Proof IRS Targets Conservative Groups

Obama Targets Conservatives

IRS Scandal proves Teaparty and Conservative groups were targeted by the Obama Administration

New emails released by Judicial Watch May 15,2014 show that IRS headquarters in D.C. were actually in control of the targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups – and prove that the Obama administration lied when it tried to pin the scandal on that small local office in Cincinnati. 

Here’s a timeline of events over the last year:

             On May 10, 2013, Lois Lerner, who was IRS director of Exempt Organizations at the time, said that “the targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups was absolutely inappropriate and the actions by front-line people were not driven by partisan motives.”

Then, four days later, May 14,2013;  Obama issued the following statement about the targeting:

“I have now had the opportunity to review the Treasury Department watchdog’s report on its investigation of IRS personnel who improperly targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status. And the report’s findings are intolerable and inexcusable. The federal government must conduct itself in a way that’s worthy of the public’s trust, and that’s especially true for the IRS.  The IRS must apply the law in a fair and impartial way, and its employees must act with utmost integrity. This report shows that some of its employees failed that test.  F.Y.I the IRS targeted 282 conservative groups for investigation as opposed to only 8 liberal groups?  

I’ve directed Secretary Lew to hold those responsible for these failures accountable, and to make sure that each of the Inspector General’s recommendations are implemented quickly, so that such conduct never happens again. But regardless of how this conduct was allowed to take place, the bottom line is, it was wrong. Public service is a solemn privilege. I expect everyone who serves in the federal government to hold themselves to the highest ethical and moral standards. So do the American people. And as President, I intend to make sure our public servants live up to those standards every day.”

The next day, IRS Commissioner Steven Miller resigned. He was made aware of the inappropriate targeting on May 3, but did not disclose that information to Congress – not even during questioning in July.

On May 22, Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination and refused to testify before a House committee.

On January 9, 2014, it was revealed that the Department of Justice attorney leading the investigation was a donor to the president’s campaigns.

About a week later, the FBI announced that it had completed its “investigation” of the scandal and found no evidence to support criminal charges. That is particularly interesting, because normally during investigations, the victims are contacted for information. But out of the 41 conservative groups represented by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), only 10 were contacted by the FBI at all.

In early February, during a pre-Super Bowl interview with Bill O’Reilly of Fox news, Obama said that IRS targeting was the result of a few “bone-headed decisions out of a local IRS office”.  He also blamed FOX News for bringing attention to the matter: “I mean, these kinds of things keep on surfacing in part because you and your TV station will promote them.”

How dare the media alert the masses about corruption within government agencies!

Obama went on to say:

“Bill, when you look at the stuff, there have been multiple hearings on it. What happened here was that you’ve got a 501(c)4 law people think is confusing. The folks did not know how to implement it.”

How comforting….NOT!  That comment in itself is alarming and is more evidence that the tax code is far too complicated and the IRS has grown into an out-of-control, unmanageable, and untrustworthy behemoth.

When O’Reilly asked if there was mass corruption within the IRS, Obama responded with a truly outrageous statement:

“Not even mass corruption, not even a smidgen of corruption, I would say.”

On May 7, 2014 Congress voted to hold Lerner in contempt of Congress for her refusal to testify.

Yesterday, Judicial Watch released a new batch of IRS documents that show the true origin of the IRS targeting. Hint: It wasn’t that small IRS office in Ohio:

Judicial Watch today released a new batch of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) documents revealing that its handling of Tea Party applications was directed out of the agency’s headquarters in Washington, DC. The documents also show extensive pressure on the IRS by Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) to shut down conservative-leaning tax-exempt organizations. The IRS’ emails by Lois Lerner detail her misleading explanations to investigators about the targeting of Tea Party organizations.

Judicial Watch has been working on obtaining the documents since last May, when the scandal first erupted. Not surprisingly, the IRS refused to comply with the watchdog organization’s FOIA request, and Judicial Watch had to file suit to get the documents.

A series of emails from July 2012 are especially damning, as Judicial Watch reports:

One key email string from July 2012 confirms that IRS Tea Party scrutiny was directed from Washington, DC. On July 6, 2010, Holly Paz (the former Director of the IRS Rulings and Agreements Division and current Manager of Exempt Organizations Guidance) asks IRS lawyer Steven Grodnitzky “to let Cindy and Sharon know how we have been handling Tea Party applications in the last few months.”  Cindy Thomas is the former director of the IRS Exempt Organizations office in Cincinnati and Sharon Camarillo was a Senior Manager in their Los Angeles office. Grodnitzky, a top lawyer in the Exempt Organization Technical unit (EOT) in Washington, DC, responds:

“EOT is working the Tea party applications in coordination with Cincy. We are developing a few applications here in DC and providing copies of our development letters with the agent to use as examples in the development of their cases. Chip Hull [another lawyer in IRS headquarters] is working these cases in EOT and working with the agent in Cincy, so any communication should include him as well. Because the Tea party applications are the subject of an SCR [Sensitive Case Report], we cannot resolve any of the cases without coordinating with Rob.”

