Jan 26 at 8:29 PM
Subject: WE ARE PAYING FOR THIS TOO!!!
Multiply this by 8 years & add it to her vacation travel expenses. Small wonder this country is broke...
Why isn't there some control - like an expense account ?!
Mary Lincoln was taken to task for purchasing China for the White House during the Civil War.
And Mamie Eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary from her husband’s salary.
Total Personal Staff members for other first ladies paid by you the taxpayers:
Mamie Eisenhower: One-- paid for personally out of President's salary.
Jackie Kennedy: One
Rosaline Carter: One
Barbara Bush: One
Hilary Clinton: Three
Laura Bush: One
Michele Obama: Twenty-two
How things have changed! If you're one of the tens of millions of Americans facing certain destitution, earning less than subsistence wages stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart or serving up McDonald cheeseburgers, prepare to scream and then come to realize that the benefit package for these servants of Mrs. Obama are the same as members of the national security and defense departments and the bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by YOU, John Q. Public:
Michele Obama's personal staff:
One.. $172,200 - Sher, Susan (Chief Of Staff)
Two.. $140,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Policy And Projects For The First Lady)
Three.. $113,000 - Rogers, Desiree G. (Special Assistant to the President and White House Social Secretary for Mrs. Obama)
Four.. $102,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications for the First Lady)
Five.. $100,000 - Winter, Melissa (Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Six.. $90,000 Medina , David S. (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Seven.. $84,000 - Lilyveld, Catherine M. (Director and Press Secretary to the First Lady)
Eight.. $75,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (Director of Scheduling and Advance for the First Lady)
Nine.. $70,000 - Sanders, Trooper (Deputy Director of Policy and Project for the First Lady)
Ten.. $65,000 - Burnough, Erinn (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
Eleven.. $64,000 - Reinstein, Joseph B.(Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
Twelve.. $62,000 - Goodman, Jennifer R. (Deputy Director of Scheduling and Events Coordinator For The First Lady)
Thirteen.. $60,000 Fitz, Alan O.(Deputy Director of Advance and Trip Director for the First Lady)
Fourteen.. $57,500 - Lewis, Dana M. (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)
Fifteen.. $52,500 - Mustaphi, Semonti M. (Associate Director and Deputy Press Secretary To The First Lady)
Sixteen.. $50,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (Special Assistant f or Scheduling and Traveling Aide To The First Lady)
Seventeen.. $45,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (Associate Director of Correspondence For The First Lady)
Eighteen.. $43,000 - Tubman, Samantha a (Deputy Associate Director, Social Office)
Nineteen.. $40,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (Executive Assistant to the Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Twenty.. $36,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (Staff Assistant to the Social Secretary)
Twenty-One. . $35,000 - Bookey, Natalie (Staff Assistant)
Twenty-Two. . $35,000 - Jackson, Deilia A. (Deputy Associate Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
Total: $1,591,200 in annual salaries all for someone we have to support, and apparently have no control over.
There has NEVER been anyone in the White House at any time who has created such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady's social life.
One wonders why she needs so much help, at taxpayer expense.
Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One to Europe ...
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
Saturday, January 23, 2016
Trump, a perfect depiction of who can help America
"Who is Donald Trump?"
"The better question may be, "What is Donald Trump?" The answer:
A GIANT MIDDLE FINGER FROM THE AVERAGE AMERICANS TO THE POLITICAL AND MEDIA ESTABLISHMENT.
Some Trump supporters are like the 60s white girls who dated black guys just to annoy their parents. But most Trump supporters have simply had it with the Demo-socialists and the "Republicans in Name Only." They know there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Hillary Rodham and Jeb Bush, and only a few cents worth between Rodham and the other GOP candidates. Ben Carson is not an "establishment" candidate, but the Clinton machine would pulverize Carson,
And both establishment fear that lightning might strike, Trump might get elected, and he might actually fix a few things. Stranger things have happened. (The nation elected a Marxist in 2008 and Bruce Jenner now wears designer dresses.)
Millions of conservatives are justifiably furious. They gave the Republicans control of the House in 2010 and control of the Senate in 2014 and have seen them govern no differently than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Yet those same voters are supposed to trust the GOP in 2016? Why? Trump did not come from out of nowhere. His candidacy was created by the last six years of Republican failures.
