CLOSET MUSLIM, SERVANT TO MUSLIM DICTATORS Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard. JACK CASHILL
Has the white half of Barack Obama gone white supremacist? Is the lavish house on Martha's Vineyard just purchased by the former first couple one of those racist "dog whistles" that progressives so often are able to hear?
Take a look at the startling sheer whiteness of the interior of the house, as featured in The Earl of Taint:
As the Earl notes, most of the brown to be found is where people step on.
If President Trump purchased a house with so much whiteness, you can bet that the cries of racist symbolism and dog whistles would have been heard throughout the prog internet.
It occurred to me that maybe the Obamas are planning to remodel the place with colors that "look like America." But then I realized that the Obamas already have been renting the property and obviously like it so much they decided to buy it.
Or maybe they miss the White House so much that they want an nearly all-white house? But the interior of the D.C. White House isn't anything at all like as white as the Vineyard estate, where you'd be advised to bring your sunglasses inside if you visit.
OBAMA GETS A $1+ MIL PRICE CUT ON 29 ACRE MARTHA'S VINEYARD ESTATE
Former president Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama are in the process of purchasing a multimillion-dollar Martha's Vineyard estate from Boston Celtics owner Wyc Grousbeck, according to a report.
The former first family is currently in escrow for a 29-acre beachfront estate listed at $14,850,000. The Obamas were renting the house from Grousbeck, who donated $2,300 to Obama for America in 2008, over the summer and loved the property so much they expressed interest in purchasing it with a lower offer, according to TMZ.
As of last year, the home was listed at $16,250,000. That's down from $22 million originally.
Not a bad deal apparently.
Built in 2001, the contemporary home offers more than 7,000 square feet, seven bedrooms, 8.5 bathrooms and plenty of space for entertaining—whether for a small family gathering or a crowd. The master suite features its own private sundeck and fireplace.
The nearly 30-acre estate sits on the Edgartown Great Pond, with views of the Atlantic Ocean.
Of course, with the amount of acreage around the main residence, a new owner could build additional residences for family vacations on the water.
In 2015, the home's listing agent at the time said, "It certainly has the capacity to expand to more of a compound. One could build two additional full-size properties if one wanted to create a generational meeting place."
Or house more of your illegal alien relatives.
The property listing states, "A property of this stature needs to be seen to be experienced."
The same is true of Obama's America.
HE OBOMBS HAVE ALWAYS LIVED LIKE THE 1% WHOM THEY SERVED AND GROVELED AT THE FEET OF.
Diamond Life: Michelle Obama rents out $23-million Hollywood Hills mansion for a night
Apparently, a hotel, even a luxury hotel, was not good enough.
Former first lady Michelle Obama had to go big, renting out a $23-million Hollywood Hills mansion for...a night. The New York Post has the pictures of it here. Several news accounts explained it as possibly a rental to try and buy, something most home-buyers don't get to do. Whether she actually paid is also a big question mark, and if so, whether she paid market value (which would have cost more than a fancy hotel) or received her night there a "gift," which presents its own ethics problems.
The Shark House, which is located in the 9200 block of Swallow Drive, is thus named due to its open air shark aquarium. It also has a full spa, a humidor room, movie theater and walk-in wine room.
It's on the market, currently listed for a cool $22.9 million.
A source told TMZ the Obamas may be looking at real estate in the Hollywood Hills area, but that was not confirmed.
If they're in the market to buy that, they've got a lot more money than the press is reporting. We know they're loaded. But not that loaded. Not Louis XIV loaded, which is about the range for this sort of place. Or is it a sweetheart deal in the works we're talking about? Maybe they'll end up buying it for "a dollar." Don't know yet, but neither possibility makes them look good.
It's all part and parcel of the Obamas' long, luxurious post-presidency, a nonstop vacay that costs taxpayers millions. It's as though we're financing kings now, not retired presidents. For a while there, the Obamas were jetting around with billionaires and staying on private islands. Then they bought that expensive Kalorama mansion in Washington, D.C., all supposedly for the benefit of their daughter Sasha, who was finishing high school. Surprise, surprise, it actually seems to primarily serve as a political watch post for longtime Obama loyalist and consigliere Valerie Jarrett. They did some audience tours and hung out with more billionaires. There were those lucrative Goldman Sachs speeches by the celebrity president (which certainly weren't based on economics anyone would want to trade on).
And all of this has been financed by taxpayers, who pay his $207,000 pension, along with bennies such as unlimited air travel, transition expenses, office expenses, presidential library funds, and lifetime Secret Service detail.
Apparently, to the Obamas, there's no reaching that "certain point" at which "you've made enough money."
For Michelle, just call her "Mooch." Is this really what an ex-presidency is supposed to be like? Hitting the money jackpot? What he makes on his own is his own business (subject to bribery laws), but taxpayers shouldn't be financing this level of movie-star billionaire luxe life. Maybe it's time for some pension reform from Congress. Would be quite a thing to see that idea presented to the House's ruling Democrats.
OBAMAnomics:
Billionaire Class Enjoys 15X the Wage Growth of American Working Class
The billionaire class — the country’s top 0.01 percent of earners — have enjoyed more than 15 times as much wage growth as America’s working and middle class since 1979, new wage data reveals.
Between 1979 and 2017, the wages of the bottom 90 percent — the country’s working and lower middle class — have grown by only about 22 percent, Economic Policy Institute (EPI) researchers find.
Compare that small wage increase over nearly four decades to the booming wage growth of America’s top one percent, who have seen their wages grow more than 155 percent during the same period.
The top 0.01 percent — the country’s billionaire class — saw their wages grow by more than 343 percent in the last four decades, more than 15 times the wage growth of the bottom 90 percent of Americans.
In 1979, America’s working class was earning on average about $29,600 a year. Fast forward to 2017, and the same bottom 90 percent of Americans are earning only about $6,600 more annually.
The almost four decades of wage stagnation among the country’s working and middle class comes as the national immigration policy has allowed for the admission of more than 1.5 million mostly low-skilled immigrants every year.
(Public Citizen)
In the last decade, alone, the U.S. admitted ten million legal immigrants, forcing American workers to compete against a growing population of low-wage workers. Meanwhile, employers are able to reduce wages and drive up their profit margins thanks to the annual low-skilled immigration scheme.
The Washington, DC-imposed mass immigration policy is a boon to corporate executives, Wall Street, big business, and multinational conglomerates as every one percent increase in the immigrant composition of an occupation’s labor force reduces Americans’ hourly wages by 0.4 percent. Every one percent increase in the immigrant workforce reduces Americans’ overall wages by 0.8 percent.
Mass immigration has come at the expense of America’s working and middle class, which has suffered from poor job growth, stagnant wages, and increased public costs to offset the importation of millions of low-skilled foreign nationals.
Four million young Americans enter the workforce every year, but their job opportunities are further diminished as the U.S. imports roughly two new foreign workers for every four American workers who enter the workforce. Even though researchers say 30 percent of the workforce could lose their jobs due to automation by 2030, the U.S. has not stopped importing more than a million foreign nationals every year.
For blue-collar American workers, mass immigration has not only kept wages down but in many cases decreased wages, as Breitbart News reported. Meanwhile, the U.S. continues importing more foreign nationals with whom working-class Americans are forced to compete. In 2016, the U.S. brought in about 1.8 million mostly low-skilled immigrants.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Study: Elite Zip Codes Thrived in Obama Recovery, Rural America Left Behind
Wealthy cities and elite zip codes thrived under the slow-moving economic recovery of President Obama while rural American communities were left behind, a study reveals.
The Economic Innovation Group research, highlighted by Axios, details the massive economic inequality between the country’s coastal city elites and middle America’s working class between the Great Recession in 2007 and Obama’s economic recovery in 2016.
Between 2007 and 2016, the number of residents living in elite zip codes grew by more than ten million, with an overwhelming faction of that population growth being driven by mass immigration where the U.S. imports more than 1.5 million illegal and legal immigrants annually.
The booming 44.5 million immigrant populations are concentrated mostly in the country’s major cities like Los Angeles, California, Miami Florida, and New York City, New York. The rapidly growing U.S. population — driven by immigration — is set to hit 404 millionby 2060, a boon for real estate developers, wealthy investors, and corporations, all of which benefit greatly from dense populations and a flooded labor market.
The economic study found that while the population grew in wealthy cities, America’s rural population fell by nearly 3.5 million residents.
Likewise, by 2016, elite zip codes had a surplus of 3.6 million jobs, which is more than the combined bottom 80 percent of American zip codes. While it only took about five years for wealthy cities to replace the jobs lost by the recession, it took “at risk” regions of the country a decade to recover, and “distressed” U.S. communities are “unlikely ever to recover on current trendlines,” the report predicts.