The reference to Rob is believed to be Rob Choi, then-Director of Rulings and Agreements in IRS’s Washington, DC, headquarters.

Emails from 2010 specifically referenced Tea Party applications as well:

Another email string from February – March 2010 includes a message from a California EO Determinations manager discussing a Tea Party application “currently being held in the Screening group.” The manager urges, “Please let ‘Washington’ know about this potentially embarrassing political case involving a ‘Tea Party’ organization. Recent media attention to this type of organization indicates to me that this is a ‘high profile’ case.”  A co-worker responds: “I think sending it up here [DC] is a good idea given the potential for media interest.”

The documents also included a presentation about “heightened awareness issues” that specifically referenced the Tea Party as an “emerging issue” that triggers scrutiny for organizations requesting tax-exempt status.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton explained the implications of the new information:

These new documents show that officials in the IRS headquarters were responsible for the illegal delays of Tea Party applications. It is disturbing to see Lois Lerner mislead the IRS’ internal investigators about her office’s Tea Party targeting.  These documents also confirm the unprecedented pressure from congressional Democrats to go after President Obama’s political opponents.  The IRS scandal has now ensnared Congress.

It is up to Attorney General Eric Holder to take any action against Lerner for her lies, but some say she should be granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony.

As disturbing as all of this is, Heritage legal expert Hans von Spakovsky has released a new paper that exposes potentially worse news. Von Spakovsky explains new regulations the IRS has proposed. He explained that the proposed rules would:

  • ignore Supreme Court precedents and the Internal Revenue Code;
  • fail to provide clear guidance to citizens and organizations attempting to comply with the Code and accompanying regulations; and
  • threaten to restrict or violate the First Amendment rights of Americans. (source)

So, let’s summarize what we have going on here:

  1. Obama tells the IRS to target dissidents.

  2. Dissidents call out the Obama regime.

  3. Obama blames the media for telling people he said to target dissidents.

  4. Obama also lies and says he didn’t give the order.

  5. Turns out that Obama DID give the order and now there’s proof.

  6. The IRS wants to make this kind of targeting into actual rules and guidelines.

Whether or not this information results in any legal action or reforms remains to be been, but we probably shouldn’t count on it.

Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared. Her goal is to help people to “Wake the Flock Up!”

Lily contributed to this story.

 

What is The Real Reason the BLM is after Bundy?

Harry-Reid-Nevada-Standoff2 harry-Reid-Nevada-StandoffWhen Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy refused to take his cattle off the land the federal government demanded for the habitat of an endangered desert tortoise, it focused the nation’s attention on an area  Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., wanted to keep quiet.

An investigative report published last week by Jeanine Pirro on FOX NEWS drew a connection between Senate Majority Leader Reid’s involvement with Chinese energy giant ENN, Chinese efforts to build massive solar facilities in the Nevada desert and the showdown between Bundy and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, or BLM.

It wasn’t the first report to notice curious dealings involving the Chinese and America’s top Democrats.

 Joseph Farah exposed China’s deal with the Senator of Nevada driving fed action against the rancher.
On Jan. 20, 2013, WND warned Chinese government-backed economists were proposing a plan to allow Chinese corporations to set up “development zones” in the United States as part of a plan proposed by the Chinese government to convert into equity the more than $1 trillion in U.S. Treasury debt owned by the Chinese government.

The next day, Jan. 21, 2013, World Net Daily documented the Obama administration had begun to allow China to acquire major ownership interests in oil and natural gas resources across the USA.

China grabs oil interests in USA?

The first major intrusion of China in the U.S. oil and natural gas market can be traced to the Obama administration decision in October 2009 to allow state-owned Chinese energy giant China Offshore Oil Corporation, or CNOOC, to purchase a multi-million dollar stake in 600,000 acres of South Texas oil and gas fields. By allowing China to have equity interests in U.S. oil and natural gas production, the Obama administration reversed a policy of the Bush administration that in 2005 blocked China on grounds of national security concerns from a $18.4-billion dollar deal in which China planned to purchase California-based Unocal Corp.

China’s two, giant, state-owned oil companies acquiring oil and natural gas interests in the USA are CNOOC, 100-percent owned by the government of the People’s Republic of China, and Sinopec Group, the largest shareholder of Sinopac Corporation, an investment company owned by the government of the People’s Republic of China, incorporated in China in 1998, largely to acquire and operate oil and natural gas interests worldwide.


On March 6, 2012, the Wall Street Journal compiled a state-by-state list of the $17 billion in oil and natural gas equity interests CNOOC and Sinopec have acquired in the United States since 2010.

1. Colorado: CNOOC gained a one-third stake in 800,000 acres in northeast Colorado and southwest Wyoming in a $1.27-billion pact with Chesapeake Energy Corporation.

2. Louisiana: Sinopec has a one-third interest in 265,000 acres in the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale after a broader $2.5-billion deal with Devon Energy. 


3. Michigan: Sinopec gained a one-third interest in 350,000 acres in a larger $2.5-billion deal with Devon Energy. 


4. Ohio: Sinopec acquired a one-third interest in Devon Energy’s 235,000 Utica Shale acres in a larger $2.5-billion deal. 