And, millions of Democrats are sick and tired of their own party hacks. Enter Bernie Sanders, Really? If the amazing amount of support this guy is getting, running against Hillary Clinton, doesn’t make the Democratic “Old Guard” Establishment (and their media partners) wake up and take notice that their “rank and file” blue collar party members are rejecting not only their “soon to be crowned princess”, but also, many of the policies jammed down their throats these past years,,, shame on them. It’s all over and they best get ready to pick up the pieces of their party. Ditto for the Republican establishment as they so disdainfully view Trump, for now.
No reasonable person can believe that any of the establishment candidates will slash federal spending, rein in the Federal Reserve, cut burdensome business regulations, reform the tax code, or eliminate useless federal departments (the Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Energy, etc.). Even Ronald Reagan was unable to eliminate the Department of Education. (Of course, getting shot at tends to make a person less of a risk-taker.) No reasonable person can believe that any of the nation's major problems will be solved by Rodham, Bush, and the other dishers of donkey fazoo now eagerly eating corn in Iowa and pancakes in New Hampshire.
A very large number of Americans, and especially Trump supporters, have had it with:
Anyone named Bush…
Anyone named Clinton…
Anyone who's held political office…
Political correctness…
Illegal immigration…
Massive unemployment…
Phony "official" unemployment and inflation figures…
Welfare waste and fraud…
People faking disabilities to go on the dole…
VA waiting lists…
TSA airport groping…
Obama Care…
The Federal Reserve's money-printing schemes…
Wall Street crooks like Jon Corzine…
Michelle Obama's vacations…
Michelle Obama's food police…
Barack Obama's golf…
Barack Obama's arrogant and condescending lectures…
Barack Obama's criticism/hatred of America…
Valerie Jarrett…
"Holiday trees"…
Hollywood hypocrites…
Global warming nonsense…
Cop killers…
Gun confiscation threats…
Stagnant wages…
Chevy Volts…
Clock boy…
Pajama boy…
Mattress girl…
Girls in Boy Scouts...
Kids suing their parents...
Parents suing teachers for trying to control their bratty kids,
Boys in girls' bathrooms…
Whiny, spoiled college students…
--- who can't even place the Civil War in the correct century… and this is just the short list…
Trump supporters believe that no Democrat wants to address these issues, and that few Republicans have the courage to address these issues. They certainly know that none of the establishment candidates are better than barely listening to them, and Trump is their way of saying, "Screw you, Hillary Rodham Rove Bush!" The more the talking head political pundits insult the Trump supporters, the more supporters he gains. (The only pundits who seem to understand what is going on are Democrats Doug Schoen and Pat Caddell and Republican John LeBoutillier. All the others argue that the voters will eventually "come to their senses" and support an establishment
candidate.)
But America does not need a tune-up at the same old garage. It needs a new engine installed by experts--and neither Rodham nor Bush are mechanics with the skills or experience to install it.
Hillary Rodham is not a mechanic; she merely manages a garage her philandering husband abandoned. Jeb Bush is not a mechanic; he merely inherited a garage. Granted, Trump is also not a mechanic, but he knows where to find the best ones to work in his garage. He won't hire his brother-in-law or someone to whom he owes a favor; he will hire someone who lives and breathes cars.
"How dare they revolt!" the "elites" are bellowing. Well, the citizens are daring to revolt, and the RINOs had better get used to it. "But Trump will hand the election to Clinton!" That is what the Karl Rove-types want people to believe, just as the leftist media eagerly shoved "Maverick" McCain down GOP throats in 2008--knowing he would lose to Obama. But even if Trump loses and Rodham wins, she would not be dramatically different than Bush or most of his fellow candidates. They would be nothing more than caretakers, not working to restore America's greatness but merely presiding over the collapse of a massively in-debt nation.
A nation can perhaps survive open borders; a nation can perhaps survive a generous welfare system. But no nation can survive both--and there is little evidence that the establishment candidates of either party understand that. The United States cannot forever continue on the path it is on. At some point it will be destroyed by its debt.
Yes, Trump speaks like a bull wandering through a china shop, but the truth is that the borders do need to be sealed; we cannot afford to feed, house, and clothe 200,000 Syrian immigrants for decades (even if we get inordinately lucky and none of them are ISIS infiltrators or Syed Farook wannabes); the world is at war with radical Islamists; all the world's glaciers are not melting; and Rosie O'Donnell is a fat pig.