A map included in the research shows how rich, coastal metropolises have boomed economically while entire portions of middle America have been left behind as job and business gains remain concentrated at the top of the income ladder.
(Economic Innovation Group)
(Economic Innovation Group)
Economic growth among the country’s middle-class counties and middle-class zip codes has considerably trailed national economic growth, the study found.
For example, between 2012 and 2016, there were 4.4 percent more business establishments in the country as a whole. That growth was less than two percent in the median zip code and there was close to no growth in the median county.
The same can be said of employment growth, where U.S. employment grew by about 9.3 percent from 2012 to 2016. In the median zip code, though, employment grew by only 5.5 percent and in the median county, employment grew by less than four percent.
“Nearly three in every five large counties added businesses on net over the period, compared to only one in every five small one,” the report concluded.
Elite zip codes added more business establishments during Obama’s economic recovery, between 2012 and 2016, than the entire bottom 80 percent of zip codes combined. For instance, while more than 180,000 businesses have been added to rich zip codes, the country’s bottom tier has lost more than 13,000 businesses even after the economic recovery.
(Economic Innovation Group)
(Economic Innovation Group)
The gutting of the American manufacturing base, through free trade, has been a driving catalyst for the collapse of the white working class and black Americans. Simultaneously, the outsourcing of the economy has brought major wealth to corporations, tech conglomerates, and Wall Street.
The dramatic decline of U.S. manufacturing at the hands of free trade—where more than 3.4 million American jobs have been lost solely due to free trade with China, not including the American jobs lost due to agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS)—has coincided with growing wage inequality for white and black Americans, a growing number of single mother households, a drop in U.S. marriage rates, a general stagnation of working and middle class wages, and specifically, increased black American unemployment.
“So, the loss of manufacturing work since 1960 represents a steady decline in relatively high-paying jobs for less-educated workers,” recent research from economist Eric D. Gould has noted.
Fast-forward to the modern economy and the wage trend has been the opposite of what it was during the peak of manufacturing in the U.S. An Economic Policy Institute studyfound this year that been 2009 and 2015, the top one percent of American families earned about 26 times as much income as the bottom 99 percent of Americans.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Record high income in 2017 for top one percent of wage earners in US
In 2017, the top one percent of US wage earners received their highest paychecks ever, according to a report by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).
Based on newly released data from the Social Security Administration, the EPI shows that the top one percent of the population saw their paychecks increase by 3.7 percent in 2017—a rate nearly quadruple the bottom 90 percent of the population. The growth was driven by the top 0.1 percent, which includes many CEOs and corporate executives, whose pay increased eight percent and averaged $2,757,000 last year.
The EPI report is only the latest exposure of the gaping inequality between the vast majority of the population and the modern-day aristocracy that rules over them.
The EPI shows that the bottom 90 percent of wage earners have increased their pay by 22.2 percent between 1979 and 2017. Today, this bottom 90 percent makes an average of just $36,182 a year, which is eaten up by the cost of housing and the growing burden of education, health care, and retirement.
Meanwhile, the top one percent has increased its wages by 157 percent during this same period, a rate seven times faster than the other group. This top segment makes an average of $718,766 a year. Those in-between, the 90th to 99th percentile, have increased their wages by 57.4 percent. They now make an average of $152,476 a year—more than four times the bottom 90 percent.
Graph from the Economic Policy Institute
Decades of decaying capitalism have led to this accelerating divide. While the rich accumulate wealth with no restriction, workers’ wages and benefits have been under increasing attack. In 1979, 90 percent of the population took in 70 percent of the nation’s income. But, by 2017, that fell to only 61 percent.
Even more, while the bottom 90 percent of the population may take in 61 percent of the wages, large sections of the workforce today barely pull in any income at all. For example, Social Security Administration data found that the bottom 54 percent of wage earners in the United States, 89.5 million people, make an average of just $15,100 a year. This 54 percent of the population earns only 17 percent of all wages paid in America.
However unequal, these wage inequalities still do not fully present the divide between rich and poor. The ultra-wealthy derive their wealth not primarily from wages, but from assets and equities—principally from the stock market. While the bottom 90 percent of the population made 61 percent of the wages in 2017, they owned even less, just 27 percent of the wealth (according to the World Inequality Report 2018 by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman).
The massive increase in the value of the stock market, which only a small segment of the population participates in, means that the top 10 percent of the population controls 73 percent of all wealth in the United States. Just three men—Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffet and Bill Gates—had more wealth than the bottom half of America combined last year.
Wages are so low in the United States that roughly half of the population falls deeper into debt every year. A Reuters report from July found that the pretax net income (that is, income minus expense) of the bottom 40 percent of the population was an average of negative $11,660. Even the middle quintile of the population, the 40th to 60th percentile, breaks even with an average of only $2,836 a year.
As the Social Security Administration numbers show, 67.4 percent of the population made less than the average wage, $48,250 a year in 2017, a sum that is inadequate to support a family in many cities—especially, with high housing costs, health care, education, and retirement factored in.
For the ruling class, though, workers’ wages are already too much. The volatility of the stock market and the deep fear that the current bull market will collapse has made politicians and businessmen anxious of any sign of wage increases.
In August, wages in the US rose just 0.2 percent above the inflation rate, the highest in nine years. Though the increase was tiny, it was enough to encourage the Federal Reserve to increase the interest rate past two percent for the first time since 2008. Raising interest rates helps to depress workers’ wages by lowering borrowing and spending. As the Financial Times noted, stopping wage growth was “central” to the Federal Reserve’s move.
Further analysis of the Social Security Administration data shows that in 2017, 147,754 people reported wages of 1 million dollars or more—roughly, the top 0.05 percent. Their combined total income of $372 billion could pay for the US federal education budget five times over.
These wages, however large, still pale in comparison to the money the ultra-rich acquire from the stock market. For example, share buybacks and dividend payments, a way of funneling money to shareholders, will eclipse $1 trillion this year.
Whatever the immediate source, the wealth of the rich derives from the great mass of people who do the actual work. Across the United States and around the world, workers, young people, and students have entered into struggle this year over pay, education, health care, immigration, war and democratic rights. This growing movement of the working class must set as its aim confiscating the wealth and power of this tiny parasitic oligarchy. Society’s wealth must be democratically controlled by those who produce it.
THE STAGGERING ECONOMIC INEQUALITY UNDER OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION SERVING THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS.
THE ENTIRE REASON BEHIND AMNESTY IS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED AND PASS ALONG THE REAL COST OF "CHEAP" MEXICAN LABOR TO THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS.
AND IT'S WORKING!
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS
“Calling income and wealth inequality the "great moral issue of our time," Sanders laid out a sweeping, almost unimaginably expensive program to transfer wealth from the richest Americans to the poor and middle class. A $1 trillion public works program to create "13 million good-paying jobs." A $15-an-hour federal minimum wage. "Pay equity" for women. Paid sick leave and vacation for everyone. Higher taxes on the wealthy. Free tuition at all public colleges and universities. A Medicare-for-all single-payer health care system. Expanded Social Security benefits. Universal pre-K.” WASHINGTON EXAMINER
YOU THOUGHT OBAMA INVITED OBAMANOMICS and started the assault on the American middle-class?
NOPE!
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994 Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has helped create the largest prison population in the world.”
Clinton Foundation Put On Watch List Of Suspicious ‘Charities’
The report found that the growth of global inequality has accelerated sharply since the 2008 financial crisis, as the values of financial assets have soared while wages have stagnated and declined.
Millionaires projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth by 2019
By Gabriel Black 18 June 2015
Households with more than a million (US) dollars in private wealth are projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth in 2019 according to a new report by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
This large percentage, however, only includes cash, savings, money market funds and listed securities held through managed investments—collectively known as “private wealth.” It leaves out businesses, residences and luxury goods, which comprise a substantial portion of the rich’s net worth.
At the end of 2014, millionaire households owned about 41 percent of global private wealth, according to BCG. This means that collectively these 17 million households owned roughly $67.24 trillion in liquid assets, or about $4 million per household.
In total, the world added $17.5 trillion of new private wealth between 2013 and 2014. The report notes that nearly three quarters of all these gains came from previously existing wealth. In other words, the vast majority of money gained has been due to pre-existing assets increasing in value—not the creation of new material things.
This trend is the result of the massive infusions of cheap credit into the financial markets by central banks. The policy of “quantitative easing” has led to a dramatic expansion of the stock market even while global economic growth has slumped.
While the wealth of the rich is growing at a breakneck pace, there is a stratification of growth within the super wealthy, skewed towards the very top.