5. Oklahoma: Sinopec has a one-third interest in 215,000 acres in a broader $2.5-billion deal with Devon Energy. 


6. Texas: CNOOC acquired a one-third interest in Chesapeake Energy’s 600,000 acres in the Eagle Ford Shale in a $2.16-billion deal. 


7. Wyoming: CNOOC has a one-third stake in northeast Colorado and southeast Wyoming after a $1.27-billion pact with Chesapeake Energy. Sinopec gained a one-third interest in Devon Energy’s 320,000 acres as part of a larger $2.5-billion deal.

On March 6, 2012, in a separate story, the Wall Street Journal described that China’s strategy implemented since 2010 by Fu Chengyu, who has served as chairman of both CNOOC and Sinopec, involved the following components: “Seek minority states, play a passive role, and, in a nod to U.S. regulators, keep Chinese personnel at arm’s length from advanced U.S. technology.”

HARRY REID AND CHINESE SOLAR INVESTMENTS:

The Democrat Senator of Nevada Harry Reid has been outspoken in support of the government’s position on the Bundy issue, and both he and his son Rory were in earlier years prominent advocates of efforts by ENN Mojave Energy LLC (a Chinese-backed company) to build a solar plant in Clark County: Questions surrounding family ties are flaring again in Nevada around the Senate majority leader. He and his oldest son, Rory, are both involved in an effort by a Chinese energy giant, ENN Energy Group, to build a $5 billion solar farm and panel manufacturing plant in the southern Nevada desert.

Reid has been one of the project’s most prominent advocates, helping recruit the company during a 2011 trip to China and applying his political muscle on behalf of the project in Nevada. His son, a lawyer with a prominent Las Vegas firm that is representing ENN, helped to locate a 9,000-acre (3,600-hectare) desert site that it is buying well below appraised value from Clark County, where Rory Reid formerly chaired the county commission. (more dirty politics)

THIS IS THE LIE BEING PERPETUATED BY SNOPES:

According to the fact checker websites Snopes they say  “The theory that Reid’s involvement in the Bundy dispute was motivated by a desire to somehow profit from the building of a solar plant falls flat in the face of two basic facts: The site that ENN Mojave Energy was planning to buy in order to build a solar plant is nowhere near the public land Bundy has been disputing with the government”

Snopes calls this a FALSE story, simply because the actual land being purchased is 50 miles away and seemingly has nothing to do with the land in question where the Bundy cattle are grazing. They omit the truth. The simple truth is the land being offered to the Chinese is the land where the tortoise were. Those endangered tortoise had to be MITIGATED for the land where Bundy’s cattle graze. In other words. The Federal govt has to by their own law find a new home for the tortoise. They chose to relocate the tortoise onto the land adjacent to the Bundy land but found they could not because of the Cattle grazing there. Snopes lost all credibility with me the day I learned they  get donations from George Soros. Sorry but why would I believe them when all the facts point to something else?


On April 3, 3012, Bloomberg reported Chinese billionaire Wang Yusuo, one of China’s richest citizens and the founder of Chinese energy giant ENN Group, had teamed up with Senate Majority Leader Reid to win incentives including land 113 miles southeast of Las Vegas that ENN sought to buy for $4.5 million, less than one-eighth of the land’s $38.6 million assessed value.

Bloomberg reported ENN intended to create solar energy farms on the Nevada land, despite the nearly 50 percent plunge in solar panel prices globally in the previous 15 months that led to the bankruptcy of solar equipment maker Solyndra LLC, which had received approximately $535 million in U.S. government loan guarantees.

Bloomberg further documented ENN had contributed $40,650 individually and through its political action committee to Sen. Reid over the previous three election cycles.

Subsequently, on Sept. 4, 2012, Breitbart.com reported lawyer Rory Reid, the son of Sen. Reid, had been appointed the primary representative for ENN Energy Group, fronting the bid by the Chinese company to build a $5-billion solar panel plant on a 9,000-acre Clark County desert plot in Laughton, Nevada. The land worth an estimated  whopping $30 Billion dollars is being offered to the Chinese for $5 Billion.


A Reuters report published on Aug. 31, 2012, documented that Reid was recruited by ENN during a 2011 trip he took to China with nine other U.S. senators, supposedly to invite Chinese investment in the United States.

The Senate group accompanying Reid on his 2011 trip to China included six other Democrats and three Republicans: Richard Shelby, R-Ala.; Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; Dick Durbin, D-Ill.; Mike Enzi, R-Wyo.; Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.; Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.; Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.; and Michael Bennet, D-Colo.

“A tortoise isn’t the reason why BLM is harassing a 67-year-old rancher,” blogger Dana Loesch wrote last week. “They want his land.”

his is not the first time Senator Harry Reid has wielded federal power.  According to Dana Loesch she pointed out that Reid has been accused by ranchers in Nevada of using the BLM to control Nevada land, over 84 percent of which is already owned by the federal government, and to pay back special interests, including his top donor, Harry Whittemore, who first urged Reid to have the habitat of the desert tortoise moved before he was convicted of violating federal election laws by illegally funneling $150,000 to Reid’s 2007 reelection campaign.