Is Trump the perfect candidate? Of course not. Neither was Ronald Reagan. But unless we close our borders and restrict immigration, all the other issues are irrelevant. One terrorist blowing up a bridge or a tunnel could kill thousands. One jihadist poisoning a city's water supply could kill tens of thousands. One electromagnetic pulse attack from a single Iranian nuclear device could kill tens of millions. Faced with those possibilities, most Americans probably don't care that Trump relied on eminent domain to grab up a final quarter acre of property for a hotel, or that he boils the blood of the Muslim Brotherhood thugs running the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
While Attorney General Loretta Lynch's greatest fear is someone giving a Muslim a dirty look, most Americans are more worried about being gunned down at a shopping mall by a crazed lunatic who treats his prayer mat better than his three wives and who thinks 72 virgins are waiting for him in paradise.
The establishment is frightened to death that Trump will win, but not because they believe he will harm the nation. They are afraid he will upset their taxpayer-subsidized apple carts. While Obama threatens to veto legislation that spends too little, they worry that Trump will veto legislation that spends too much. You can be certain that if an establishment candidate wins in November 2016, his or her cabinet positions will be filled with the same people we've seen before. The washed-up has-beens of the Clinton and Bush administrations will be back in charge. The hacks from Goldman Sachs will continue to call the shots. Whether it is Bush's Karl Rove or Clinton's John Podesta who makes the decisions in the White House will matter little. If the establishment wins, America loses.
Tuesday, January 19, 2016
Obama, a perfect depiction of an imperfect idiot
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages.
How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer;” a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, less often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.
He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor;” a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president? There is no evidence that he ever attended or worked for any university or that he ever sat for the Illinois bar. We have no documentation for any of his claims. He may well be the greatest hoax in history. Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal- dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were ‘a bit’ extreme, he was given a pass. Let that Sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest? Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back.
Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. (An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches) And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerless-ness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track). But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such an impostor in the Oval Office.
P.S. Please send this article to family and friends throughout America and ask them to read and distribute this article to others.
Michael Vara
Stu Shear
How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer;” a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, less often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.
He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor;” a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president? There is no evidence that he ever attended or worked for any university or that he ever sat for the Illinois bar. We have no documentation for any of his claims. He may well be the greatest hoax in history. Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal- dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were ‘a bit’ extreme, he was given a pass. Let that Sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest? Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back.
Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. (An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches) And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerless-ness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track). But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such an impostor in the Oval Office.
P.S. Please send this article to family and friends throughout America and ask them to read and distribute this article to others.
Michael Vara
Stu Shear
Friday, January 8, 2016
A Great New World Order
January 8th, 2016
From the perspective of Bible prophecy, 2015 may be remembered at the year Satan's key project began to rise.
Since at least the time of Nimrod, Satan has been laying the groundwork for a one-world government, with his man in charge.
Through the millennia since, he's had successes and setbacks. But in 2015, the foundation became complete enough for him to begin building the actual edifice. The past year seemed to bring us to the critical time when Satan's one-world order got on final track.
2015 showed us that the Antichrist may not establish his power through a dramatic military coup or the takeover of a particular national government. Instead, it may well come through his control of a global, trans- and supra-national governing body.
And we witnessed in 2015 the breathtaking birth of those bodies that may control the world one day.
Surprisingly, a major culprit may be the Republican Congress that handed the President sweeping new powers to negotiate trade deals.
On October 5, 2015, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was formed by 12 Pacific Rim nations. It will be an unbelievably powerful governing regime that can change the rules however it wishes and there is nothing the participants can do about it.
Though supposedly formed to regulate and facilitate trade between the 12 nations, the TPP Commission will be granted power and authority that is almost unbelievable. Here are just a few of the things that the TPP will have dictatorial power over: immigration, wealth redistribution, education, human rights, gay rights, same-sex marriage, gun control, health care, women's reproductive rights, abortion, sustainable development, pollution, wildlife and wetlands, and the authority to give foreign nations complete access to American markets. It will be able to punish nations with multi-billion dollar fines and punish individuals who organize boycotts against products. It is also going to make it illegal to mark a product as "Made in the USA."
And its companion treaty is The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Very little about trade, but a lot about global control.
But in 2015, TPP was not the worst deal of the year. In fact, it wasn't even second worst. That distinction falls to the Iran nuclear deal.
The worst international agreement of 2015 was approved unanimously by every member of the United Nations General Assembly. It is a so-called "climate" agreement known as Agenda 2030.
Supposedly created to deal with climate issues, the agreement includes items like plans to "reduce... violence and death rates." And, "provide justice for all." And "provide legal identity for all including birth registration."
