Sunday, July 31, 2016

Hillary Contradicts FBI’s Comey on Email Scandal — Claims Emails In Question Were Classified ‘Retroactively’

FBI director admitted Hillary was a Compulsive Liar and now she is Lying and saying he did not say she was a Liar. What a Dirtbag

On this weekend’s broadcast of “Fox News Sunday,” when confronted with video of FBI director James Comey saying during her tenure as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did send classified information over her private unsecured email server, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said the emails in question were classified “retroactively.”
Clinton said, “That’s not what I heard director Comey say, and I thank you for giving me the opportunity in my view clarify. Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the e-mails. I was communicating with over 300 people in my e-mailing. They certainly did not believe and no reason to believe that what they were sending was classified. In retrospect, different agencies come in and say, well, it should have been, but that’s not what was happening in real time.”
When confronted with video from a congressional hearing on July 7 of Comey directly contradicting her, Clinton said, “Well, Chris, I looked at the whole transcript of everything that was said, and what I believe is, number one, I made a mistake not using two different e-mail addresses. I have said that and I repeat it again today. It is certainly not anything I would ever do again. I take classification seriously. I relied on and had every reason to rely on the judgments of the professionals with whom I worked. And so in retrospect, maybe some people are saying, well, among those 300 people they made the wrong call. There was no reason in my view to doubt the professionalism and the determination by the people who work every single day on behave of our country.”

Want to know Hillary's only qualification to be president?

The Hillary strategy to win is to destroy Donald Trump.  This was the theme of the convention, with each speaker attacking Trump.  Doug Schoen, who has run many Democrat campaigns, said on Fox that Hillary will spend two billion dollars in negative ads.
Hillary has nothing positive to offer.  Her record as secretary of state is a failure, from supporting the killing of Gaddafi, which caused Libya to descend into anarchy and become a haven for ISIS, to failing to provide the requested security at Benghazi, then doing nothing on the day of the attack and lying about its cause.  She actually, without shame, told the mother of Sean Smith that the attack was cause by a video.  This alone should be enough to disqualify and defeat her.  She should have been indicted for lying about the emails and endangering national security, but the director of the FBI gave her a pass.  Now we learn that the DNC worked with her to defeat Bernie so she could win.
Her record as a senator is that she voted for the Iraq War, which she now is trying to explain away.
Her record as first lady is a failed plan to have government run health care, scandal in firing the White House travel office workers to give the jobs to her friends, having FBI records of political opponents, covering up the sexual harassment by her husband, selling pardons, hiding billing records to hide her role in Whitewater, and generally lying about anything and everything.
Since 2000 she has used her political persona to amass $200 million in speaking fees, book deals, and whatever.
Her record as the governor’s wife in Arkansas was basically to use the governor’s office to steer business to the Rose Law Firm, and the sordid affairs of Whitewater.  Web Howell went to jail, Jim McDougall went to jail, Vince Foster killed himself, but Hillary keeps on making money.
Her record as an attorney was that she was fired from the Watergate Committee for ethics violation.  Dick Morris says she failed the D.C. bar exam.
As a law student, she associated with Saul Alinsky and the Black Panthers.
This is the first time that a presidential candidate has absolutely nothing to  offer. There is nothing in her background to suggest she is fit to be president.
At the convention the best that anyone could say, and the highpoint of the convention, is that she is a mother and a grandmother.
Thus we have candidate Hillary who has nothing to offer except she has a daughter and two grandchildren, and was not indicted.
So she will attack Trump every day.  Too bad she and Obama did not bring this focus and determination in fighting terrorism.