Confirmed by a 71-28 Senate vote on April 9, BLM chief Neil Kornze served as a former senior adviser to Reid before he joined BLM in 2011, serving for the past year as the agency’s principal deputy director, according to a CBS local television news report broadcast in Carson City, Nevada.

In 2012, BLM and the U.S. Department of Energy published a “Final Pragmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States” that Inforwars.com charged established the basis for allowing the endangered desert tortoise to migrate habitats, paving the way to put solar energy development projects on acreage that includes public land at dispute in the Bundy standoff over grazing rights.

Loesch’s analysis of the BLM’s actions was echoed at the Moapa Valley Town board meeting last Wednesday when one of the local citizens rose to give a stirring defense of Cliven Bundy and issue a warning to the BLM.

“They can throw an army of men around there … with sniper rifles on people just like you are, men, women and children … out there, who believe they have a right to be there,” he said.

“Maybe you believe in some other place that you believe you can be. Someday they’re gonna throw that army of men around you. And then somehow they feel like they got the right … they can drop a damn tripod in the ground and set a sniper rifle on it, so if you cross a line, they can put a bullet in you. Who the hell is the man behind that trigger? I wanna know … which one of you guys gives that guy the authority to throw that rifle down? And when he does, which one of us is he going to shoot?”

“Good God, didn’t he grow up in this country? Are we gonna give it up? This is a helluva lot bigger than Clive Bundy.”
The audience erupted in applause as the man concluded his speech.

“And when Clive decides to go back in there after his cows, and they’ve got orders to shoot anyone who goes in there, I’m gonna be with him.”
Someone in the crowd piped up, “Carrying a gun I hope.”

“No, no,” he said, “because them S.O.B’s will fire the next shot heard around the world … and we will fire the rest!”

Harry Reid, Son’s Solar Power Scheme Linked to Bundy Ranch Standoff

An Unconstitutional Stand:

The sad truth is that According to the United States Constitution,Article 1, Sec 8, Clause 17, The federal goct can only own land under SPECIFIC conditions, and none of these conditions are met in this case. The Government doesn’t have a leg to stand on.  

Legislative Time Bomb Could Outlaw Guns

20131203-092812.jpg

Legislative Time Bomb Could Retroactively Outlaw the Possession of Virtually all Guns with Non-Metal parts
Wood stocks could be prohibited

“We look at [the plastic gun ban] as an infringement,” said GOA’s Erich Pratt. “The law does nothing to keep undetectable guns out of the hands of criminals [who have] no regard for the law in the first place.” — The Hill, November 28, 2013

URGENT ACTION: The House did not take up the plastic gun ban yesterday. So please continue contacting your legislators — especially your Representative — with today’s new message. The House will most certainly vote today. If you can, please call your Rep. at 202-225-3121.

Gun ban would be mischief for an anti-gun administration.

Sometimes it takes decades for a poorly-drafted anti-gun law to rise up and bite you. The 1968 gun ban for “mental defectives” sat around for 25 years before an anti-gun Clinton administration decided to use it to disarm more than 150,000 law-abiding veterans who had never been before a court.

The “plastic gun ban” is another massive time bomb sitting in federal law. And it will be reauthorized (for as much as a decade) in the next two weeks — if we don’t stop it.

Unless it existed before December 10, 1988, the plastic gun ban absolutely bans any gun that is not as detectable in a “walk-through metal detector” as a Security Exemplar [18 U.S.C. 922(p)(1)(A) and (6)].

The “Security Exemplar” is a piece of metal that the ATF uses to calibrate how much steel a manufacturer needs to put in the gun to make it beep in the metal detector. Other than the fact that it has to contain 3.7 ounces of steel and look sort of like a gun, anti-gun Attorney General Eric Holder can determine, by regulatory fiat, the characteristics of the Exemplar.

He can determine whether you test guns with a “top flight” metal detector — or a crummy one. He can determine how many times (or thousands of times) a gun has to pass in order not to be banned.

In addition, every “major component” of every firearm has to pass through an airport x-ray in such a way that its shape is “accurately” depicted [18 U.S.C. 922(p)(1)(B)].

The statute contains a list of parts of guns which are definitely “major components.” But is that list exclusive? If we didn’t have a President and an Attorney General who have violated and perverted the law again and again and again, we might be able to conclude that it was exclusive. But the language is not so definitive as to protect us against an administration intent on destroying us.

So what if Holder determines that a wooden stock is a “major component”?

According to an expert we consulted, a wooden stock would produce an x-ray image which is “fuzzier” (less “accurate”) than a metal gun would produce. Interestingly, a wholly plastic gun would also produce an x-ray image, according to this expert, although it would be “fuzzier” (less “accurate”) than that of a metal gun.

So, for those Republicans who are talking about locking us into an extension of this statute that could ban lots of guns … tell them, “please don’t.”

A couple of more points:

* It is simply not true that, if this statute is allowed to lapse, “killers can freely go into airports, courthouses, and schools to commit mass murder and mayhem.”