That seems like a lot of stuff that has little to do with the climate! This pact will lead to the most extreme totalitarian regime ever conceived and, eventually, to the "Mark of the Beast."
Very little about the climate, but a lot about global control.
In 2015, Pope Francis jumped wholeheartedly on the climate change bandwagon. Throughout the year, he chastised individual nations that place their national interests above the common global good and stand in the way of international progress toward climate control. He thinks that's a bad thing. And he called for governments to cede their authority to a higher agency -- and he wasn't talking about Almighty God, either.
The Pope has been hoodwinked by the secular agenda of those working toward a one-world government. He seems not to understand that Agenda 2030 is not about the climate. It never was. It is about the politics of the New World Order.
In 2015, European leaders welcomed massive numbers of Muslims into their countries. It has now accelerated from immigration to invasion.
And while the United States has been fairly focused on ISIS, al-Qaeda and the Taliban have been re-establishing themselves in Afghanistan. During the 2012 campaign, President Obama disingenuously bragged that "al-Qaeda is on the run." But at the moment, al-Qaeda is preparing to run Afghanistan.
In 2015, ISIS proved that its tentacles now reach into much of the world, including the United States. I guess they are no longer President Obama's "J.V. team."
In America, 2015 saw acceleration of the brutal new despotism known as Political Correctness.
"Tolerance" used to mean "forbearance," or "to allow," or "to agree to disagree," or even, "to endure what you don't like." No longer.
American schools today teach our children that "tolerance" means "full endorsement" and that anything less than "full endorsement" means "intolerance."
It started with the issue of homosexuality. Children are being taught that if you don't endorse and promote homosexuality, then you must be an intolerant bigot.
That same absurd thinking has now spread to the subject of Islam. So, to teach our schoolchildren tolerance of Islam, they are taught to embrace Islam.
Ironically, the Muslim faith is the most "intolerant" of all major religions.
And just before Christmas of 2015, Disney released the seventh Star Wars movie: "Star Wars: The Force Awakens." Like the original "Star Wars" in 1977, they are both extremely "spiritual" movies. They feature a spirituality that loosely resembles Christian faith. It's not real Christianity, but it is vaguely spiritually comforting.
Revelation predicts the coming of a world religion. I'm not saying that it will be based on "Star Wars," but the mythology of "The Force" is one of many elements laying the groundwork for that coming religion.
People are hungry for meaning. They're spiritually destitute. They don't know it, but they feel it. They are searching for something to fill the void.
In the movie, one of the characters tells another that "The Force is calling to you. Just let it in." That's scary because "The Force" of "Star Wars" is not the one true God. And if you just "let it in," you will be in for a world of hurt.
But in these last days, people are desperate to find something to fill the God-shaped void in their lives. The coming false religion will flood that void for many of them.
Thursday, January 7, 2016
Trump... Whats Not To Like?
BY G. MURPHY DONOVAN, AMERICAN THINKER
Donald Trump is a piece of work even by New York standards: tall, white, loud, brash, entrepreneurial, successful, rich, ruthlessly candid, well-dressed, and fond of heterosexual women. He has married at least three delicious ladies in fact. Trump has five children and seven grandchildren.
Indeed, his progeny are well above average too, smartly groomed,
photogenic, and successful to boot. As far as we know, Donald does not have any
tattoos, piercings, unpaid taxes, or under-aged bimbo interns, nor is he a
drinker or a junkie.
Trump projects and enterprises probably employ more folks than the NYC
school system -- or the United Nations. You could say that Trump is living
the life, not the life of Riley, but more like Daddy Warbucks with a comb
over. “The Donald,” as one ex-wife calls him, is not just living the
American dream. Trump is the dream -- and proud of it. You could do worse than
think of Trump as upwardly mobile blue collar.
He is the grandson of immigrants and the product of Long island, a Queens
household, and a Bronx education. The Donald survived the Jesuits of
Fordham University for two years before migrating to finish his baccalaureate at
the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.
When readers of the New York Times, The New Yorker, and the New York
Review of Books speak of “the city”, they are not talking about the Queens or
the Bronx. Growing and schooling in the blue-collar boroughs gives Trump a
curb level perspective, something seldom found in Manhattan. Or as any “D”
Train alumnus might put it, Trump has “a pretty good Bravo Sierra detector.