What Hillary believes

Now that the performances at the DNC are over and the scripts have been retired to the memory hole, it is worthwhile reviewing what Hillary believes as we go into the election campaign...
  • She believes that the police are occupying black communities and that they need reeducation to stop shooting black men for no good reason
  • She believes that all of white America is at fault on race and needs reeducation
  • She believes that the needs of teachers’ unions come first in managing public education
  • She believes that Common Core is a good program
  • She believes that the southern border should be left open and that illegal immigrants here now should be amnestied
  • She believes that the immigration of Muslims from radical countries in the Middle East should be increased by five.
  • She believes that ObamaCare is good policy.
  • She believes that BLM is a legitimate movement.
  • She was in favor of TPP. It appears that Trump has forced her to recant on this.
  • She believed it was not necessary to send the cavalry for our guys in Benghazi and instead went home, thus abandoning them in the field when they were in a jam and calling for help and when, as we now know, the DoD had equipment “spinning up” on the tarmac (the fact that only the president could make the final decision does not make any of the foregoing incorrect).
  • She was in favor of having the USAF take out Gaddafi, creating chaos in Libya.
  • She believes the Iran deal is a good one.
  • She is the leading progressive in the country. The progressive narrative is that the history of the United States is one of racism, sexism, homophobia, aggression and genocide and that the founding was an illegitimate activity of rich white slaveholding men. If she rejects this narrative, there is no evidence of it.
  • She feels it is appropriate to conduct the high affairs of state on an unsecured private server and does not expect to be called to account for it even though experts now conclude that her servers was hacked by foreign intelligence agencies.
  • She believes that she and Bill are entitled to enrich themselves to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars -- so far -- by being unfaithful servants of the public interest and selling out the country’s policies.
We do not know how much more Hillary and Bill plan to accumulate if she becomes president, but the opportunities to do so are much broader than as Secretary of State. The only drawback to this activity is that (a) it shows that progressivism is a racket which uses alleged concern for others as the pretext for self-enrichment, and (b) that if it is accepted by the culture, it will destroy the Republic. Just think how it would work if all our high officials sell out their offices by having their spouses give speeches to our opponents and enemies. We would become a third-world nation. That practice of the politicians siphoning off the public interest is what keeps these countries down. Our never having had that done by our high officials is one of the things that make us who we are.
Until now.




Rahm Emanuel Says Chicago Pension Crisis "Improving", Facts Show He Is Lying

He learned from his former Boss

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel brags about balancing the Chicago budget and fixing the city’s pension plans. Reuters writer Dave McKinney took the lies hook line and sinker.
Mark Glennon at Wirepoints Illinois separates fact from fiction in his article Chicago’s Friday Bunk Dump. This is a guest post by Glennon.