X-ray machines will pick up the images of plastic guns. And, unfortunately for the safety of the inhabitants, guns in airports, courthouses, and schools will remain illegal under 18 U.S.C. 922(q) and 930.

* And it is foolish to assume that the Jared Loughners and Adam Lanzas of the world — intent on committing mass murder — would somehow be deterred by a plastic gun ban. That genie is already out of the bottle.

* Finally, it appears that New York Senator Chuck Schumer would like to take the potentially significant gun ban and expand it even further.

Thursday, November 21, Schumer tried to pass an expansion though the U.S. Senate by unanimous consent without even usual a standard Senate procedure for notifying other senators, called hot-lining. Almost two weeks AFTER HE TRIED TO PASS IT, the text of the Schumer bill was still not available.

But we do know that Schumer has been working all year to expand the plastic gun ban to shut down every gun manufacturer in America who makes guns using a mold. We also know that Schumer has been trying to extend it even more explicitly to gun parts and magazines — although it’s hard to see what danger a plastic magazine would pose.

ACTION: Click here to contact your senators and representative. Tell them to oppose this effort to ban guns with wooden stocks. Call him or her at 202-225-3121.

20131203-092843.jpg

Redeem The Dream: Blacks n America Today

Democrats use Black voters

Blacks in America need to redeem the dream.

BLACKS & THE DEMOCRAT PARTY:

I wonder how many whites feel disenfranchised because people who thought they were voting for the agent of hope & change later found out it was a case of bait & switch. President Obama is a racist. Obama is not who he portrayed himself to be. All you need do is look around you. Obama takes every opportunity to pace the race card, he wants blacks to stay down and out. He wants you dependent on government. In my humble opinion Obama is the worse kind of Uncle Tom. Rather than espouse ways for you to do better, he rather wallow in self pity, and he encourages that among the black population. Those of you who thought Obama would bring hope & change found all he brings is misery. All he talks about is how down trodden you are. Oh boo hoo. You can’t make it because of your race. Well then why don’t we all just throw our hands up and say “that’s it, I can’t do any better”. That’s what President Obama and the democrat leadership encourage. They encourage it with their words, they encourage that defeated attitude with their policies. If you support the democrat party you may as well just give up because you cant do it on your own without the help of government. That is what the democrats stand for today.

It’s hard to turn blacks against Obama’s policies. They revere him for achieving the great heights of presidency and completely ignore what a poor leader he’s been.

A friend said to me “Blacks don’t vote republican because they mistrust the Republican Party?” My question? Why don’t they mistrust the democrat party? That’s the party that was in power for 50 years, the party that’s  kept blacks in ‘their place.’ So to speak. Taught Blacks dependency and segregated them in the projects in the name of “affordable housing” for years.

I resent what the democrat party does to minorities. Blacks should stand up and shout “we shall overcome” ala Martin Luther King Jr and get out of their predicament and become whole. Blacks need to JOIN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OR THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY & dare I say it, Join the TeaParty movement.  If they want to overcome their poverty and dependency they need to DO something different because the Democrat party is not your friend.

That’s what angers me about the Al Sharptons of the world. They have the bully pulpit but use it to continue to perpetrate victim hood.

Blacks are blinded by the lies of democrat party, and don’t realize they’re being patronized to stay down. Whites in the democrat party have mastered the new slavery and blacks in democrat leadership are the new Uncle Tom. I’m not picking a fight but those are the facts

More Facts on race relations since Obama took office:

Recently in the Daily caller said that Public attitudes about race relations  plummeted since the historic election of President Barack Obama, according to a new poll from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal.

Only 52 percent of whites and 38 percent of blacks have a favorable opinion of race relations in the country, according to the poll, which has tracked race relations since 1994 and was conducted in mid-July by Hart Research Associations and Public Opinion Strategies.

That’s a sharp drop from the beginning of Obama’s first term, when 79 percent of whites and 63 percent of blacks held a favorable view of American race relations.

Negative views on race relations have also increased substantially. According to the poll  45 percent of whites and 58 percent African-Americans now believe race relations are very or fairly bad, compared with 2009, when  only 20 percent of whites and 30 percent of blacks held an unfavorable view.

Although the NBC/WSJ survey addressed the politically fueled Trayvon Martin controversy only obliquely (asking how the acquittal of George Zimmerman in Martin’s shooting death had affected respondents’ views of the legal system), the survey’s historical time frame — which shows the steepest declines in positives and increases in negatives coming in the last two years — suggests the firestorm over the Martin case played a role in diminishing the high solidarity between whites and blacks that was exemplified by Obama’s election.

A View From the Right

20131001-130217.jpg

Written by D.Craig

I continue to feed the mouth of society with an organized labor force that I coordinated and produced. I exploited my organized labor force to the maximum. Why? So that my company, my entity, my extension of my-self can become more self-reliant and independent. A socialist would digress. A communist would puke.

I know it’s hard for the left to understand. Clearly, the left has become the employee-faction rather than the John-Galt faction. I get that. (inb4 Ayndroid)

Dear leftists, I beg you – please, do not hate on people for having the ability to self-produce value. It is the very people you hate which gives you these internets you exploit. These computers you type. These things are not made by your ideas. Your socialist ideas. Your humanitarian ideas. These things exist so that the “Self” can grow.