So what’s not to like about Donald Trump? He doesn’t just stay in
four-star hotels; he builds them. He doesn’t just own luxury condominiums; he
makes them. He doesn’t just own historic buildings; he restores them. He
doesn’t just eat at the best restaurants; he creates them. He just doesn’t
belong to the best country clubs; he builds those too. Donald Trump,
unlike the Manhattan/Washington fantasy Press and every Beltway political pimp,
doesn’t just pay lip service to a bigger and better economy, he creates
micro-economies every day.
In any case, the merits of entrepreneurs like Trump might best be defined
by the character or motives of his critics. Trump detractors are for the
most part “B” list politicians, ambulance chasers, and a left-leaning Press
corps that lionizes the likes of Nina Totenberg, Dan Rather, Chris
Matthews, Andrea Mitchell, and Brian Williams. If the truth were told, most of
Trump’s critics are jealous, envious of his wealth and they loathe his
candor.
Donald might also be hated for what he is not. Trump is not a lawyer, nor
is he a career politician who lives on the taxpayer dime. Trump is paying
for his own campaign. Bernie, Barack, McCain, and Kerry could take
enterprise lessons from a chap like Trump. Unlike most government barnacles,
Trump can walk and chew gum at the same time. He knows how to close a deal
and build something. He is a net creator, not consumer, of a kind of wealth
that provides “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for Americans
-- real jobs not feather merchants. Today, Trump has nothing left to
prove. Yet, success has allowed him the rarest of public privileges, an
electoral pulpit and the courage to speak his mind.
Alas, truth is not necessarily a political asset in a socialized
democracy. Indeed, the erstwhile presidential candidate stepped on his tongue
recently by suggesting that Mexico, already exporting dangerous drugs, cheap
tomatoes, and even cheaper labor, was also exporting violent felons to the US.
Truth hurts! Trump’s rude candor is underwritten by nearly half a million
illegal felons in American jails.
Coincidently, events have conspired to support Trump’s take on Mexican
dystopia with the El Chapo Guzman jailbreak and the murder of Kathryn Steinle
by Francisco Sanchez. Senor Sanchez sported a lengthy criminal record and
had been deported on four previous occasions. San Francisco, a “sanctuary”
city, failed to honor existing warrants and released Sanchez from jail
just before he blew Kathy Steinle away!
As serendipity would have it, Trump then went to Phoenix on 12 July and
gave a stem winder to a sell-out crowd on the subject of illegal immigration.
Senator John McCain was not pleased to have The Donald on Arizona’s front
lawn and intemperately called Trump supporters “crazies.”
To date, Trump has run a clever campaign. He is chumming; throwing red
meat and blood into campaign waters and all the usual suspects are in a
feeding frenzy.
McCain, the Press, the Left, and the Republican establishment all have
something to say about “The Donald.” It is truly amazing how cleverly Trump
manages to manipulate the establishment. If you are trying to sell an idea
or a candidacy, there’s no such thing as bad publicity. Who knows where
the Trump campaign goes?
With El Capo on the loose again, every time a toilet flushes in Sinaloa,
Mexican garbage is likely top spill out in Los Angeles, Hollywood, San
Francisco, Portland, or Seattle. Indeed, it’s hard to believe that the Left Coast
could survive without cheap labor, pistileros, meth, coke, heroin, or weed.
Necrotic immigration and its byproducts are ready made targets for a
gunslinger like Trump. Trump is no bigot. He probably employs more Latinos and
Blacks than Enrique Peña Nieto or as current President, Barack Obama. In
his own way, Donald Trump is both immigrant and POW, a refugee from Queens
and still a prisoner of Wharton. The Donald is The Dude, the guy with
babes and a roll of Benjamins that would choke a shark. He is the wildly
successful capitalist that some of us love to hate. It doesn’t take much
insight to compare Trump’s various enterprises with federal programs. Public
education, banking oversight, public housing slums, poverty doles, veterans
fiascos, Internal Revenue hijinks, and even some Defense Department
procurement programs are consensus failures. The F-35 “Lightning” fighter is an
illustration, arguably the most expensive single DOD boondogg le in history.
Pentagon progressives seldom win a catfight these days, but they still
spend like sailors.
In Trump’s world failure has consequences so if and when he fails, he is
out of business. In contrast, Washington rewards failure with better
funding. Indeed, generational program failure is now a kind of perverse
incentive for Beltway politicians and apparatchiks to throw good money after failed
programs. The difference between Trump and McCain should be obvious to
any fair observer; Trump has done something with his talents.
Any way you look at it, Donald Trump is good for national politics, good for democracy, good for America, and especially good for candor. If nothing else, The Donald may help Republicans to pull their heads out of that place where the sun seldom shines.