In 2014, those with over $100 million in private wealth saw their wealth increase 11 percent in one year alone. Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion in 2014, 6 percent of the world’s private wealth. According to the report, “This top segment is expected to be the fastest growing, in both the number of households and total wealth.” They are expected to see 12 percent compound growth on their wealth in the next five years.
Those families with wealth between $20 and $100 million also rose substantially in 2014—seeing a 34 percent increase in their wealth in twelve short months. They now own $9 trillion. In five years they will surpass $14 trillion according to the report.
Coming in last in the “high net worth” population are those with between $1 million and $20 million in private wealth. These households are expected to see their wealth grow by 7.2 percent each year, going from $49 trillion to $70.1 trillion dollars, several percentage points below the highest bracket’s 12 percent growth rate.
The gains in private wealth of the ultra-rich stand in sharp contrast to the experience of billions of people around the globe. While wealth accumulation has sharply sped up for the ultra-wealthy, the vast majority of people have not even begun to recover from the past recession.
An Oxfam report from January, for example, shows that the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population went from having about 56 percent of the world’s wealth in 2010 to having 52 percent of it in 2014. Meanwhile the top 1 percent saw its wealth rise from 44 to 48 percent of the world’s wealth.
In 2014 the Russell Sage Foundation found that between 2003 and 2013, the median household net worth of those in the United States fell from $87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36 percent. While the rich also saw their wealth drop during the recession, they are more than making that money back. Between 2009 and 2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in the US went to the top 1 percent. This is the most distorted post-recession income gain on record.
As the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has noted, in the United States “between 2007 and 2013, net wealth fell on average 2.3 percent, but it fell ten-times more (26 percent) for those at the bottom 20 percent of the distribution.” The 2015 report concludes that “low-income households have not benefited at all from income growth.”
Another report by Knight Frank, looks at those with wealth exceeding $30 million. The report notes that in 2014 these 172,850 ultra-high-net-worth individuals increased their collective wealth by $700 billion. Their total wealth now rests at $20.8 trillion.
The report also draws attention to the disconnection between the rich and the actual economy. It states that the growth of this ultra-wealthy population “came despite weaker-than-anticipated global economic growth. During 2014 the IMF was forced to downgrade its forecast increase for world output from 3.7 percent to 3.3 percent.”
DICK MORRIS:
On America’s First Family of Crime….. NO! Not the Bushes again!
Clinton global hucksterism – Selling out America like they sold out the Lincoln Bedroom.
HILLARY CLINTON: CRONY CLASS’ “Hope and Change” huckster’s successor!
“I serve Obama’s cronies first, illegals second and together we will loot the American middle-class to double our figures. It’s called BAILOUTS! Evita Peron Clinton
At this point, Clinton is the choice of most multimillionaires to be the next occupant of the White House. A recent CNBC poll of 750 millionaires found 53 percent support for Clinton in a contest with Republican Jeb Bush, 14 points better than Obama’s showing in the 2012 election with the same group.
Sen. Bernie Sanders – America’s answer to Wall Street’s looting, the war on the American middle-class and jobs for legals!
“At this point, Clinton is the choice of most multimillionaires to be the next occupant of the White House. A recent CNBC poll of 750 millionaires found 53 percent support for Clinton in a contest with Republican Jeb Bush, 14 points better than Obama’s showing in the 2012 election with the same group.”
THE CRONY CLASS:
OBAMACLINTONOMICS was created by BILLARY CLINTON!
Income inequality grows FOUR TIMES FASTER under Obama than Bush.
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994 Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has helped create the largest prison population in the world.”
*
“Calling income and wealth inequality the "great moral issue of our time," Sanders laid out a sweeping, almost unimaginably expensive program to transfer wealth from the richest Americans to the poor and middle class. A $1 trillion public works program to create "13 million good-paying jobs." A $15-an-hour federal minimum wage. "Pay equity" for women. Paid sick leave and vacation for everyone. Higher taxes on the wealthy. Free tuition at all public colleges and universities. A Medicare-for-all single-payer health care system. Expanded Social Security benefits. Universal pre-K.” WASHINGTON EXAMINER
OBAMA’S WALL STREET and the LOOTING of AMERICA – SECOND TERM
The corporate cash hoard has likewise reached a new record, hitting an estimated $1.79 trillion in the fourth quarter of last year, up from $1.77 trillion in the previous quarter. Instead of investing the money, however, companies are using it to buy back their own stock and pay out record dividends.
Megan McArdle Discusses How America's Elites Are Rigging the Rules - Newsweek/The Daily Beast special correspondent Megan McArdle joins Scott Rasmussen for a discussion on America's new Mandarin class.
WHO REALLY PAYS FOR THE CRIMES OF OBAMA’S CRONY DONORS???
LAST WEEK BARACK OBAMA CELEBRATED FIVE YEARS OF THE LOOTING BY HIS WALL STREET BANKSTERS… now it’s back to cutting social programs to pay for all that rape by the 1% he represents. The following week it will be back to the AMNESTY HOAX to legalize Mexico’s looting of America and make it legal that Mexicans get our jobs first… they already do!
As in previous budget crises under the Obama administration, the events are being stage-managed by the two corporate-controlled parties to give the illusion of partisan gridlock and confrontation over principles—in this case, whether to go forward with the implementation of the Obama health care program—while behind the scenes all factions within the ruling elite agree that massive cuts must be carried through in basic federal social programs.
OBAMA’S CRONY CAPITALISM – A NATION RULED BY CRIMINAL WALL STREET BANKSTERS AND OBAMA DONORS
Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies
by Michelle Malkin
In her shocking new book, Malkin digs deep into the records of President Obama's staff, revealing corrupt dealings, questionable pasts, and abuses of power throughout his administration.
PATRICK BUCHANAN
After Obama has completely destroyed the American economy, handed millions of jobs to illegals and billions of dollars in welfare to illegals…. BUT WHAT COMES NEXT?
Millionaires projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth by 2019
By Gabriel Black 18 June 2015
Households with more than a million (US) dollars in private wealth are projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth in 2019 according to a new report by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
This large percentage, however, only includes cash, savings, money market funds and listed securities held through managed investments—collectively known as “private wealth.” It leaves out businesses, residences and luxury goods, which comprise a substantial portion of the rich’s net worth.
At the end of 2014, millionaire households owned about 41 percent of global private wealth, according to BCG. This means that collectively these 17 million households owned roughly $67.24 trillion in liquid assets, or about $4 million per household.
In total, the world added $17.5 trillion of new private wealth between 2013 and 2014. The report notes that nearly three quarters of all these gains came from previously existing wealth. In other words, the vast majority of money gained has been due to pre-existing assets increasing in value—not the creation of new material things.
This trend is the result of the massive infusions of cheap credit into the financial markets by central banks. The policy of “quantitative easing” has led to a dramatic expansion of the stock market even while global economic growth has slumped.
While the wealth of the rich is growing at a breakneck pace, there is a stratification of growth within the super wealthy, skewed towards the very top.
In 2014, those with over $100 million in private wealth saw their wealth increase 11 percent in one year alone. Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion in 2014, 6 percent of the world’s private wealth. According to the report, “This top segment is expected to be the fastest growing, in both the number of households and total wealth.” They are expected to see 12 percent compound growth on their wealth in the next five years.
Those families with wealth between $20 and $100 million also rose substantially in 2014—seeing a 34 percent increase in their wealth in twelve short months. They now own $9 trillion. In five years they will surpass $14 trillion according to the report.
Coming in last in the “high net worth” population are those with between $1 million and $20 million in private wealth. These households are expected to see their wealth grow by 7.2 percent each year, going from $49 trillion to $70.1 trillion dollars, several percentage points below the highest bracket’s 12 percent growth rate.
The gains in private wealth of the ultra-rich stand in sharp contrast to the experience of billions of people around the globe. While wealth accumulation has sharply sped up for the ultra-wealthy, the vast majority of people have not even begun to recover from the past recession.
An Oxfam report from January, for example, shows that the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population went from having about 56 percent of the world’s wealth in 2010 to having 52 percent of it in 2014. Meanwhile the top 1 percent saw its wealth rise from 44 to 48 percent of the world’s wealth.
In 2014 the Russell Sage Foundation found that between 2003 and 2013, the median household net worth of those in the United States fell from $87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36 percent. While the rich also saw their wealth drop during the recession, they are more than making that money back. Between 2009 and 2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in the US went to the top 1 percent. This is the most distorted post-recession income gain on record.
As the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has noted, in the United States “between 2007 and 2013, net wealth fell on average 2.3 percent, but it fell ten-times more (26 percent) for those at the bottom 20 percent of the distribution.” The 2015 report concludes that “low-income households have not benefited at all from income growth.”
Another report by Knight Frank, looks at those with wealth exceeding $30 million. The report notes that in 2014 these 172,850 ultra-high-net-worth individuals increased their collective wealth by $700 billion. Their total wealth now rests at $20.8 trillion.
