Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Didn't stop millions of women screaming that Trump is a serial rapist and all women should be afraid for their lives once he is elected. Care to share how your life has been in danger since Nov? So much for innocent huh?

 

Even the NYT had to admit that The Clintons are crooked.

“The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.”

The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.”

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal, By JO BECKER and MIKE McINTIREAPRIL 23, 2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...ssed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

The Clintons were the candidates of Wall Street - and Russia/Putin.

 

The MSM does more damage in a day than Judicial Watch can do in a year.

 

They didn't claim Trump was a serial rapist. They said he was a groper.

 

Well Said !!

 

It was a Canadian company .. They owned the Uranium.

The Russians could buy uranium from Jordan, Afghanistan and many other place. Cut the crap.

 

And it was well worth it. President Obama brought our country out of the worst recession with it !

Really we need to raise taxes! Taxes are at the Lowest in 30 years. We keep electing people who say they will lower taxes.
What we need is to be realistic and Raise Taxes. Fix Infrastructure, Healthcare and pay off Debt !

 

SLPC is a disgrace and should never be referenced in any example except to say "hey, I read crazy racist websites and use them as a source"

 

Such raises should be in the spirit of the Eisenhower Tax Code. A progressive tax code.
Eroded via Bipartisan support beginning with JFK.
It was this erosion that created CEO's making tens of thousands more than their employees and not just 100 times more as in the Ike days.
More income, higher tax bracket. The Eisenhower Tax code.

I would also tax "paper income" higher than "product income".


Moi

r > g

​

 

Liberals are always tolerant until they run into a different opinion.

 

LOL! Are you accusing the NYT of printing Fake News about their favorite crooks, The Clintons? Margot - that's not credible.

In fact, the Clintons received payoffs from many international corporations.

“Further suspicions of a quid pro quo also have surfaced because while the CFIUS deliberations were taking place, people who stood to profit from Uranium One sale donated more than $2.6 million to the Clinton Foundation and an investment bank with connections to the Russian government paid former president Bill Clinton $500,000 to deliver a speech more than his usual fee. Even before the sale was under consideration the Clinton Foundation received $31.3 million in donations from one person, Frank Giustra, who stood to benefit from the sale. Some of the donations were not properly disclosed at the time. Bill Clinton also helped Guistra, who was once owned a company that merged with Uranium One, secure valuable uranium mining rights in Kazakhstan.” Memo undercuts Hillary story on controversial Russian uranium deal, Clinton foundation, by Raphael Williams, 8/24/16.
http://circa.com/politics/election-...-russian-uranium-moves-were-bad-for-us-europe

And yet the DNC rigged its own primary and nomination process to select the unelectable Cooked Clintons as the DP candidate.
How can they wonder why they lost to Trump? The DNC needs a big IQ bump before 2016.

 

Guistra is a Canadian businessman in the mining and filmmaking industries, and a philanthropist... The Clinton Foundation is a PUBLIC OPERATIONAL CHARITY.

You only understand half the issue.

 

IOW, a crony capitalist crook?

“Many of the Colombian “success stories” touted on the foundation’s website – the ones specific enough for us to track down – were critical about the foundation’s effect on their lives. Labor leaders and progressive activists say foundation programs caused environmental harm, displaced indigenous people, and that it concentrated a larger share of Colombia’s oil and natural gas reserves in the hands of Giustra, who was involved in a now bankrupt oil company that worked closely with the Clinton Foundation and which used the Colombian military a 1984-stylesurveillance program to smash a strike by its workers.” LITTLE GUYS LOSE, The Clinton Foundation left a toxic legacy in Colombia, By Ken Silverstein and The American Media Institute, 10/13/16.
http://fusion.net/story/357169/hillary-clinton-foundation-victims-colombia/

 

I have personally corrected the misinformation in the above so many times on this forum with irrefutable facts, yet here it is again.

1. Those high Eisenhower rates can only be considered in the absolutely necessary context of deductions, shelters and loopholes of the time, which insured that only those caught by surprise windfalls, with no opportunity to plan, ever paid the high rates. This is such a foundational, irrefutable part of US tax policy history that it beggars the imagination how frequently the purposeful error is repeated.

2. The exorbitantly high CEO salaries lie narrative is also out of context, as I have posted dozens of times here. It only considers .002% of US companies that are public. There are 30 million or so companies in the US, all of them have a CEO or equivalent, and the average compensation of CEOs in the US is in and around $400,000.

Please stop spreading union label misinformation.

 

None the less, the noise made about ACORN was definately an orchestrated campaign, as Mr Rathke pointed out (not that it wasn't obvious) when he signed the restitution deal.

In 2012, the RNC was caught faking voter registrations forms and throwing forms away for people who had signed up at their drives as Democrats.

The first is exactly what Republicans accused ACORN of doing. The second is a crime.

 

We disagree.
And I am sure we can go pull our references to support out individual point of view.
So let's just agree - we disagree.

Take the last word as you chose.