At this point I have no idea who I am supporting. I like Ted Cruz, Ben
Carson and several others, however I am enjoying every minute of seeing Trump
confound the critics and driving the liberal, progressives, and media
crazy.
You better believe I would vote for Trump over ANYTHING the Democrat party
selects. We are in for the fight of our life for this nation and we need
someone with a whole lot of nerve, guts or whatever you call it. I am sick
of the establishment politicians who stand for nothing, have accomplished
nothing and are a large part of the problem in this country, and if Trump
is the nominee I will be campaigning for him.
Donald Trump is a piece of work even by New York standards: tall, white, loud, brash, entrepreneurial, successful, rich, ruthlessly candid, well-dressed, and fond of heterosexual women. He has married at least three delicious ladies in fact. Trump has five children and seven grandchildren.
Indeed, his progeny are well above average too, smartly groomed,
photogenic, and successful to boot. As far as we know, Donald does not have any
tattoos, piercings, unpaid taxes, or under-aged bimbo interns, nor is he a
drinker or a junkie.
Trump projects and enterprises probably employ more folks than the NYC
school system -- or the United Nations. You could say that Trump is living
the life, not the life of Riley, but more like Daddy Warbucks with a comb
over. “The Donald,” as one ex-wife calls him, is not just living the
American dream. Trump is the dream -- and proud of it. You could do worse than
think of Trump as upwardly mobile blue collar.
He is the grandson of immigrants and the product of Long island, a Queens
household, and a Bronx education. The Donald survived the Jesuits of
Fordham University for two years before migrating to finish his baccalaureate at
the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.
When readers of the New York Times, The New Yorker, and the New York
Review of Books speak of “the city”, they are not talking about the Queens or
the Bronx. Growing and schooling in the blue-collar boroughs gives Trump a
curb level perspective, something seldom found in Manhattan. Or as any “D”
Train alumnus might put it, Trump has “a pretty good Bravo Sierra detector.
So what’s not to like about Donald Trump? He doesn’t just stay in
four-star hotels; he builds them. He doesn’t just own luxury condominiums; he
makes them. He doesn’t just own historic buildings; he restores them. He
doesn’t just eat at the best restaurants; he creates them. He just doesn’t
belong to the best country clubs; he builds those too. Donald Trump,
unlike the Manhattan/Washington fantasy Press and every Beltway political pimp,
doesn’t just pay lip service to a bigger and better economy, he creates
micro-economies every day.
In any case, the merits of entrepreneurs like Trump might best be defined
by the character or motives of his critics. Trump detractors are for the
most part “B” list politicians, ambulance chasers, and a left-leaning Press
corps that lionizes the likes of Nina Totenberg, Dan Rather, Chris
Matthews, Andrea Mitchell, and Brian Williams. If the truth were told, most of
Trump’s critics are jealous, envious of his wealth and they loathe his
candor.
Donald might also be hated for what he is not. Trump is not a lawyer, nor
is he a career politician who lives on the taxpayer dime. Trump is paying
for his own campaign. Bernie, Barack, McCain, and Kerry could take
enterprise lessons from a chap like Trump. Unlike most government barnacles,
Trump can walk and chew gum at the same time. He knows how to close a deal
and build something. He is a net creator, not consumer, of a kind of wealth
that provides “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for Americans
-- real jobs not feather merchants. Today, Trump has nothing left to
prove. Yet, success has allowed him the rarest of public privileges, an
electoral pulpit and the courage to speak his mind.
Alas, truth is not necessarily a political asset in a socialized
democracy. Indeed, the erstwhile presidential candidate stepped on his tongue
recently by suggesting that Mexico, already exporting dangerous drugs, cheap
tomatoes, and even cheaper labor, was also exporting violent felons to the US.
Truth hurts! Trump’s rude candor is underwritten by nearly half a million
illegal felons in American jails.
Coincidently, events have conspired to support Trump’s take on Mexican
dystopia with the El Chapo Guzman jailbreak and the murder of Kathryn Steinle
by Francisco Sanchez. Senor Sanchez sported a lengthy criminal record and
had been deported on four previous occasions. San Francisco, a “sanctuary”
city, failed to honor existing warrants and released Sanchez from jail
just before he blew Kathy Steinle away!
As serendipity would have it, Trump then went to Phoenix on 12 July and
gave a stem winder to a sell-out crowd on the subject of illegal immigration.