Chicago’s Friday Bunk Dump

Fridays in the summer are a great day to dump news you don’t want scrutinized, as reporters will tell you. Today, we got a new financial report from the city, the actuarial reports for its police and firefighter pensions and news of a private offering by Chicago’s school district.
The Report
First, the city released a carefully written, glitzy, Annual Financial Analysis. At least they put it online this year, a departure from the past, but that’s probably because it’s such meticulously prepared misinformation. Hooray, said most headlines and Mayor Emanuel in his cover letter: The 2017 deficit for the city will only be $138 million.
Only under a perverted meaning of “deficit,” they should have added. The report means little because it doesn’t include losses sustained in pensions and tax hikes for pensions deferred to the future, and it’s pensions that are Chicago’s primary problem. The kicked can isn’t included. Instead, the report is centered on near term, annual contributions to the pensions, which are made up by politicians and are inadequate even using the phony accounting that goes into them. That’s a primary reason why unfunded liabilities grow routinely.
Specifically, here’s what they didn’t tell us: The deficit appears low now because taxpayer contributions gradually ramp up and then, in 2020, go up further to whatever-it-takes, sky’s-the-limit, annual amounts sufficient to fund the pensions, and property taxes automatically increase to cover those amounts.
That’s for the police and firefighter pensions. For the small Laborer’s fund, that date is 2022, paid for mostly out of a telecom tax. MEABF, the city’s largest fund, will be dealt with in a yet-to-be announced plan funded by a “dedicated revenue source,” the city tells us, which means a new tax of some kind.
Following is a schedule of taxpayer contributions to the police and firefighter contributions, taken from the report. Those will have to be covered by property tax increases. Expect the same on different taxes for the other two pensions.
chicago police and fire contributions
The city gloats in the report that, “For the first time since 2011, the gap for the coming year is put forward without separate consideration of the City’s pension funds. As of July 29, 2016, the City has identified a permanent, reoccurring source to fund three of its four pension funds.” That source is years of tax increases that haven’t been properly explained to the public.
Most reporters have accepted the report as good news. Perhaps the worst was Dave McKinney atReuters, whose headline is, “Chicago deficit narrows despite pension uncertainty.”  To the contrary,  a better headline would be, “Chicago ignores pension tax certainty to claim deficit narrows.”
The same issue plagues city budgets, which is why Rahm regularly gets away bragging about balancing the city’s. “This is the fourth year in a row we have balanced the budget,” he said in his last budget address. In fact, the city lost about $5 billion last year (though that results largely from a change to more realistic accounting standards) and about $1 billion in each of the previous four years, according to its own financial statements.
Actuarial Reports for Chicago Police and Firefighter Pensions
Today, I finally got the actuarial reports for the Chicago police and firefighter pensions, which I had filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on July 8.
For the police pension, Net Pension Liability (that’s the term for unfunded liability under the new accounting standards) worsened by $260 million, ending 2015 at 8.97 billion. The funded ration worsened from 26% to 25.4%.
For the firefighter’s pension, Net Pension Liability worsened by $304 million in 2015, ending the year at $3.78 billion. Its funded ratio worsened from 23% to 21.7%. That’s actually much better performance for the year than I expected. However, with funded ratios near 20%, these pensions are in truly horrid shape.
Together with the two other Chicago pensions whose reports were released earlier, the total Net Pension Liability for the city is $33.8 billion and they are 23% funded in aggregate. Obviously, that’s far worse than the $20 billion total that’s been commonly reported over the past year. Much of that change results from the shift to new, more realistic accounting standards.
You can add another $10 billion for the CPS pension. We’ll try to add it all up soon for all the other overlapping pension obligations when we can — Cook County, Chicago Park District, Cook County Forest Preserve, Metro Water & Reclamation District, RTA, CTA and state pensions.
None of these numbers include healthcare obligations, which are very hard to nail down, and are not addressed in the Annual Financial Analysis.
Chicago School Borrowing
Also today, CPS announced it borrowed another $150 million. What’s unusual is that it was done as a private placement — a reflection of its difficulty accessing the usual public markets. We don’t know all the terms of the deal because CPS did not release the key documents. The CPS says it will release those on September 2.
September 2, eh? That would be the Friday before Labor Day weekend. Credit these folks with consistency.


Soaring Chicago Gun Violence Amid 'Toughest Gun Laws' Crushes Clinton Narrative For More 'Controls'

In continued defiance of the Democrat narrative calling for stricter gun laws, Chicago's homicide problem just keeps getting worse despite gun laws that are already among the most restrictive in the country.  If fact, even the New York Times described Chicago's gun laws as some of the "toughest restrictions," saying: 
Not a single gun shop can be found in this city because they are outlawed.  Handguns were banned in Chicago for decades, too, until 2010, when the United States Supreme Court ruled that was going too far, leading city leaders to settle for restrictions some describe as the closest they could get legally to a ban without a ban. Despite a continuing legal fight, Illinois remains the only state in the nation with no provision to let private citizens carry guns in public.
Data compiled the Stanley Manne Children's Research Institute revealed that homicide rates in Chicago increased to 18.81 per 100,000 in 2015 vs. 17.64 in 2010, a 7% increase.  That's compared to a 6% decline for the United States overall for the same period and over 4x the national average.  In fact, at 18.81 homicides per 100,000, Chicago would be ranked as the 201st most dangerous country out of the 218 countries tracked by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
Chicago Homicides