The report also draws attention to the disconnection between the rich and the actual economy. It states that the growth of this ultra-wealthy population “came despite weaker-than-anticipated global economic growth. During 2014 the IMF was forced to downgrade its forecast increase for world output from 3.7 percent to 3.3 percent.”
THE CRONY CLASS:
OBAMACLINTONOMICS was created by BILLARY CLINTON!
Income inequality grows FOUR TIMES FASTER under Obama than Bush.
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994 Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has helped create the largest prison population in the world.”
*
“Calling income and wealth inequality the "great moral issue of our time," Sanders laid out a sweeping, almost unimaginably expensive program to transfer wealth from the richest Americans to the poor and middle class. A $1 trillion public works program to create "13 million good-paying jobs." A $15-an-hour federal minimum wage. "Pay equity" for women. Paid sick leave and vacation for everyone. Higher taxes on the wealthy. Free tuition at all public colleges and universities. A Medicare-for-all single-payer health care system. Expanded Social Security benefits. Universal pre-K.” WASHINGTON EXAMINER
OBAMA’S WALL STREET and the LOOTING of AMERICA – SECOND TERM
The corporate cash hoard has likewise reached a new record, hitting an estimated $1.79 trillion in the fourth quarter of last year, up from $1.77 trillion in the previous quarter. Instead of investing the money, however, companies are using it to buy back their own stock and pay out record dividends.
Megan McArdle Discusses How America's Elites Are Rigging the Rules - Newsweek/The Daily Beast special correspondent Megan McArdle joins Scott Rasmussen for a discussion on America's new Mandarin class.
After Obama has completely destroyed the American economy, handed millions of jobs to illegals and billions of dollars in welfare to illegals…. BUT WHAT COMES NEXT?
Millionaires projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth by 2019
By Gabriel Black 18 June 2015
Households with more than a million (US) dollars in private wealth are projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth in 2019 according to a new report by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
This large percentage, however, only includes cash, savings, money market funds and listed securities held through managed investments—collectively known as “private wealth.” It leaves out businesses, residences and luxury goods, which comprise a substantial portion of the rich’s net worth.
At the end of 2014, millionaire households owned about 41 percent of global private wealth, according to BCG. This means that collectively these 17 million households owned roughly $67.24 trillion in liquid assets, or about $4 million per household.
In total, the world added $17.5 trillion of new private wealth between 2013 and 2014. The report notes that nearly three quarters of all these gains came from previously existing wealth. In other words, the vast majority of money gained has been due to pre-existing assets increasing in value—not the creation of new material things.
This trend is the result of the massive infusions of cheap credit into the financial markets by central banks. The policy of “quantitative easing” has led to a dramatic expansion of the stock market even while global economic growth has slumped.
While the wealth of the rich is growing at a breakneck pace, there is a stratification of growth within the super wealthy, skewed towards the very top.
In 2014, those with over $100 million in private wealth saw their wealth increase 11 percent in one year alone. Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion in 2014, 6 percent of the world’s private wealth. According to the report, “This top segment is expected to be the fastest growing, in both the number of households and total wealth.” They are expected to see 12 percent compound growth on their wealth in the next five years.
Those families with wealth between $20 and $100 million also rose substantially in 2014—seeing a 34 percent increase in their wealth in twelve short months. They now own $9 trillion. In five years they will surpass $14 trillion according to the report.
Coming in last in the “high net worth” population are those with between $1 million and $20 million in private wealth. These households are expected to see their wealth grow by 7.2 percent each year, going from $49 trillion to $70.1 trillion dollars, several percentage points below the highest bracket’s 12 percent growth rate.
The gains in private wealth of the ultra-rich stand in sharp contrast to the experience of billions of people around the globe. While wealth accumulation has sharply sped up for the ultra-wealthy, the vast majority of people have not even begun to recover from the past recession.
An Oxfam report from January, for example, shows that the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population went from having about 56 percent of the world’s wealth in 2010 to having 52 percent of it in 2014. Meanwhile the top 1 percent saw its wealth rise from 44 to 48 percent of the world’s wealth.
In 2014 the Russell Sage Foundation found that between 2003 and 2013, the median household net worth of those in the United States fell from $87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36 percent. While the rich also saw their wealth drop during the recession, they are more than making that money back. Between 2009 and 2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in the US went to the top 1 percent. This is the most distorted post-recession income gain on record.
As the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has noted, in the United States “between 2007 and 2013, net wealth fell on average 2.3 percent, but it fell ten-times more (26 percent) for those at the bottom 20 percent of the distribution.” The 2015 report concludes that “low-income households have not benefited at all from income growth.”
Another report by Knight Frank, looks at those with wealth exceeding $30 million. The report notes that in 2014 these 172,850 ultra-high-net-worth individuals increased their collective wealth by $700 billion. Their total wealth now rests at $20.8 trillion.
The report also draws attention to the disconnection between the rich and the actual economy. It states that the growth of this ultra-wealthy population “came despite weaker-than-anticipated global economic growth. During 2014 the IMF was forced to downgrade its forecast increase for world output from 3.7 percent to 3.3 percent.”
OBAMA-CLINTONomics: the never end war on the American middle-class. But we still get the tax bills for the looting of their Wall Street cronies and their bailouts and billions for Mexico’s welfare state in our borders.
While the wealth of the rich is growing at a breakneck pace, there is a stratification of growth within the super wealthy, skewed towards the very top.
In 2014, those with over $100 million in private wealth saw their wealth increase 11 percent in one year alone. Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion in 2014, 6 percent of the world’s private wealth. According to the report, “This top segment is expected to be the fastest growing, in both the number of households and total wealth.” They are expected to see 12 percent compound growth on their wealth in the next five years.
In 2014 the Russell Sage Foundation found that between
2003 and 2013, the median household net worth of those in
the United States fell from $87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36
percent. While the rich also saw their wealth drop during the
recession, they are more than making that money back.
Between 2009 and 2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in
the US went to the top 1 percent. This is the most distorted
post-recession income gain on record.
INCOME PLUMMETS UNDER OBAMA AND HIS WALL STREET CRONIES
collapse of household income in the US… STILL BILLIONS IN WELFARE HANDED TO ILLEGALS… they already get our jobs and are voting for more!
“The yearly income of a typical US household dropped by a massive 12 percent, or $6,400, in the six years between 2007 and 2013. This is just one of the findings of the 2013 Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances released Thursday, which documents a sharp decline in working class living standards and a further concentration of wealth in the hands of the rich and the super-rich.”
"During the month, some 432,000 people in
the US gave up looking for a job."
AMNESTY! AMNESTY! AMNESTY! "The American phenomenon of record stock values fueling an ever greater concentration of wealth at the very top of society, while the economy is starved of productive investment, the social infrastructure crumbles, and working class living standards are driven down by entrenched unemployment, wage-cutting and government austerity policies, is part of a broader global process." HILLARY CLINTON'S BIGGEST DONORS ARE OBAMA'S CRIMINAL CRONY BANKSTERS! "A defining expression of this crisis is the dominance of financial speculation and parasitism, to the point where a narrow international financial aristocracy plunders society’s resources in order to further enrich itself." Federal Reserve documents stagnant state of US economy
Federal Reserve documents stagnant state of US economy
By Barry Grey 21 July 2015
The US Federal Reserve Board last week released its semiannual Monetary Policy Report to Congress, providing an assessment of the state of the American economy and outlining the central bank’s monetary policy going forward. The report, along with Fed Chair Janet Yellen’s testimony before both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as a speech by Yellen the previous week in Cleveland, present a grim picture of the reality behind the official talk of economic “recovery.” In her prepared remarks to Congress last Wednesday and Thursday, Yellen said, “Looking forward, prospects are favorable for further improvement in the US labor market and the economy more broadly.”
She reiterated her assurances that while the Fed would likely begin to raise its benchmark federal funds interest rate later this year from the 0.0 to 0.25 percent level it has maintained since shortly after the 2008 financial crash, it would do so only slowly and gradually, keeping short-term rates well below historically normal levels for an indefinite period.This was an expected, but nevertheless welcome, signal to the American financial elite, which has enjoyed a spectacular rise in corporate profits, stock values and personal wealth since 2009 thanks to the flood of virtually free money provided by the Fed.