Moi
Child of the Fifties

r > g

Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
​

 

The irony of your post is that the first point you make is exactly the same error of omission that conservastives regularly make when griping about the high US corporate tax rate.

Your second point is invalid. Even if only .002% of US companies are publically held, it makes no difference. That claim is intended to create the deliberately dishonest impression that publically held large corporations are only a small part of the overall economy. I myself, have several paper companies.

That does not change the fact that CEO's are paid far more today than their counterparts in the Eisenhower era were.

 

Wrong. No, you will -not- be able to "pull references" to support the claims that

1. discussion of high US tax rates of the past are accurate outside the necessary context of shelters, loopholes and prevailing deductions of the time when those rates were law; and

2. that claims of absurd multiples of CEO salaries are honest in light of the necessary context that those multiples exclude about 29,800,000 US companies, or 99.9% of US companies.

You made factual statements that are so deficient of necessary factual context, well-documented, irrefutable, uncontroversial context, that they rise to the level of lies of omission. I gave you the chance to correct the irrefutable errors of -fact-, and get the above dissimulation in response. This leads to the conclusion that your are willing to lie purposefully in the face of facts. Fine. Great to have a written record of that.

 

So you have complaints about the Clinton Foundation. Good for you. How did they personally enrich themselves here?

 

1. You very plainly don't understand the concept of "irony."
2. Corporate tax rates are a red herring/non sequitur, and we have a straw man also (I don't give a F what some "conservastives" somewhere "out there" say), making the entirety of the above plainly and childishly fallacious. If the goal is to address US tax policy and tax history accurately, what do prevailing corporate tax rates in the present have to do with the necessity of discussing the high personal tax rates of the 50s-70s in context of the deductions, shelters and loopholes of the 50s-70s? Not a GD thing. You know this, and right here in print too. You look more and more foolish and union label doctrinaire every day here.

Getting out the crayons. The union label part of the Complex has perpetuated a lie narrative about CEO compensation for decades. By -only- considering public companies, .002% of US companies, that's .0-0-2%, AND NOT QUALIFYING THE LIE NARRATIVE AS SUCH, leaving people to believe they are talking about ALL US companies, truly ABSURD multiples of line pay are reachable to make it look like ALL the companies in the US consist of some CEO making 400 times what the line employees make. THAT'S A LIE OF OMISSION, plain as f-ing day. Why do the inveterate LIARS do this? To perpetuate damaging, divisive resentment politics. It doesn't work on reasonably educated, experienced adults, but works just fine on their union label, knuckle-dragging, personality disordered Complex voting blocs itching for an excuse to exercise the snakes in their heads and STEAL more from their fellow man.

YES, there are lots of "one man" companies in the US, and lots of 10 man, `100 man. I operate under one. MANY people do. Those should be counted too. They are companies. When the union label STOPS lying by omitting "public" from in front of companies in their lie narrative then and ONLY then can we talk about what's a fair representation. As it is, my statement is factually accurate, theirs is NOT.

Moreover, let's talk about those .002% of US companies where CEOS make those high multiples. These are the largest companies in the world with Michael Jordan level talent at the top, and they tend to have tens of thousands of "fry cook" equivalent young entry level workers at the bottom. Companies like Mc Donalds, that employs hundreds of thousands of low skill workers. DO THEY EVER TEMPER THEIR CLAIMS WITH THIS? Of course not. The LIARS want you to believe that it's a greedy CEO and a bunch of CAREER workers when it's F-ing not.

Are they fooling you? Don't be fooled by their constant, repetitive lies.

http://chiefexecutive.net/how-much-does-the-average-ceo-really-earn/

The above is the whole picture, in context, a report that companies pay 1000s of dollars a year for to help set their CEO comp. You will never see the whole picture from the left, just lies of omission like:

We should go back to those 70% Eisenhower and after rates!
CEOS make 400x what line employees make.

Don't let them keep lying and lying and lying without accountability. Once again, this atheist THANKS GOD for the internet. Without it, reason and truth would be doomed under a mountain of self-serving Complex BULLSHIT.

 

To help the FEC convict the Clintons of colluding with foreign countries? So what is the current noise about and why isn't the Russian agent, Podesta, being investigated for staging the hacking of his emails?

 

WOW...you were practically SPITTING when typing that expletive laden rant!

Impressive. Now explain what you actually mean?

What corporation were not accounted for and how EXACTLY would that change the calculation? Oh and one man corps obviously need to be exempted from this discussion because not doing so would be incredibly STUPID.

So please. Show us what you have

 

Get Clinton smear campaign, lololol. Personal responsibility for one's own actions is really an unknown for you guys, huh?

 

Apparently you keep the goal set at about 3 feet for those slam dunks.

Your opinion of whether some group is or is not worthy of any given list is, well, worthless. What we're looking for here is:

a lawsuit;
based on absolutely faked complaints;
designed solely to destroy the defendant's reputation;
In which the defendant was completely exonerated.

Now that we've set the goal back up to Junior High level see if you're still "slam dunking."

 

Wrong again. Does it ever get tiresome?