US Murder Rate
Perhaps even more shocking is the disparity in homicide rates by ethnicity.  African American homicides increased 19% between 2010 and 2015 vs. 8% for Caucasians and a 2% decline for Latinos.  Data revealed that African American homicide rates were eight times higher than Caucasians in 2005, 16 times higher in 2010, and 18 times higher in 2015.
Chicago Homicides By Race
Homicide rates were the highest among young people with the highest rates experience among 20-24 year olds at 64.28, a 48% increase in 5 years.
Chicago Homicides by Age
Finally, despite some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, 87% of homicides were committed with firearms, up from 79% in 2010.  So how could the city that has the toughest gun laws in the country, laws described as the "closest they could get legally to a ban without a ban," also have some of the highest gun-related homicide rates?  Could it be, that criminals looking to use weapons for violence have a lower propensity to follow laws and that by banning guns you're really just taking them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens that wouldn't have used them for violence anyway?  Just a thought.
Chicago Homicide by Weapon

Hillary Is a Menshevik

The Bolshevik/Menshevik crisis we saw in the first stages of the Russian Revolution is bubbling to the surface in our country through the Democratic Party.
The Democratic Party today reflects an updated version of the Bolshevik/Menshevik split of the early 20th century.  In 1903, the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party (communist) split into two opposing groups, the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks.  Vladimir Lenin, leader of the pro-dictatorial Bolsheviks, defined the difference between the two groups, as one being "hard" (Bolsheviks) and the other being "soft," led by Leon Trotsky, Georgi Plekhanov, Julius Martov, and others.  Both were for the overthrow of capitalism and of the Tsarist regime, but the Mensheviks would allow for a somewhat broader range of views within the communist apparatus.  Ironically, the meeting that sealed this split was held in London, a center of capitalism, where differences could be aired, and even revolutionary groups could meet without fear of reprisal.
After the outbreak of the Russian Revolution, Russia withdrew from WWI, and a long civil war raged between the two parties, which the Bolsheviks won.  A dictatorship of the proletariat was happily introduced by Lenin, but because of weak production, particularly in agriculture, there was some modification in the direction of private ownership under Lenin's New Economic Policy.  When Lenin died, the dictatorial confiscation of private property was reinstated under Josef Stalin, Lenin's successor.  Trotsky had to escape to Mexico, where one of Stalin's hired assassins murdered him.
Stalin's policy was to purge, purge, purge.  The revolution had to be purified.  You see, some prosperous peasants in Ukraine, the kulaks, were not happy turning over their land and their equipment – in short, their small agri-businesses – to this vicious ideologue who was intent on collectivizing agriculture.  Many kulaks were murdered.  Others left their homes and fled as far as Siberia.  Their properties and possessions were confiscated.  It was one of the most horrible episodes in the history of humankind of a government dispossessing and brutally enslaving and killing its own people.
The Menshevik opposition was crushed in Russia, but it lived on elsewhere as a communist ideal, violently opposed to capitalism, albeit anti-Stalinist.  So when we saw the collapse of communism in the USSR, we saw the collapse of Bolshevism, but Menshevism has lived on all these decades and is now the order of the day in the Democratic Party.
What are the parallels between then and now?  With the followers of Bernie Sanders, we see the essence of the Menshevik pattern.  It is solidly anti-capitalist and Marxist in its foundation.  Bernie's willingness to relinquish his microphone to Black Lives Matter was a symbol of his willingness to accommodate to the more thuggish and violent elements of the Democratic Party.  Under the rubric of listening to "the people's voice," Bernie and friends will give ground to the violent voices.  At the convention, we hear speakers like Leon Panetta, Tim Kaine, and Joe Biden being drowned out by the Sanders Menshevik group at various point in their speeches.  Meanwhile, outside the hall, other communists were burning flags and screaming their pro-communist obscenities.  This violent (Stalinist) voice will continue to accompany the mainstream Menshevik voice, since both are ideologically on the same page.