"But as Yellen’s remarks and the Fed report indicate, the explosion of asset values and wealth accumulation at the very top of the economic ladder has occurred alongside an intractable and continuing slump in the real economy."In her prepared testimony to the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking Committee, Yellen noted the following features of the performance of the US economy over the first six months of 2015: * A sharp decline in the rate of economic growth as compared to 2014, including an actual contraction in the first quarter of the year. * A substantial slackening (19 percent) in average monthly job-creation, from 260,000 last year to 210,000 thus far in 2015. * Declines in domestic spending and industrial production. In her July 10 speech to the City Club of Cleveland, Yellen cited an even longer list of negative indices, including: * Growth in real gross domestic product (GDP) since the official beginning of the recovery in June, 2009 has averaged a mere 2.25 percent per year, a full one percentage point less than the average rate over the 25 years preceding what Yellen called the “Great Recession.” * While manufacturing employment nationwide has increased by about 850,000 since the end of 2009, there are still almost 1.5 million fewer manufacturing jobs than just before the recession. * Real GDP and industrial production both declined in the first quarter of this year. Industrial production continued to fall in April and May. * Residential construction (despite extremely low mortgage rates by historical standards) has remained “quote soft.” * Productivity growth has been “weak,” largely because “Business owners and managers… have not substantially increased their capital expenditures,” and “Businesses are holding large amounts of cash on their balance sheets.” * Reflecting the general stagnation and even slump in the real economy, core inflation rose by only 1.2 percent over the past 12 months. The Monetary Policy Report issued by the Fed includes facts that are, if anything, even more alarming, including: * “Labor productivity in the business sector is reported to have declined in both the fourth quarter of 2014 and the first quarter of 2015.” * “Exports fell markedly in the first quarter, held back by lackluster growth abroad.” * “Overall construction activity remains well below its pre-recession levels.” * “Since the recession began, the gains in… nominal compensation [workers’ wages and benefits] have fallen well short of their pre-recession averages, and growth of real compensation has fallen short of productivity growth over much of this period.” * “Overall business investment has turned down as investment in the energy sector has plunged. Business investment fell at an annual rate of 2 percent in first quarter… Business outlays for structures outside of the energy sector also declined in the first quarter…”
The report incorporates the Fed’s projections for US economic growth, published following the June meeting of the central bank’s policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee. They include a downward revision of the projection for 2015 to 1.8 percent-2.0 percent from the March projection of 2.3 percent to 2.7 percent.
That the US economy continues to stagnate and even contract is indicated by two surveys released last week while Yellen was testifying before Congress. The Fed reported that factory production failed to increase in June for the second straight month and output in the auto sector fell 3.7 percent. The Commerce Department reported that retail sales unexpectedly fell in June, declining by 0.3 percent. These statistics follow the employment report for June, which showed that the share of the US working-age population either employed or actively looking for work, known as the labor force participation rate, fell to 62.6 percent, its lowest level in 38 years. During the month, some 432,000 people in the US gave up looking for a job.
The disastrous figures on business investment are perhaps the most telling indicators of the underlying crisis of the capitalist system. The Fed report attributes the sharp decline so far this year primarily to the dramatic fall in oil prices and resulting contraction in investment and construction in the energy sector. But the plunge in oil prices is itself a symptom of a general slowdown in the world economy. Moreover, a dramatic decline in productive investment is common to all of the major industrialized economies of Europe and North America. In its World Economic Outlook of last April, the International Monetary Fund for the first time since the 2008 financial crisis acknowledged that there was no prospect for an early return to pre-recession levels of economic growth, linking this bleak prognosis to a general and pronounced decline in productive investment.The American phenomenon of record stock values fueling an ever greater concentration of wealth at the very top of society, while the economy is starved of productive investment, the social infrastructure crumbles, and working class living standards are driven down by entrenched unemployment, wage-cutting and government austerity policies, is part of a broader global process. The economic crisis in the US and internationally is not simply a conjunctural downturn. It is a systemic crisis of global capitalism, centered in the US. A defining expression of this crisis is the dominance of financial speculation and parasitism, to the point where a narrow international financial aristocracy plunders society’s resources in order to further enrich itself.
While the economy is starved of productive investment, entirely parasitic and socially destructive activities such as stock buybacks, dividend hikes and mergers and acquisitions return to pre-crash levels and head for new heights. US corporations have spent more on stock buybacks so far this year than on factories and equipment. The intractable nature of this crisis, within the framework of capitalism, is underscored by the IMF’s updated World Economic Outlook, released earlier this month, which projects that 2015 will be the worst year for economic growth since the height of the recession in 2009.
It sounds to me as though Judge Blakey is a true believer in the wonderfulness of Barack Obama, so that nay monument to him is a public benefit.
Obama-appointee to federal bench dismisses lawsuit against transfer of park land to Obama's personal monument
The monument to Barack Obama, the community organizer turned president, has vanquished the community organizers who attempted to stop its takeover of public land.
Federal Judge John Robert Blakey, appointed by Barack Obama and confirmed by the Senate in 2014, wants construction to begin “without delay” on the “Obama Presidential Center” (OPC) on former park land belonging to the citizens of Chicago. The OPC should not be confused with a presidential library, as it will not contain any official records of the Obama presidency and will not be under the control of the National Archives or any governmental body at all. It is strictly a private project, under the control of a board of Obama acolytes unaccountable to the public and will function as a monument to Obama.
In a move the Chicago Tribune called “surprising,” Judge Blakey used strong language to dismiss the lawsuit.
BLOG: SPOKEN LIKE A TRUE COMMUNIST PARTY MEMBER!
“The facts are clear in this case and the law is more settled than the parties are suggesting,” Blakey said from the bench.
“Everyone’s had their day in court. … There’s been no rush to judgment,” he said before declaring there should be “no delay in construction. This case is dismissed.”
He also dismissed criticism from the plaintiffs that the museum is a personal monument, not accountable to the public:
“The museum itself is the public benefit,” he said.
“The record is swelling with evidence of the benefits, not only of this particular museum, but also to its location in a park generally and to this particular location,” he said.
Blakey announced his ruling after an hour of oral arguments at the Dirksen Federal Courthouse. He concluded in a 52-page written opinion that “the facts do not warrant a trial, and construction should commence without delay.”
However, Judge Blakey’s desire to see groundbreaking and construction right away is not likely to be realized.
…lawyers for the advocacy group that filed the lawsuit, Protect Our Parks, immediately told reporters they would take the case to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
And before construction can take place, the project must also go through what has been a long-running federal review, mandated because Jackson Park is on the National Register of Historic Places.
Once the review is done, there are more time-eating steps, including a public comment period to consider the findings, time to reply and time to weigh plans to mitigate adverse impacts, if any, caused by the development.
Also at issue is another aspect of community organizing: a “community benefits agreement” in which a powerful party (in this case, the rich Obama Foundation backed by the powers-that-be) agrees to payoff community groups. The Sun-Times notes that Chicago’s brand-new mayor wants one:
On top of that, it’s not known how Mayor Lori Lightfoot intends to wrangle a pledged community benefits agreement from the Obama Presidential Foundation, and whether she is on board with the proposed $174 million related-traffic redo plan.
The foundation and former President Barack Obama oppose a benefits deal.
The specifics behind the ruling are explained by the Chicago Maroon, of the University of Chicago:
Public trust doctrine originates from the common law principle of maintaining public access to navigable waterways for commerce, which in Illinois includes submerged land a mile outward from Chicago into Lake Michigan. This land cannot be transferred from the state to a private entity, as it would constitute “private encroachment and interruption,” against public trust doctrine.
Blakey responded in the ruling, “Plaintiffs invite this Court to find that because the OPC site may have been submerged approximately 11,000 years ago, it constitutes ‘formerly submerged’ land for purposes of the public trust doctrine. Respectfully, the Court declines the Plaintiff’s invitation.”
POP’s second major argument called for “heightened scrutiny” in this case due to potential conflicts of interest between the Obamas and the City of Chicago that calls into question the public benefit of the OPC.
Blakey was unconvinced. “Plaintiffs attempt to twist this public benefit into a private purpose, arguing that the Museum’s mission merely ‘seeks to preserve and enhance the legacy of the former President and his wife’ rather than benefit the public,” he argued.
He dismissed POP’s assessment of the Obamas’ intentions behind the OPC, stating, “This Court cannot accept such a mischaracterization.”
It sounds to me as though Judge Blakey is a true believer in the wonderfulness of Barack Obama, so that nay monument to him is a public benefit. Obama Center Breaks Pledge Not to Remove Trees in Jackson Park
The Obama Presidential Center has already started destroying dozens of age-old trees in Chicago’s Jackson Park, despite a pledge not to start removing trees until all legal paths are cleared.
The City of Chicago, the park district, and the Obama Center agreed to wait until a handful of lawsuits have developed before beginning preparations for construction, but the Chicago Sun-Timesreports that the Obama Center’s promise has essentially been broken because the Chicago Park District has already begun destroying baseball diamonds and tearing out trees as part of the work associated with the Obama complex construction.