Oh, my sweet sweet leftists, you can do it too, but it would seem that you’re too non-individualist to do it. Instead, you lean on people like myself to help feed Society (social security) programs (your public restroom of sorts) so that you can sit on Facebook bitching about how the game is rigged, and nothing is fair.

I get it, bro. I get it. You’re a sad man with no skills outside of your slave-driven service/labor.

I get it, bro. I get it. I am ruining your utopian beliefs by being an individual. I understand….

Another Whistleblower?

20130622-082937.jpg

Picture of the UTAH DATA CENTER

Safe to say it’s been a rough couple of weeks for the NSA, and the latest information that has leaked certainly won’t help. This whistleblower isn’t new, he has actually been around since the Bush days, but his claims are getting a closer look now that we know the scope of the NSA snooping scandal.

His comments are chilling and include claims that a Supreme Court justice has been closely monitored for quite some time. Could a justice have been compromised?

According to TheBlaze:

Russ Tice, a former intelligence analyst and Bush-era NSA whistleblower, claimed Wednesday that the intelligence community has ordered surveillance on a wide range of groups and individuals, including high-ranking military officials, lawmakers and diplomats.

“He’s been blowing whistles for a while,” Pat said. “This guy has been talking about the Bush administration spying for a long time, and he was with the ONI, the DIA, the NSA, the NCAA. I mean, he’s been everywhere. And so now, now his latest deal, he’s been saying this about Bush since I think 2005 and then he said that they retaliated against him but then he was speaking out in more specifics yesterday.”

Yesterday, Tice dropped this bomb:

“[The Bush administration] went after–and I know this because I had my hands literally on the paperwork for these sort of things – they went after high-ranking military officers; they went after members of Congress, both Senate and the House, especially on the intelligence committees and on the armed services committees and some of the–and judicial.

But they went after other ones, too. They went after lawyers and law firms. All kinds of lawyers and law firms. They went after judges. One of the judges is now sitting on the Supreme Court that I had his wiretap information in my hand. Two are former FISA court judges. They went after State Department officials. They went after people in the executive service that were part of the White House–their own people.”

Still Blaming Bush?

20130602-072602.jpg

If you’re still blaming Bush for losing your job and keeping you jobless then you’re obviously not paying attention or don’t understand economics. I’m not going to try to convince you of anything because the facts speak for themselves. Did Bush spend too much? Yes, but it was Bush’s Democrat controlled congress I would thank for that too. As far as they were concerned they didn’t think he spent enough because although they said something else with their lips their actions under the Obama administration is to allow and encourage triple the spending. In other words if Bush got us into trouble with his over spending then you must by your own logic agree Obama is bankrupting America because he spent in 3 years more than Bush did in 8 and my specific problem with Obama with regard to his spending is he continues to borrow almost .40 cents for every dollar he gives away. He doesn’t think he’s spent enough. So…I guess you renounce Obama as bad as you agree Bush over spent. Am I right? O? Maybe you’re just a whitey hater. ( I couldn’t resist playing the race card. I thought I would get a jump on you) get your head out of your delusional a**. PAY ATTENTiON!!!!!!!

20130602-072640.jpg

Ambitious Senate Immigration Overhaul

20130417-071627.jpg

A sweeping Senate immigration proposal is set to be released on Tuesday April 16 that would offer the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. a chance at citizenship, representing the most ambitious overhaul of the nation’s immigration system in 30 years. The plan would stem the flow of undocumented immigrants into the U.S. by creating tens of thousands of new visas for foreign workers in low-skilled jobs, according to early summaries of the plan.

The immigration plan is certain to create controversy in Washington, likely dominating Congressional debate for the remainder of the year. Under the plan, permanent legal residency would be granted a decade after registering with the government. Immigrants would pay a $2,000 fine, pass a background check, have a job and wait 10 years before applying for a green card. Three years after that, they would apply to become U.S. citizens.

The bill would also affect visas for high-tech workers, create a new “W” visa program to attract low-skilled workers, require businesses to implement new electronic-verification requirements and call for billions of dollars to be spent on tightened security at the U.S.-Mexico border, with a goal of apprehending 90 percent of those crossing the border in high-risk areas.

Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are expected to brief President Obama on the merits of the legislation this week in advance of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on April 19.

House Republicans are expected to take a more piecemeal approach to immigration in the lower chamber. The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Representative Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) has indicated that he will begin considering single-issue immigration bills in his committee even as a bipartisan group of House members continues to work behind closed doors toward a comprehensive immigration reform package to shore up House legislation.

The House Judiciary Committee has already held six hearings on the immigration system this year, and any legislation from the House Judiciary Committee is likely to include measures on agricultural workers, employment verification, high-skilled immigration, and family immigration. Legislation previously introduced and considered in the House included a bill to reallocate green cards from the diversity visa lottery to top foreign students graduating from U.S. universities with degrees in science, technology, engineering, or math, as well as legislation to remove the country caps on the number of legal permanent residents who are admitted to the U.S. each year.