Many news articles noted that terrorism was barely discussed during the convention.  The reason is that the left is united ideologically with the Islamist terrorists in their bid to destabilize the U.S. and the West and to overthrow capitalism using the Islamists' strategically to accomplish long-run goals, intending to dispense with them at the right time.  Of course, the Islamists, in a parallel fashion, are using their left-wing sympathizers to accomplish their goals to destroy the infidels and their governments.  At the right time, we can be sure that they intend to put the left-wing infidels in their place as second-class, jizya-paying infidels. 
Hillary is also a Menshevik, albeit a more subtle Menshevik than Sanders.  She selects the impressive Tim Kaine as her running mate.  He, like Hillary, does not openly and boastfully speak of their identification with Marxist philosophy, but instead speaks of his commitment to "social justice."  Kaine boasts of his Catholic upbringing (remember, Josef Stalin attended a seminary for a while to become a priest in the Russian Orthodox Church).  Kaine doesn't say he is vigorously pro-life.  But he portrays himself as a warrior of the caring wing of Catholicism like Pope Francis – all for one and one for all.  All religions are peaceful.  We all have much more in common than the perceived differences would seem to suggest.  The convention theme is "Together."
Also, in a strange way, Hillary's old-school corruption, where she is bought by Wall Street and foreign individuals and entities, creates the impression that she is simply greedy and not really a threat to our freedom or to capitalism.  How could somebody who benefits so much from a parasitical relationship with capitalism be opposed to capitalism?
You see, Hillary is a disciple of the community organizer Saul Alinsky, just like Pres. Obama.  Consider this quotation from Alinsky's classic book about community organizing, Rules for Radicals: "If I were organizing in an orthodox Jewish community I would not walk in there eating a ham sandwich, unless I wanted to be rejected so I could have an excuse to cop out. My 'thing,' if I want to organize, is solid communication with the people in the community. Lacking communication I am in reality silent; throughout history silence has been regarded as assent — in this case assent to the system" (my italics). 
If you are one of the more intelligent promoters of Alinskyism, you will realize that Hillary's engagement with the big money moguls both domestic and foreign is a twofold strategy.  Her selfishness and corruption from taking bribes and contributions can be (falsely) perceived as her assent to capitalism, to the system of high-level corruption which Sanders claims to oppose and which Trump jokes about as necessary in order to do business.  But what did Alinsky write?  If you want to organize orthodox Jews, you cannot eat ham in front of them.  If you want to organize America, you have to seem to be putting money first.  This is not the country of high-minded Christian ethics it was at our founding.  Hillary's character flaw, greediness so-called, is part of her Menshevik Alinsky strategy – to seem committed to the very system that in fact she is dedicated to destroying.
By taking the money, she seems to be assenting to capitalism; however, in fact, she wants to bring down the system, which we see from her commitment to protecting the Islamists in the Middle East and in the U.S., like Obama, by avoiding the rhetoric of "Islamic terrorism."  Also, she has put herself foursquare on the side of exponentially expanding the scope of the federal government's role in the economy and in our private lives.  Further, instead of supporting the family and the individual, she supports the "global village" concept, the pro-abortion movement, and the expansion – not the reduction – of people's dependence on governmental welfare programs.  In short, she is as much of a Menshevik as Sanders, only she has learned the Alinsky method at a deeper level than Sanders.  