In January, the Obama Center promised that until the foundation had all permits secured and all lawsuits were satisfied, “there will be no trees removed or cut down.” But now, the Center claims that only the 19.3 acres upon which the center will sit is included in that promise, and the trees destroyed by the Park District are not on that acreage.
The Center’s claim is technically accurate. But the paper explains that the decades-old trees are being destroyed to make room for a track field that is being displaced by the impending construction of the Obama Center. One did not need to transpire without the other, so the moving of the track field is inextricably tied to the Obama Center, critics note.
The paper also points out that the Obama Center is impacting far and away more acreage and city facilities than just the area upon which the complex will eventually sit.
The Times wrote:
Since former President Barack Obama picked Jackson Park for his center in August 2016, a series of intertwined projects in and around Jackson Park has made the impact much larger than just the 19.3 acres to be occupied by the center, including retooling roadways and relocating athletic fields.
Despite claims by Obama representatives, the famed Jackson Park, designed by landscape architects Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux in 1893, will see major alterations even though the park was placed on the federal National Register of Historic Places in 1972. And preservationists say the Obama Center is destroying the carefully planned parklands across the city’s Lake Shore region.
The claim that the Center will not force the city, state, or federal governments to spend tax dollars on the complex is also coming up false.
According to the Wall Street Journal, taxpayers are now being asked for nearly two hundred million dollars for costs resulting from the Obama Center.
“Now comes news that Illinois taxpayers will put up at least $174 million for roadway and transit reconfigurations needed to accommodate the Obama Center. If you don’t live in Illinois, you may be smirking — but you’ll be footing the bill, too,” the Journalreported on August 10. “Eighty percent of such spending is generally reimbursed by the federal government, and Illinois officials confirmed to me that they expect to receive $139 million from Washington if they request it.”
Former Obama chief of staff and current embattled Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel thinks the $174 million in tax dollars to be spent on the center is “money well spent.”
Oddly, the city will not even enjoy rent money from the sprawling Obama Center because another sweetheart deal the city agreed to when it entered into the pact with the Obama Foundation maintains that the Center will pay only one dollar for the land. And that is one dollar only, in perpetuity–not per month or even per year, just one single dollar.
The one-dollar rent and the $174 million in taxpayer funds certainly do seem like great deals, indeed–but for Obama, not for the American people or the citizens of Chicago.
PSYCHOPATH BARACK OBAMA HAS LONG CONCEALED HIS PATH TO RICHES AND POWER BECAUSE MOST OF THESE PATHS WANDER DOWN THE TRAILS OF HIS CRONY BANKSTERS AND MUSLIM DICTATORS
"Obama’s presidential papers will not be housed there, and no scholars will be afforded the opportunity to explore the history of his presidency."
The Obama Presidential Center planned for Chicago is nothing more than a personal monument to Barack Obama and a center for political indoctrination in his radical views. It serves no public purpose the way that a presidential library would. Obama’s presidential papers will not be housed there, and no scholars will be afforded the opportunity to explore the history of his presidency.
And, this is receiving vast public subsidies, despite assurances that it would be privately funded. Barack and Michelle Obama have been playing a major role in its design, in a fashion reminiscent of a dictator putting up monuments to himself in some third world country. As the revised design stands, it will look like a cenotaph bizarrely erected before the death and burial of its principal.
I have written several pieces about the folly of the OPC. But I am delighted to be joined in this by the Wall Street Journal. In an article there, Mark Glennon challenges the vast subsidies that all American taxpayers will be affording this personal and political endeavor:
Illinois taxpayers will put up at least $174 million for roadway and transit reconfigurations needed to accommodate the Obama Center. If you don’t live in Illinois, you may be smirking—but you’ll be footing the bill, too. Eighty percent of such spending is generally reimbursed by the federal government, and Illinois officials confirmed to me that they expect to receive $139 million from Washington if they request it.
Bait and switch
Taxpayers were softened up by a bait and switch strategy:
In a 2014 request for proposal, the Obama Foundation said that the planned presidential library “will include an Institute that will enhance the pursuit of the President’s initiatives beyond 2017.” This institute now seems to have taken over the project. As the Chicago Tribune reported in February: “Obama said he envisions his center as a place where young people from around the world can meet each other, get training and prepare to become the next generation of leaders.” No doubt, his definition of “leaders” will be political.
Which raises the question of why the state and city are giving the Obama Center official support. Back when it was still being sold as an official presidential library, the city of Chicago took steps to allow the project to be built in Jackson Park. Under a deal approved by the City Council in May, the Obama Foundation will lease 19.3 acres in perpetuity for $1.
One dollar for perpetual use of a huge amount of priceless lakefront land.
Fortunately, this is not going to happen without a legal challenge:
A nonprofit group called Protect our Parks has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that this violates state law. The suit calls the Obama Center a “bait and switch,” since the “public purpose” of a presidential library no longer exists.
Last fall WTTW, a Chicago public television station, was reporting skeptically on “preliminary plans” for Illinois to cough up $100 million to “assist” the Obama Center: “How could a public financing proposal fly in a state that is bleeding red ink, especially when the Obamas have promised 100 percent private funding?”
The Obama Foundation responds that no public money will flow into its coffers (the tax deductibility of donations is another matter). But a hundred and seenty-four million taxpayer dollars spent on construction specifically designed for the facility is a subsidy, period.
Hat tip: Michael Nadler
Democrats Allow Communists to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation
The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) is infiltrating the Democratic Partyacross the country. Communists, some openly, some secretly, are working in Democratic campaigns, holding Democratic Party leadership positions, and even running for public office on the Democratic Party ballot line.
They also are pushing their policies inside the Democratic Party, to the point where it’s almost impossible to distinguish between the CPUSA and Democratic Party programs. Many comrades work closely with influential congressmembers or U.S. senators.
The CPUSA supports China, Cuba, Venezuela, and the Russian Communist Party—all enemies of the United States. The CPUSA still advocates for the “overthrow of the capitalist class” in the United States, yet the Democrats do absolutely zilch to keep the communists out of their party.
CPUSA infiltration of the Democratic Party is widespread—it affects every region where the communists have a significant presence.
Support and Infiltration
In the San Diego area, two CPUSA members, Carl Wood and Emiliana Sparaco, recently ran for the California Democratic Party Central Committee, from Assembly Districts 76 and 80, respectively.
Wood, a lifelong communist, intended to push for the “Healthy California Act that provides improved Medicare for All, a Living Wage of at least $15/hour, the Green New Deal for a healthy environment with good new jobs in a peace economy, and legislation to promote strong Unions.” In 1999, California’s then-Democratic Gov. Gray Davis appointed Wood to a six-year term on the California Public Utilities Commission, where he “played a significant role in protecting California from the consequences of its disastrous deregulation experiment.”
Sparaco, a former leader of the Young Communist League, traveled to Sochi, Russia, in October 2017, as part of a U.S. communist delegation to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution—keynoted by Vladimir Putin himself. In 2018, Sparaco was a leading activist in Flip the 49th, which helped Democrat Mike Levin win California’s 49th Congressional District.
In Northern California, Sacramento area Democratic Rep. Ami Bera, who serves on the House Foreign Relations Committee, has won several super-close elections with communist help. For example, in 2014, CPUSA members Juan Lopez, Cassie Lopez, Michelle Kern, Nell Ranta, and Mik Diddams canvassed and phone-banked out of Bera’s campaign headquarters.
Further up the left coast in rural Washington state, communists Tim and Joyce Wheeler and Tim’s sister Marion “Honeybee” Wheeler Burns have been active in the Clallam County Democrats for decades. They campaignedfor Barack Obama, U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, and local Rep. Derek Kilmer. Timtraveled to international communist gatherings for many years as editor of the CPUSA’s People’s World. His father, Don Wheeler, betrayed American secrets to Moscow during World War II while working for U.S. intelligence.
Over in Minnesota, local CPUSA leaders the late Doris and Erwin Marquitwere very active inside the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (Minnesota’s Democratic Party affiliate). The couple helped raise funds for congressional aspirant Keith Ellison in their home three times. In 2006, they used their political influence to help get Ellison elected to Congress.
Another Minnesota communist, Mark Froemke, is very active in the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. Froemke has enjoyed good relations with former Minnesota Sen. Al Franken and former Gov. Mark Dayton.
Swinging down to Chicago, we see CPUSA members such as Pepe Lozanoworking in the successful Chuy Garcia for Congress campaign. CPUSA member Abdul-Aziz Hassan has worked for 22nd Ward Alderman Ricardo Munoz, a Democrat, for several years. Even CPUSA leader John Bachtellonce served as a precinct chairman for U.S. Senate candidate Obama.