Gold is to Capitalism What Debt is to Bankruptcy

The Price of Gold in the Cold-Gold War

Darryl Robert Schoon
Posted Feb 17, 2013

The collapse of the USSR in 1991 was seen as the triumph of capitalism over communism. The 40-year cold war was over and the West had won. That perception, however, was as premature as it was misleading. The struggle of world powers wasn’t over. Today, the struggle continues in a far more fundamental venue; on capitalism’s home court in the arena of paper money.

The West, as Mao Tse-Tung once claimed, is not a paper tiger; unless, of course, you’re referring to its paper money.

In 1991, communism was, in fact, collapsing. But capitalism, unbeknownst to itself and others, was bankrupt after its costly decades-long struggle with communism. Today, the former communist super-powers, Russia and China, have re-emerged and are playing the high-hand of gold against England, the US and the West and their now vulnerable paper currencies.

England’s debt-based paper banknotes were the reason for the West’s three hundred year global hegemony. Because of its ability to wage war on credit and pass off its debt-based paper banknotes as money, England in the 18th and 19th centuries and, later, the US in the 20th achieved a level of world power not seen since the Roman Empire.

In the 1900s, Russia and China escaped the West’s capitalist dominion by adopting communism, an alternate economic paradigm, based on the theories of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir Lenin. Communism was, in fact, a potent and dysfunctional amalgam of untested theories, unfounded hopes and totalitarian state oppression.

Ostensibly offering a more equitable distribution of wealth than the banker’s paradigm of credit and debt, Marxism/Leninism was, in fact, a bloody and costly trap into which Russia and China would both fall in their attempts to escape the West’s economic and political domination.

The West’s attempts to subjugate Russia and China would, however, ultimately cost the West its foundation of economic and political power, i.e. the ability to pass off debt-based paper banknotes as money.

In capitalist economies, debt-based paper money possessed intrinsic value because it was convertible to gold upon demand. Gold, in fact, was capitalism’s ‘secret sauce’, the essential ingredient that transformed the bankers’ debt-based banknotes into something other than government-issued IOUs.

Since 1971, however, the West’s paper banknotes are no longer convertible to gold. This is because after WWII, the US, in its attempts to militarily subjugate Russia and China overspentits massive gold reserves, forcing it to end the gold-convertibility of the US dollar. As a result, all currencies in the world formerly tied to the US dollar and hence to gold became fiat, i.e. currencies who have value only because of government fiat, i.e. command.

After 1971, it was only a matter of time until the bankers’ debt-based paper banknotes – without the convertibility to gold – would become increasingly unstable and ultimately worthless; and, today, in 2013, the former has happened and the latter is underway.

The value of today’s paper money is determined solely by currency speculators placing leveraged bets in the hopes of achieving short-term gains. Once the gold-convertibility of paper money ended, modern currencies became paper coupons with expiration dates written in invisible ink.

Today, the West and its bankers are desperately hoping that no one will notice, hoping thereby to prevent a hyperinflationary collapse of paper money should confidence in fiat paper money evaporate.

Russia and China, however, are preparing for that very day. Russia and China are stockpiling gold as fast as they can in anticipation of a coming currency crisis triggered by the West’s increasingly suspect paper money.

For the former communist powers, Russia and China, it’s payback time; but for England and the US, it’s blowback time

Blowback, an unforeseen and unwanted effect, result, or set of repercussions Merriam-Webster dictionary

THE EAST IS GOLD WITH A RED TINGE

On February 6, 2013, in China Gold Imports from Hong Kong Climb to record on Wealth, Bloomberg New reported:

Exports of gold to Hong Kong from China more than tripled to 310,861 kilograms in 2012 from about 95,529 kilograms a year earlier, according to Bloomberg calculations. Shipments were 29,718 kilograms in December, up from 28,978 kilograms in November.

In the article, Bloomberg News also noted the growing relationship between China’s wealth and the ownership of gold:

China’s urban per capita disposable income rose 12.6 percent in nominal terms in 2012 to 24,565 yuan, the National Bureau of Statistics said on Jan. 18. Per capital rural net income increased 13.5 percent in nominal terms, and 10.7 percent in real terms.
Not only is China buying record amounts of gold, Russia is buying even more. On February 11th in Putin Turns Black Gold Into Bullion as Russia Outbuys World, Bloomberg News reported that Russia’s President Putin is investing Russian’s oil income in gold bullion at a record rate: When Vladimir Putin says the U.S. is endangering the global economy by abusing its dollar monopoly, he’s not just talking. He’s betting on it…. His central bank has added 570 metric tons of the metal in the past decade, a quarter more than runner-up China, according to IMF data compiled by Bloomberg. The added gold is also almost triple the weight of the Statue of Liberty.

China, the world’s number one producer of gold, and Russia, the world’s fourth largest producer, also no longer allow domestically-mined gold to be sold outside their countries. This means Russia and China are accumulating gold both by buying and mining it in record amounts.

GEOPOLITICS AND THE PRICE OF GOLD

Money and power are two sides of the same coin and both are at the center of today’s gold market. With growing demand for gold from both China and Russia, it would be assumed that prices should be rising as supplies of gold are becoming increasingly tight.