DNC: Emanating a Putrid Smell Across America

At my local gym using an aerobic machine, I saw on TV Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, speaking at the DNC. Seeing this despicable, cold, calculating, and evil woman at the podium defined the Democrat party as the source of the putrid smell spreading across our country. The DNC emanated the foul odor of America's moral decline. Richards is running a national dead-baby-body-parts chop shop. And yet, this vile woman had the audacity to deceptively portray herself as an advocate for women and Trump as anti-woman. 
After the release of numerous undercover videos exposing the horrors and illegality happening behind the walls of Planned Parenthood, why on earth would the Democrats gift the abortion factory's president with hero status at their national convention?
Rev. Joseph Prince says a key component of spiritual warfare is to relax and trust God. In other words, lay your burdens at God's feet and trust Him to make things right. Mary and I decided to have a spiritual warfare day, relaxing at New Smyrna Beach, FL. Note: we stay close to the shore in shallow water. Shark attacks at New Smyrna are up.
We posted “Trump” signs on the beach beside our tent. Responses from people driving and walking on the beach were overwhelmingly positive; 99% in favor of Trump; honks and thumps up. Some yelled, “Make America great again!” Clearly, that theme really resonates.
A tall muscular white guy approached our tent. He was a tourist from South Carolina. He said our Trump sign renewed his faith in Florida. As we chatted about the decline of our country, it became obvious that he was a Christian. He asked if we could pray together for our country. Mary and I jumped at the opportunity. We joined hands as he led us in prayer. It was awesome. Very cool. After he left, it dawned on me that we never exchanged names.
Comfy in my beach chair, I read, You Can If You Think You Can by Norman Vincent Peale. Upon reading the following passage, I thought, Oh my gosh, this book was published back in 1984. And yet, Peale's statement perfectly describes and rebukes the mindset of Bernie Sanders disciples and the message Democrats are using to con Americans at their national convention.
Peale wrote:
“One wonders what has come over this great, free country. We are the descendants of a once great breed of men who had problems and had them plenty. But did they whine and whimper and crawl through life on their hands and knees piteously demanding of some so-called benevolent government that they be taken care of? Not on your life! They stood solidly on their feet and they took care of themselves. And they built the greatest economy in the history of the world -- one that has made available more goods and services to more people than any other in the long life of mankind on earth.”
Peale succinctly explained my repulsion against the Democrats. They have successfully brainwashed far too many Americans into believing they are victims; they are owed; they are weak and they cannot make it without daily sucking on the breast of government. Bernie Sanders supporters eat that crap up.
Also contributing to the putrid smell emanating from the DNC is the party's aggressive attempts to divide Americans into victimized camps, repeal more personal freedoms, spread hate for traditional values and spread hate for cops. Their convention flat out stinks to high heaven, folks.
As a matter of fact, Rush Limbaugh offered Trump the script for an extremely effective short speech.
"Black Lives Matter, New Black Panthers, Occupy Wall Street, stripping God from their party platform, transgender bathroom advocates, pro-death panels in health care, baby butchers at Planned Parenthood, a candidate who violated the Espionage Act thousands of times, pedophiles, illegal immigrants, Sharia law Muslims, Marxists! That's the modern day Democrat Party," and you close it with a simple ending: "It's time to clean up this mess.
"We deserve better. Let them manage their own affairs. Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America."
Folks, Rush nailed it. This is the modern Democrat Party. Disgusting.
Just when you thought the depravity of the Democrats could not descend any deeper into the pits of hell, this act broke the needle on my evil-meter. The Democrats featured the mothers of black men killed by police. In essence, the Democrats poured a boatload of gasoline on the flames of hatred for cops. They had to know that featuring the moms would further the lie that cops murder blacks and inspire the assassination of more cops. 
Clearly, the Democrats deem the lives of our brave men and women in blue acceptable collateral damage in their quest to secure the black vote for Hillary. It is hard to believe that such evil is being spread by a major political party in the United States of America.
I am passionately campaigning for Trump. For those who see little difference between Trump and Hillary, Americans have died due to decisions made by Hillary. Clearly, her personal political ambitions and agenda take priority over American lives. That is really scary. Staying home or writing in another candidate, in essence, equals giving this wicked, wicked woman, and her Democratic minions our WH. This is the simple, obvious truth. God bless.


Economy grew 1.2% in second quarter, far below expectations

 I sent this to my socialist Progressive co worker. His defense was the Stock market is rolling under Obama. We know it is artificial too. Obama has the worst GDP growth in years.  Pathetic.

The sputtering, weezing US economy is barely managing to keep its head above water as the Department of Commerce announced second quarter growth of 1.2%, far below the 2.6% predicted by private economists..
In addition, first quarter growth was revised downward from 1.1% to 0.8%. 
Most indices were equally weak with a couple of exceptions. Consumer spending rose 4.2% and inventories were cut substantially. But while payrolls are growing modestly, there doesn't seem to be any momentum behind the job growth.