In Ohio, former CPUSA chairman Rick Nagin worked inside the Democratic Party for decades. In 2006, Nagin was on the staff of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations 2006 campaign that first elected Sherrod Brown. Nagin also worked closely with Rep. Dennis Kucinich for many years. Nagin has run several times for public office on the Democratic Party ticket and served as the Democratic Leader in Cleveland Ward 14 and on the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party Executive Committee.
In St. Louis, the CPUSA has worked closely with many black Democratic candidates through its front group the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists. Longtime CPUSA member Glenn Burleigh is very active in the Democratic Party and has managed several Democratic campaigns, including Robin Wright-Jones for State Senate and Lewis Reed for St. Louis mayor. Missouri CPUSA leader Tony Pecinovsky will be standing for St. Louis Alderman in 2020, presumably as a Democrat.
Over in New York City, the communists have been working inside the Democratic Party since at least the 1930s.
Former communist Dan Margolis was active in New York City elections, including as the mid-Staten Island coordinator for the 2004 Democratic Party congressional campaign.
According to Margolis’s blog: “I ended up working on many Democratic campaigns during by time in the CPUSA: John Kerry’s, Obama’s twice, [Senator] Kirsten Gillibrand’s, Fernando Ferrer’s (he nearly beat Michael Bloomberg to become mayor of NYC), and a host of others known mostly to NYC residents. I am proud to say that I wrote the first official document in the CPUSA calling for support of Obama in the primaries: I wrote this as chair of the party in Brooklyn, in 2007.”
In 2014, the CPUSA’s Elizabeth Gurley Flynn Club wrote: “Sometimes, we must be free to disagree with Democrats on selected issues, even those whom we have supported, such as Obama on a national level, Jerrold Nadler, a progressive congressman from Manhattan, and Bill DeBlasio, who is New York City’s new progressive mayor. For example, we should be free to advocate a general reduction of our country’s military and to disagree with the Obama Administration’s expansion of some sections of our military forces.”
Across the river in New Jersey, communists such as Estevan Nembhard and Carol Widom were active in Democrat Ras Baraka’s successful 2014 campaign for the mayoralty of Newark. Baraka is the son of one-time CPUSA member Amina Baraka.
Connecticut is the CPUSA’s “jewel in the crown.” The party almost runs the state. The CPUSA is close to Gov. Ned Lamont, as it was to his predecessor Dannel Malloy. Both U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Sen. Chris Murphy are close to the party. Sen. Murphy employed CPUSA member Max Goldman as an aide for nearly three years, while serving on the highly sensitive Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro is very close to CPUSA Connecticut leader Joelle Fishman and her husband Art Perlo—the son of Roosevelt-era Soviet spy ring leader Victor Perlo. In 2012, DeLauro helped organize birthday celebrations for veteran Connecticut communist Al Marder. Comrade Marder is so well regarded in international communist circles that he was invited to Moscow in June 2015 to help the Russian Communist Party celebrate the anniversary of the Soviet defeat of Nazi Germany. Marder even got a big hug from then-Russian Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov.
Three other Connecticut congressmembers, Jim Himes (House Intelligence Committee), Joe Courtney (House Armed Services Committee), and John B. Larson work closely with the CPUSA front group Connecticut Alliance for Retired Americans. Even freshman Rep. Jahana Hayes had veteran communist Len Yannielli working in her campaign office.
Down in Texas, the situation is not much better. In Dallas, local communist leader Gene Lantz is very active in the Democratic Party and the Texas Alliance for Retired Americans. Lantz is close to Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson(House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology) and is friends with Rep. Marc Veasey (House Armed Services Committee).
In Houston, local CPUSA leader Bernard Sampson doubles as a Democratic Party precinct chairman. The Houston CPUSA ran several comrades for public office in 2018 on the Democratic ticket (it’s illegal to run for office as a communist in Texas).
Comrade Ali Khorasani ran for Congress in Texas District 2 but was defeated in the primary. Communist Penny Shaw ran for a seat on the Harris County Commission but lost with 45 percent of the vote. Party member Sema Hernandez ran a shoestring campaign in the Texas U.S. Senate primary and managed to secure a respectable 250,000 votes.
And this is just the open or easily identifiable members. As a conspiratorial revolutionary organization, the CPUSA keeps much of its membership secret. The CPUSA almost certainly has many secret members and supporters in key positions throughout the Democratic Party.
Opposition
Millions of grassroots Democrat voters are strongly opposed to communism. Many are descendants of families who fled communism in Eastern Europe, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Cuba. Many lost friends or family fighting communism in Vietnam. Many are Catholic, informed of the evils from communism at an early age by their priests, bishops, and popes.
Most would be horrified to know that communists are working openly and secretly at every level of their cherished Democratic Party.
The Democratic Party knows the identities of most of its communist members. The Democrats do more than turn a blind eye; they welcome the revolutionaries into their party.
The Democrats have spent the last two years bashing President Donald Trump for having ties to Russia. Yet the Democrats are willing to tolerate pro-China communists actively working within their own party.
By allowing communists to stand for office on their ticket, Democrats are cheating the American voter. By allowing communists to work closely with Democratic congressmembers and senators, they are endangering national security.
Trevor Loudon is an author, filmmaker, and public speaker from New Zealand. For more than 30 years, he has researched radical left, Marxist, and terrorist movements and their covert influence on mainstream politics.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
OPERATION OBOMB:
DESTABILIZE AMERICA TO LAY GROUNDS FOR A MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
BARACK OBAMA: Was he America’s first closet Communist president?
Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA. These facts are not in dispute. Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control. Our press chooses not to report them.
Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.
WAS THE RUSSIAN HOAX ONLY OBAMA’S ATTEMPT TO PUT ASIDE TRUMP FOR AN OBAMA THIRD TERM FOR LIFE???
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”
*
These people were engaged in a massive political conspiracy. The Democrats made a decision from the outset—beginning with the election campaign of the favored candidate of Wall Street and the CIA, Hillary Clinton—that they would not oppose Trump on his anti-working-class social policy or his authoritarian hostility to democratic rights and promotion of anti-immigrant racism, but on issues of imperialist foreign policy.
*
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
Barack Obama’s plot for a third term for life
A Muslim dictatorship like his crony paymasters, the 9-11 invading Saudis who have financed him for decades.
“Obama has the totalitarian impulse. After all, he went around saying he didn't have Constitutional authority to legalize the illegals, and then he tried anyway. The courts stopped him.”
*
What was Obama’s motive? Simple, he knew if he did that for Hillary, he’d own the next President of the United States, and could blackmail her with the truth till the end of time. It literally would have given him a 3rd and 4th term.
This week Rush Limbaugh repeated a quote from James Comey in a New York Magazine interview:
“I’d moved from Communist to whatever I am now. I’m not even sure how to characterize myself politically. Maybe at some point, I’ll have to figure it out.”
It’s hard to pin too much on that quote. Perhaps Comey was joking by calling his vote for Jimmy Carter a vote for a Communist, in mockery of his supposedly fellow Republicans.
Joking about support for Communism is not all that funny in the Obama administration. Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan actually did vote for a Communist presidential candidate. Brennan and Comey are two of the central players in the Russia Collusion Hoax.
Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA. These facts are not in dispute. Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control. Our press chooses not to report them.
Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.
Brennan (who was sworn in as CIA director on a draft of the US Constitution, without the Bill of Rights, instead of a Bible) said that while he had voted Communist, he wasn't an official member of the Communist Party - and was relieved that he had been accepted into the CIA.
Barack Hussein Obama
His Kenyan father was a communist, who met Obama’s mother, a radical leftist, in a Russian language class. Stanley Dunham, Obama’s white grandfather, chose a notorious member of the Communist Party to be Obama’s mentor, Frank Marshall Davis.
Obama wrote in his memoir that in college, he sought out Marxist professors. A Marxist student at Occidental College, John Drew, confirms that Obama was a revolutionary Marxist in college. Drew recounts:
Obama… believed that the economic stresses of the Carter years meant revolution was still imminent. The election of Reagan was simply a minor set-back …As I recall, Obama repeatedly used the phrase "When the revolution comes...." …"There's going to be a revolution," Obama said, "we need to be organized and grow the movement." In Obama's view, our role must be to educate others so that we might usher in more quickly this inevitable revolution. …Obama seemed to think their ideological purity was a persuasive argument in predicting that a coming revolution would end capitalism.
Obama tells us the radical socialist conferences he attended before law school gave him his road map in life, i.e., their plan to put a stealth black candidate in the White House. Obama's biggest job and his political career in Chicago were launched by self-avowed communist Bill Ayers. Obama's run for state representative was as the hand-picked successor of a socialist state representative, who was publicly active in communist circles. Obama's calling in life was work as a hard-left Alinskyite radical agitator. Until he became president, Obama was a 20-year member of an openly Marxist church whose members had to take a pledge against the middle class. When did Obama reject Marxism?