Senator John McCain was not pleased to have The Donald on Arizona’s front
lawn and intemperately called Trump supporters “crazies.”
To date, Trump has run a clever campaign. He is chumming; throwing red
meat and blood into campaign waters and all the usual suspects are in a
feeding frenzy.
McCain, the Press, the Left, and the Republican establishment all have
something to say about “The Donald.” It is truly amazing how cleverly Trump
manages to manipulate the establishment. If you are trying to sell an idea
or a candidacy, there’s no such thing as bad publicity. Who knows where
the Trump campaign goes?
With El Capo on the loose again, every time a toilet flushes in Sinaloa,
Mexican garbage is likely top spill out in Los Angeles, Hollywood, San
Francisco, Portland, or Seattle. Indeed, it’s hard to believe that the Left Coast
could survive without cheap labor, pistileros, meth, coke, heroin, or weed.
Necrotic immigration and its byproducts are ready made targets for a
gunslinger like Trump. Trump is no bigot. He probably employs more Latinos and
Blacks than Enrique Peña Nieto or as current President, Barack Obama. In
his own way, Donald Trump is both immigrant and POW, a refugee from Queens
and still a prisoner of Wharton. The Donald is The Dude, the guy with
babes and a roll of Benjamins that would choke a shark. He is the wildly
successful capitalist that some of us love to hate. It doesn’t take much
insight to compare Trump’s various enterprises with federal programs. Public
education, banking oversight, public housing slums, poverty doles, veterans
fiascos, Internal Revenue hijinks, and even some Defense Department
procurement programs are consensus failures. The F-35 “Lightning” fighter is an
illustration, arguably the most expensive single DOD boondogg le in history.
Pentagon progressives seldom win a catfight these days, but they still
spend like sailors.
In Trump’s world failure has consequences so if and when he fails, he is
out of business. In contrast, Washington rewards failure with better
funding. Indeed, generational program failure is now a kind of perverse
incentive for Beltway politicians and apparatchiks to throw good money after failed
programs. The difference between Trump and McCain should be obvious to
any fair observer; Trump has done something with his talents.
Any way you look at it, Donald Trump is good for national politics, good for democracy, good for America, and especially good for candor. If nothing else, The Donald may help Republicans to pull their heads out of that place where the sun seldom shines.
At this point I have no idea who I am supporting. I like Ted Cruz, Ben
Carson and several others, however I am enjoying every minute of seeing Trump
confound the critics and driving the liberal, progressives, and media
crazy.
You better believe I would vote for Trump over ANYTHING the Democrat party
selects. We are in for the fight of our life for this nation and we need
someone with a whole lot of nerve, guts or whatever you call it. I am sick
of the establishment politicians who stand for nothing, have accomplished
nothing and are a large part of the problem in this country, and if Trump
is the nominee I will be campaigning for him.
Friday, January 1, 2016
How To Get Yours
Recently,
Charles Krauthammer alluded that he had no doubt some of the 30,000
Emails Hillary deleted from her private email server very likely had
references to the Clinton Foundation, which would be illegal and a conflict
of interest.The Clinton Foundation is "organized crime" at its finest, and we are financing
it.
Here is a good, concise summary of how the Clinton Foundation works as a tax-free
international money laundering scheme. It may eventually prove to be
the largest political criminal enterprise in U.S. history.
This is a textbook case on how you hide foreign money sent to you and repackage
it to be used for your own purposes. All tax free. Here's how it works:
1. You create a separate foreign "charity." In this case, one in Canada.
2. Foreign oligarchs and governments, then donate to this Canadian
charity. In this case, over 1,000 did -- contributing mega
millions. I'm sure they did this out of the goodness of their
hearts, and expected nothing in return. (Imagine Putin's buddies waking up
one morning and just deciding to send untold millions to a Canadian
charity).
3. The Canadian charity then bundles these separate donations and makes a
massive donation to the Clinton Foundation.
4. The Clinton Foundation and the cooperating Canadian charity claim Canadian
law prohibits the identification of individual donors.
5. The Clinton Foundation then "spends" some of this money for
legitimate good works programs. Unfortunately, experts believe this is on
the order of 10%. Much of the balance goes to enrich the
Clinton's, pay salaries to untold numbers of hangers on, and fund
lavish travel, etc. Again, virtually all tax free, which means you and
I are subsidizing it.
6. The Clinton Foundation, with access to the world's best accountants, somehow
fails to report much of this on their tax filings. They discover these
"clerical errors" and begin the process of re-filing 5 years of tax
returns.