The quarter's growth failed to take off even amid signs that the headwinds created by slow growth overseas have abated. Over the past two years, weak global growth has driven down the price of oil, decimating the U.S. energy sector, and propped up the dollar, hurting manufacturers. But in both quarters of 2016, trade has stopped subtracting from Gross Domestic Product and even boosted it, very mildly.
"In short, growth was weaker than expected, although mainly because of a larger-than-expected drag from inventories, which is positive for future growth," wrote Jim O'Sullivan, economist for the forecasting firm High Frequency Economics.

One major question for the rest of the year is whether the weak output numbers or the relatively strong job growth of recent months proves to be reliable. While the GDP reports suggest that the economy is sputtering, payroll job growth has averaged 147,000 over the past three months, more than enough to keep unemployment falling rather than rising.
If it turns out that the output numbers are the better indicator, Republicans will not hesitate to run even harder against the economic record of President Obama. "Americans deserve better than the anemic growth they're getting today," GOP Ways and Means Committee chairman Kevin Brady of Texas said in response to Friday's report.
Slow growth didn't do much to derail Obama in 2012 so it's an open question just how much these stats matter to most voters. Far more relevant is how their personal economic situation is holding up. Anxiety about one's job, or slow wage growth has a greater impact on a voter's decision who to cast their ballot for.
Then there's the fact that a lot of people simply don't believe government statistics anymore. This factor will become more prominent if economic stats show a spurt before the election. No matter what the previous 7 years have shown, if there is a good growth rate reported at the end of the third quarter in September, you can bet the Clinton campaign will point to it as evidence of the success of Democratic economic policies.

Globalism through U.N.’s Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, and Vision 2050

Crazy Scary Shit. Listen for who wants and don't want Globalism. We know Obama and Hillary does, Donald Trump don't.
 Ask yourself why?