Valerie Jarrett is Obama’s closest personal advisor to the present day. She lived with the Obama’s in the White House, had dinner with them nightly and still lives with them in retirement!
“Her late father, James E. Bowman.. was involved with communist front groups and was in contact with a paid Soviet agent in the 1950s who was wanted for espionage. Jarrett's maternal grandfather, Robert Rochon Taylor, was investigated by the FBI for his membership in communist groups and his business relationship with the same Soviet agent …Her late father-in-law, Vernon D. Jarrett, was assigned by the Communist Party USA to a special cultural arts cell …he was flagged by the FBI as an internal security risk to be swiftly arrested in the event of a hot war with the Soviet Union. The FBI also investigated his wife, Fernetta "Fern" Jarrett, for communist activities.”
Kengor discusses new documents obtained by Judicial Watch that show Valerie Jarrett’s father was active on behalf of Stalin in fomenting racial divisiveness in America, as a member of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born (ACPFB).
ACPFB “was founded by the Communist Party in order to exploit racial divisions in the United States for its own revolutionary purposes.” Its modus operandi was to polarize Americans along racial lines in order to advance the Soviet agenda.”
Axelrod was the Chief Strategist for Obama’s presidential campaigns, and a Senior Advisor in the White House. His mother worked for a communist newspaper. His father, according to Axelrod in his memoir, “listed his party affiliation as ‘Communist.’ Axelrod got his start in Chicago politics through working for hardline Stalinist Soviet agents Harry and David Canter.
“The Canters were old hardline pro-Soviet communists, so much so that the senior Canter, Harry Jacob Canter, was actually brought to Moscow during the height of the Stalin period to work for the Soviet government as an official translator of Lenin’s writings. Harry was active in the old Industrial Workers of the World and had been secretary of the Boston Communist Party. He was not shy about his political enthusiasm. In 1930, he ran for governor of Massachusetts on the Communist Party ticket. After that, he sojourned to the Motherland, taking his entire family to Moscow with him, including his son David, who one day would come know David Axelrod… the Canters actually knew and worked with Obama’s old communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis…Davis — again, Obama’s mentor — also knew and worked with Valerie Jarrett’s grandfather and father-in-law in Communist Party/left-wing circles in Chicago in the 1940s.)”
Other Communists, Red Diaper Babies and Marxists in Obama’s Circle
Susan Rice, Obama’s National Security Advisor, was up to her eyeballs in the Russia Collusion Hoax against candidate and then President Trump.
Rice wrote a 426-page dissertation praising, as “a model and a masterpiece in the evolution of international peacekeeping,” … the political ascendancy of Zimbabwe’s Marxist dictator, Robert Mugabe. In her dissertation, Rice lauded Mugabe as a “pragmatic, intelligent, sensible, gentle, balanced man” who possessed considerable “patience and restraint.”
David Maraniss, the Washington Post journalist chosen to write Obama’s biography, which covered up Obama’s radical past, was also a red diaper baby. He father was a member of the Communist Party and worked through a cell in Detroit to secretly influence workers through his articles for the Detroit Times.
Frank Marshall Davis, the biggest influence on Obama’s black identity from age ten through college years, was a card-carrying member of the Communist party.
“Frank Marshall Davis was a pro-Soviet, pro–Red China communist. His Communist Party USA card number, revealed in FBI files, was CP #47544. He was a prototype of the loyal Soviet patriot, so radical that the FBI placed him on the federal government’s Security Index. In the early 1950s, Davis opposed U.S. attempts to slow Stalin and Mao. He favored Red Army takeovers of Central and Eastern Europe, and communist control in Korea and Vietnam. Dutifully serving the cause, he edited and wrote for communist newspapers in both Chicago and Honolulu, courting contributors who were Soviet agents. In the 1970s, amid this dangerous political theater, Frank Marshall Davis came into Barack Obama’s life.”
Reverend Jeremiah Wright
Obama’s pastor and personal hero and mentor, was an avowed Marxist. His church congregants had to sign a pledge to support redistribution of wealth and reject ‘middleclassness.’ Discoverthenetworks reports:
Rev. Wright’s devotion to the tenets of liberation theology, which is essentially Marxism dressed up as Christianity. … calls for social activism, class struggle, and revolution aimed at overturning the existing capitalist order and installing, in its stead, a socialist utopia where today’s poor will unseat their “oppressors” and become liberated from their material (and, consequently, their spiritual) deprivations. An extension of this paradigm is black liberation theology, which seeks to foment a similar Marxist revolutionary fervor founded on racial rather than class solidarity.
Is it any surprise that collusion with Russia, according to Victor David Hanson, was a feature of the Obama presidency?
The Obama administration colluded with Rusian agents who produced the Steele Dossier. It was paid for by Clinton, but it was Obama’s minions at the FBI, CIA and White House who weaponized this soviet disinformation against President Trump.
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
Barack and Michelle Obama 'to buy $14.85 million Martha's Vineyard estate from Boston Celtics owner Wyc Grousbeck' after spending summer there and falling in love with sprawling beachfront property
The 29-acre estate is on the market includes a 7000sqft house with seven bedrooms and nine bathrooms
Built in 2001, it also has a pool, chef's kitchen, outdoor fireplace, and two guest wings, and a large sundeck
Last year, the Obamas sold their summer home on the island for $15 million, having spent seven out of right summers there while Barack was President
Barack and Michelle Obama are reportedly trying to buy a sprawling estate in Martha's Vineyard from Boston Celtics owner Wyc Grousbeck.
The home is on the market for $14.85 million, and features seven-bedrooms and nine bathrooms inside the 7000sqft main residence.
Outside the main house, there's 29 beachfront acres, a pool, chef's kitchen, outdoor fireplace, and two guest wings.
Grousbeck had the property on the market for four years, first listing it in 2015 for $22.5 million.
+9
Barack and Michelle Obama have reportedly bought a sprawling estate in Martha's Vineyard from Boston Celtics owner Wyc Grousbeck. The home is on the market for $14.85 million, and features seven-bedrooms and nine bathrooms inside the 7000sqft main residence
Clearly enjoying life after the White House, the former President and First Lady rented out the home from the NBA side's owner, for the summer and loved it so much they made an offer to buy it, but they haven't paid the full asking price, according to TMZ.
In 2017, the price was cut back to $16,250,00, and again to the current asking price, according to realtor.com.
But not a done deal yet, as the estate, which features a private beach, is in escrow.
The Obamas won't be the first Presidential family to buy up on the Massachusetts Island.
Jackie Kennedy-Onassis kept a home there until her death in 1994, and the summer resort was popular with the whole Kennedy dynasty.
Grousbeck's former home, which was built in 2001, has huge amounts of land if the Obamas were hoping to expand.
'It's a remarkable home on an absolutely gorgeous setting,' listing agent Tom Wallace previously said 'privacy is a key feature of the property.
+9
Outside the main house, there's 29 beachfront acres, a pool (pictured), chef's kitchen, outdoor fireplace, and two guest wings. Grousbeck had the property on the market for four years, first listing it in 2015 for $22.5 million
+9
The Obamas won't be the first Presidential family to buy up on the Massachusetts Island. Jackie Kennedy-Onassis kept a home there until her death in 1994, and the summer resort was popular with the whole Kennedy dynasty. Grousbeck's former home, (pictured) which was built in 2001, has huge amounts of land if the Obamas were hoping to expand
+9
A map showing the location of the Martha's Vineyard estate in the state of Massachusetts
'It certainly has the capacity to expand to more of a compound. One could build two additional full-size properties if one wanted to create a generational meeting place' he added.
Their new home is on the edge of Edgartown Great Pond, with views of the Atlantic Ocean.
It features predominantly white interiors but is surrounded by emerald-green lawns.
Michelle and Barack will have a lot of space to relax, as the master bedroom opens up to a sundeck.
While their daughters will have plenty of room to enjoy long summer breaks there.
Malia, 21, is currently studying at Harvard University, while Sasha, 18, has just Sidwell Friends School in Washington D.C.
As the Earl notes, most of the brown to be found is where people step on.
If President Trump purchased a house with so much whiteness, you can bet that the cries of racist symbolism and dog whistles would have been heard throughout the prog internet.
It occurred to me that maybe the Obamas are planning to remodel the place with colors that "look like America." But then I realized that the Obamas already have been renting the property and obviously like it so much they decided to buy it.
Or maybe they miss the White House so much that they want an nearly all-white house? But the interior of the D.C. White House isn't anything at all like as white as the Vineyard estate, where you'd be advised to bring your sunglasses inside if you visit.
Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA. These facts are not in dispute. Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control. Our press chooses not to report them.