Sandeep Jaitly is the author of the Gold Basis Service, a subscription-only commentary on developments in the gold and silver bases and the ‘implications about future movements for prices’. In his February newsletter, Jaitly referred to an earlier statement from January 25th:

The bases/co-bases across all maturities for both gold and silver are falling/rising indicating substantial demand for physical bullion that is not being adequately accommodated. February gold has entered backwardation as of last week. As a consequence of the fall/rise in the bases/co-bases, volatility of bullion against fiat is likely to increase. The opportunity to exchange gold for silver should be taken if the gold/silver ratio rises substantially (above 55.)

Sandeep Jaitly’s observations about gold and silver have been remarkably consistent over the past year. Demand for both gold and silver have been constant while supplies of both metals have been pressured leading to indications that an upswing movement in prices can be expected and the accumulation of both metals is encouraged.

In the past year, however, gold and silver have not performed in accordance with such expectations. I believe this temporary anomaly is attributable to two factors: (1) the increasing determination of Western central and bullion banks to prevent another almost-vertical price movement in gold as happened in July/August of 2011 when gold rose 27% in only 60 days; and (2) the current Chinese strategy to purchase gold at the lowest price points possible.

On February 11th when gold collapsed to a low of $1642, Takoa de Silva of Bull Market Thinking asked a trader who runs a market-making desk in London’s gold market to explain the drop in gold.

Commenting on today’s collapse he said, “I’m not that worried about the sell-off today, it’s just the logical thing. I was surprised they waited so long [to take it down], because many opportunities to push it to that level existed before…and it finally happened, and that’s good for the market. This is actually a blessing. We are still not at the lows of January at $1625…but at the moment this is probably as far as it’s going to go [$1642]. There’s good support here.”

He further added that, “This is actually the typical reaction of the Chinese New Year, because the shorts, they know there will be no physical demand for a couple of days, there won’t be support there, and so they are smart. This is smart money just pushing it to the extremes. For me this is an opportunity to get something cheap in for the mid-term. But you can’t fight the trend at the moment in terms of what’s in the air for the Fed-speak etc., but the long-term money stays and sits.”

The statement, the opportunity to get something cheap describes China’s buying strategy perfectly. Both China and Russia want to buy the West’s gold at the lowest possible price and they will do so accordingly. All investors should do the same.

In my current youtube video, Bankers, England and Israel, I explain the role of England and bankers in the creation of the state of Israel. As stated previously, money and power are two sides of the same coin. The creation of the state of Israel is no exception.

Sandeep Jaitly’s observations about the gold and silver markets are correct. The accumulation of both metals is encouraged. Regarding the continuing struggle between gold and paper money, precious metal investors have already put their money where their beliefs are – and they should keep it there.

Buy gold, buy silver, have faith.

###

Darryl Robert Schoon
email: info@drschoon.com
website: www.drschoon.com
website: www.survivethecrisis.com
Schoon Archive

About Darryl Robert Schoon

In college, I majored in political science with a focus on East Asia (B.A. University of California at Davis, 1966). My in-depth study of economics did not occur until much later.

In the 1990s, I became curious about the Great Depression and in the course of my study, I realized that most of my preconceptions about money and the economy were just that – preconceptions. I, like most others, did not really understand the nature of money and the economy. Now, I have some insights and answers about these critical matters.

In October 2005, Marshall Thurber, a close friend from law school convened The Positive Deviant Network (the PDN), a group of individuals whom Marshall believed to be “out-of-the-box” thinkers and I was asked to join. The PDN became a major catalyst in my writings on economic issues.

When I discovered others in the PDN shared my concerns about the US economy, I began writing down my thoughts. In March 2007 I presented my findings to the Positive Deviant Network in the form of an in-depth 148-page analysis, “How to Survive the Crisis and Prosper In The Process.”

The reception to my presentation, though controversial, generated a significant amount of interest; and in May 2007, “How To Survive The Crisis And Prosper In The Process” was made available at www.survivethecrisis.com and I began writing articles on economic issues.

The interest in the book and my writings has been gratifying. During its first two months, www.survivethecrisis.com was accessed by over 10,000 viewers from 93 countries. Clearly, we had struck a chord and www.drschoon.com, has been created to address this interest.

20130217-140923.jpg

20130217-141403.jpg

Women On the Front Lines- A Good Idea?

20130125-160123.jpg

As a resulting decision from defense secretary Panetta, women in all branches of the military will have unparalleled opportunities to experience front line combat. However, we shouldn’t kid ourselves that women have not done this before.

When they bravely serve overseas, they often encounter warfare situations and are left vulnerable to getting attacked. As a woman, I see this is a groundbreaking attempt towards equality, yet I still have some reservations.

I strongly believe that women can be as courageous and capable as their male counterparts, but if a woman is to serve on the front lines next to male soldiers, they should have to meet the same standard. In every branch of the military, the physical requirements are different between men and women. Combat situations can require that you carry another wounded soldier and if women are to enter these situations, it is crucial that they can meet the same standards. I have mixed feeling about this decision. How about you? What are your thoughts on this subject?