Four years ago, a man was convicted of collecting rainwater and snow runoff on his property and served a 30-day jail sentence in Medford, Oregon, while the developing world is trashing their environment at alarming rates, suffocating waterways, rivers, and lakes with trash and refuse.
A meeting in Vienna aimed to amend the 1987 Montreal Protocol to phase out hydrofluorocarbons from air conditioners, refrigerators, and inhalers. John Kerry said that “air conditioners and refrigerators are as big of a threat to life as the threat of terrorism posed by groups like the Islamic State.” He believes that “It’s hard for some people to grasp it, but what we, you, are doing here right now is of equal importance because it has the ability to literally save life on the planet itself.”
The climate change industry claimed that HFC, a coolant, is thousands of times more potent than CO2, the gas of plant life. Kerry added that “the increase in HFCs has led to the trend of global climate change.”
There used to be a saying when I was growing up in Romania that elites were going to tax the population so much that they would eventually tax rain water. Apparently H.G. 1591/2002 requires that rain water which drains in the sewer system must be calculated by multiplying the annual quantity of rain water with the total surface of buildings finished and unfinished as declared by each customer and then taxed accordingly.
As the bills seem to be arbitrary, confused customers were asking by which method various areas were taxed, by lottery, and who is actually measuring the rain fall, and how much pluvial water evaporates before it reaches the drains.
According to Nathan Mehrens, the “EPA has entered into a series of ‘memoranda of understanding’ (MOU) with the United Nations and various foreign governments” with the idea of protecting the environment “while promoting economic growth and social development, promoting the role of the private sector in development, and encouraging social inclusion, women’s advancement, and environmental justice.
All these seemingly isolated moves have common denominators the insane manufactured anthropogenic global warming claim and global climate change claim by the United Nation. The tin pot dictators at the U.N. are only interested in redistribution of wealth, population control, the buildup of megacities, and global governance under the U.N. aegis.
How would they build these mega regions, mega cities? The plans are already underway in the form of destroying the American suburbs, the family, the way we purchase and own homes and apartments, and by depopulating rural areas.
U.N. Agenda 21 has morphed into Agenda 2030 and now into Vision 2050, a plan to force 9 billion people to live by the globalists prescription of “living well and within the planet’s resources.”
Vision 2050 report is “a consensus piece that was compiled by 29 leading global companies from 14 industries and is the result of 18-month long combined efforts between CEOs and experts, and dialogues with more than 200 companies and external stakeholders in some 20 countries.” In simple translation, global companies and CEOs are going to dictate to all of us how we are supposed to live by 2050, no free choices there.
These experts and CEOs have decided for you what constitutes “global sustainability” without consulting you, and have determined their vision for the planet. The “must haves” include, as stated on their website:
  • Incorporating the costs of externalities, starting with carbon, ecosystem services and water, into the structure of the marketplace;
  • Doubling agricultural output without increasing the amount of land or water used;
  • Halting deforestation and increasing yields from planted forests;
  • Halving carbon emissions worldwide (based on 2005 levels) by 2050 through a shift to low-carbon energy systems;
  • Improved demand-side energy efficiency, and providing universal access to low-carbon mobility.
What is exactly “low-carbon mobility?” A quick search yields no exact definition but many projects with the word “transform” and “sustainable development” attempt to describe what low-carbon mobility would entail.
Progressives love to travel and visit other cities but would like to do it by banning cars and promoting walking, cycling and public transportation as a healthier and safer alternative, protecting pedestrians and cyclists from cars. No mention is made of who would protect pedestrians from nuisance cyclists.
According to progressives, who seem to prefer their Beamers to go to work, cities that were designed before the introduction of cars are more compact and attractive to walk and cycle in. In other words, cramming as many people in a city is desirable over spreading them in suburbia. “Older cities are more human than the suburbs and cities built after World War II.” We need the “human scale experience,” walking and biking for your health and to reduce the “carbon footprint.”
So, this is how your city will be transformed into a “low-carbon mobility city.” You may be stuck in your neighborhood your entire life like a rat in a maze and your world may encompass a very small radius of travel, but, you will be saving the planet from a non-existent climate change Armageddon, a lame threat greatly benefitting the globalist elites who jet in style around the world in their personal gas guzzlers, impervious to air pollution.
“With 9 billion people on the planet competing for a limited supply of natural resources, the definition of “living well” will also have to shift. Instead of a utopian dream, living well in 2050 means that all people have access to and the ability to afford education, healthcare, mobility, the basics of foodwater, energy and shelter, and consumer goods. It also means living within the limits of the planet itself.”
If it’s not the wetlands, job-destroying EPA regulations, water use controls, electricity use control, rain water, raw milk, farmers prevented from growing their own food, ordinary Americans growing their own gardens, people living off the grid, humans forced to live in tiny homes whose furniture must be assembled and disassembled every day to make room to move around, choices of transportation, Bureau of Land Management assault on farmers, rules and regulations that choke entire industries and particularly the coal industry, protecting a tiny species of delta smelt at the expense of growing food for millions, the globalist agenda will create new regulations to destroy the source of food and livelihood of millions and thus control the population.
According to Frederick Kempe, President and CEO of Atlantic Council, the “unprecedented change” will drive “60 percent of the world’s population to mega-cities by 2030, and competition for food, water, and energy resources could increase the possibilities of violent conflict.” Experts say, “The United States must urgently address its domestic economic and political dysfunctions.”
The Atlantic Council, a think-tank, wrote a 57-page report, “Envisioning 2030: U.S. Leadership in a Post-Western World,” to “help prepare the Obama Administration and its global partners for unprecedented change.”
The report predicts a future of “vast economic and political volatility, environmental catastrophe, and conflicting, inward-looking nationalisms that would be unlike any period that the United States has seen before.” “President Obama will be setting the tone and direction for U.S. policy in a post-Western world.” (Atlantic Council, Executive Summary, p. 5)
As the powers that be are actively and speedily working to affect this outcome, the global order champions “predict” that wealth will shift from the west to the east.
Presidential candidate and highly successful businessman Donald Trump said it best; we should be concentrating on Americanism, not globalism.
Courtesy of Freedom Outpost