of the National Economic Council. Julie Margetta Morgan, a senior domestic policy advisor for the Warren campaign, became vice president of research at the Roosevelt Institute, and then joined the Biden transition team and holds a senior position at the Department of Education.
And who funds the Roosevelt Institute?
The Omidyar Network has provided at least half a million dollars to Warren’s pet socialist group. It has sponsored the Roosevelt Institute’s roster of ‘smash capitalism’ events. Roosevelt Institute podcasts are, in the words of CEO Felicia Wong, are “made possible with support from Omidyar Network, a social change venture that is reimagining how capitalism should work.”
The troubling intersection between the Roosevelt Institute, Warren’s list and the Omidyar Network was brought home by the appointment of Joelle Gamble of the Omidyar Network, who was also on the board of the Roosevelt Institute, as a top Biden economic adviser. Wong hailed “Joelle Gamble and Omidyar Network. Thank you for your smarts, your service, and your dedication to America’s workers.”
What Warren’s list was actually doing was taking a billionaire’s pet activist to the White House.
Beyond Omidyar, the Roosevelt Institute has picked up $4.7 million from George Soros’ Open Society networks. And Wong is an alumnus of Soros’ Democracy Alliance machine.
Warren’s allies also received $1.2 million from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund: a family of billionaires, money from MacKenzie Scott, the billionaire ex-wife of Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, $1.1 million from Irish duty free billionaire Chuck Feeney, and $600,000 from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, along with other billionaire foundations.
Vox even described Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes acting as a “senior adviser to Wong at the Roosevelt Institute.”
So much for that billionaire tears mug.
David Horowitz and John Perazzo described the abuses of nonprofit organizations with the complicity of the IRS in Internal Radical Service. Front Page Magazine has continued to delve into the abuse of nonprofit organizations as campaign operations, but even by those standards, Warren’s allied nonprofit uniquely blends a presidential library, a nonprofit and advocacy arm.
The Roosevelt Institute is a partner of the FDR Presidential Library. The FDR Library is administered by the National Archives. The Institute, a 501(c)(3), also has Roosevelt Forward, its own 501(c)(4) which claims to work with members of Congress to “build new rules for the American economy and our democracy”.
Using a presidential library to generate a political advocacy nonprofit and a lobbying group is certainly an example of building new rules. These rules directly entangle an arm of the federal government with a politician’s political organization and a partisan group that works with PACs.
Elizabeth Warren complains that billionaires have too much political influence. Her political power depends on a billionaire-funded ideological operation promoted by the government.
The FDR Library states that it’s “administered by the National Archives and Records Administration with the support of its nonprofit partner, the Roosevelt Institute” and links directly to the Warren political site, encouraging supporters to sign up with Warren’s political group.
Felicia Wong serves as the head of both the Roosevelt Institute and Roosevelt Forward. She also served on Biden’s presidential transition advisory board and was appointed by the Biden administration to its Committee on Racial Equity. But the revolving door can also go both ways with Warren’s digital press secretary and spokeswoman for her presidential campaign who went on to work as a senior communications strategist for the Omidyar Network.
While many remarked on the Warren takeover of the Biden administration, few noted that it was financed by leftist billionaires and foundations. As the unpopular politician continues to plot her next move, the Roosevelt Institute and its billionaire sugar daddies remain crucial to her future.
Senator Elizabeth Warren, unpopular and unlikable, who once faked an Indian identity, jettisoned it to mock up populist credentials as a champion against the rich. At least those richer than her. Billionaire-bashing is an implausible pastime for a party whose operations, especially the more radical ones, are funded by billionaires, whose populism is bought for it by vast wealth.
Warren has gotten away with her hypocritical virtue signaling this long because no one before us took a close look at her political operation. That is what the David Horowitz Freedom Center does and is continuing to do. Our investigative journalism exposes the truth about the corrupt abuses of the oppressors who pretend to be victims, the comfortable class warriors and the puppets who pretend to be populists. The politician with her Cambridge mansion isn’t a populist.
And the radical billionaires she pretends to posture against have made her their puppet.
Elizabeth Warren’s entire career has been built on lies. The billionaire tears mug from a politician who owes her influence to the backing of billionaires is just Liz’s latest scam.
Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