7. Net result -- foreign money, much of it from other countries, goes into the
Clinton's pockets tax free and untraceable back to the original donor.
This is the textbook definition of money laundering.
Oh, by the way, the Canadian "charity" includes as a principal one Frank
Giustra. Google him. He is the guy who was central to the
formation of Uranium One, the Canadian company that somehow acquired massive
U.S. uranium interests and then sold them to an organization controlled by
Russia. This transaction required U.S. State Department approval, and guess
who was Secretary of State when the approval was granted. As an aside,
imagine how former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell feels. That poor
schlep is in jail because he and his wife took $165,000 in gifts and loans
for doing minor favors for a guy promoting a vitamin company. Not
legal, but not exactly putting U.S. security at risk.
Sarcasm aside, if you're still not persuaded this was a cleverly structured
way to get unidentified foreign money to the Clintons, ask yourself
this:
Why did these foreign interests funnel money through a Canadian charity? Why not
donate directly to the Clinton Foundation? Better yet, why not donate
money directly to the people, organizations and countries in
need?
This is the essence of money laundering and influence peddling.
Now you know why Hillary's destruction of 30,000 Emails was a risk she was
willing to take.
Bill and Hillary are devious, unprincipled, dishonest and criminal.
Warning:
They could be back in the White House in January 2017. Don't let it
happen!! Remember, most people are not well informed.
You must inform and educate them.
Charles Krauthammer alluded that he had no doubt some of the 30,000
Emails Hillary deleted from her private email server very likely had
references to the Clinton Foundation, which would be illegal and a conflict
of interest.The Clinton Foundation is "organized crime" at its finest, and we are financing
it.
Here is a good, concise summary of how the Clinton Foundation works as a tax-free
international money laundering scheme. It may eventually prove to be
the largest political criminal enterprise in U.S. history.
This is a textbook case on how you hide foreign money sent to you and repackage
it to be used for your own purposes. All tax free. Here's how it works:
1. You create a separate foreign "charity." In this case, one in Canada.
2. Foreign oligarchs and governments, then donate to this Canadian
charity. In this case, over 1,000 did -- contributing mega
millions. I'm sure they did this out of the goodness of their
hearts, and expected nothing in return. (Imagine Putin's buddies waking up
one morning and just deciding to send untold millions to a Canadian
charity).
3. The Canadian charity then bundles these separate donations and makes a
massive donation to the Clinton Foundation.
4. The Clinton Foundation and the cooperating Canadian charity claim Canadian
law prohibits the identification of individual donors.
5. The Clinton Foundation then "spends" some of this money for
legitimate good works programs. Unfortunately, experts believe this is on
the order of 10%. Much of the balance goes to enrich the
Clinton's, pay salaries to untold numbers of hangers on, and fund
lavish travel, etc. Again, virtually all tax free, which means you and
I are subsidizing it.
6. The Clinton Foundation, with access to the world's best accountants, somehow
fails to report much of this on their tax filings. They discover these
"clerical errors" and begin the process of re-filing 5 years of tax
returns.
7. Net result -- foreign money, much of it from other countries, goes into the
Clinton's pockets tax free and untraceable back to the original donor.
This is the textbook definition of money laundering.
Oh, by the way, the Canadian "charity" includes as a principal one Frank
Giustra. Google him. He is the guy who was central to the
formation of Uranium One, the Canadian company that somehow acquired massive
U.S. uranium interests and then sold them to an organization controlled by
Russia. This transaction required U.S. State Department approval, and guess
who was Secretary of State when the approval was granted. As an aside,
imagine how former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell feels. That poor
schlep is in jail because he and his wife took $165,000 in gifts and loans
for doing minor favors for a guy promoting a vitamin company. Not
legal, but not exactly putting U.S. security at risk.
Sarcasm aside, if you're still not persuaded this was a cleverly structured
way to get unidentified foreign money to the Clintons, ask yourself
this:
Why did these foreign interests funnel money through a Canadian charity? Why not
donate directly to the Clinton Foundation? Better yet, why not donate
money directly to the people, organizations and countries in
need?
This is the essence of money laundering and influence peddling.
Now you know why Hillary's destruction of 30,000 Emails was a risk she was
willing to take.
Bill and Hillary are devious, unprincipled, dishonest and criminal.
Warning:
They could be back in the White House in January 2017. Don't let it
happen!! Remember, most people are not well informed.
You must inform and educate them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)