Orwellian: CIA clears itself of spying on Senate committee…

Yahoo News:

A CIA panel Wednesday cleared agency officials of any wrongdoing when they accessed the computers of a Senate committee investigating the agency’s involvement in torture. The finding ended a yearlong dispute marked by angry accusations of “hacking” and criminal misconduct.

Instead, the panel — whose members were appointed by CIA Director John Brennan — faulted the agency’s own outgoing inspector general for suggesting in a report that there may have been grounds to discipline five officials at the agency.

The findings by the so-called CIA accountability board drew sharp objections from some Senate staffers who were involved in the torture report, citing it as yet another example of the CIA’s own inability to police itself.

Ya think?

IRS Watchdog: IRS Cuts Taxpayer Services; Elderly and Disabled Taxpayers Not Allowed to Leave Messages

Despicable. The IRS was punished in its budget for using their power as a political weapon, so their retaliation is to not take calls from tax payers, starting with the elderly and disabled.

ATR:

In its annual Report to Congress today, the office of the National Taxpayer Advocate outlined a series of Internal Revenue Service failures. In the “Access to the IRS” section, the report details the trouble taxpayers face reaching the right person in order to meet their tax obligations:

“The IRS does not answer the phone at local offices and has even removed the option it once provided for taxpayers, including the elderly and disabled, to leave a message.

Until 2013, taxpayers — including the elderly and disabled — were allowed to leave a voicemail requesting an in-person appointment. But now, elderly and disabled taxpayers attempting to navigate the automated helpline maze are asked to email the IRS to set up an appointment. The automated message instructs as follows:

“If you are disabled or elderly and require special accommodations for service, please email us at…”

But this leaves many taxpayers in the dark. As the report states:

“Demographic research data show only 57 percent of adults over age 65 use the Internet compared with 87 percent of all adults. According to 2010 Census data, only 41 percent of those with a non-severe disability use the Internet and only 22 percent of those with a severe disability age 65 and older use the Internet. For those without Internet access, the only viable ways to reach the IRS are by phone, or in person.”

On its helplines, the IRS is required to provide taxpayers the option to speak with a live person. But as the report states, the IRS won’t even answer questions about what lines are considered helplines:

“TAS [Taxpayer Advocate Service] twice inquired of the IRS in a formal information request whether it considers the 3709 lines to be ‘helplines’ for the purpose of § 3705(d) of RRA 98, which would require them to have an option to speak with a live person. TAS also asked what lines the IRS does consider to be helplines. Twice, the IRS declined to answer these questions.”

The full report may be accessed here.

 

Gallup: 70% of K-12 teachers ‘not engaged’ or ‘actively disengaged’

Anyone surprised?

EAG:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A recent Gallup survey found that K-12 teachers who are “not engaged” or “actively disengaged” – about 70 percent of all teachers – miss a combined 2.3 million workdays than their “engaged” colleagues.

In Gallup Daily tracking surveys between Jan. 3, 2013 and Sept. 30, 2014, the polling firm used “responses to questions about workplace elements with proven links to performance outcomes” to place teachers into three categories: engaged, not engaged and actively disengaged.

Engaged teachers are enthusiastic and committed to their work, and represent about 30 percent of teachers. Not engaged teachers are satisfied but not connected to their jobs, and rarely go above and beyond for students. They represent about 57 percent of teachers.

Actively disengaged teachers not only hate their work, they find ways to undermine their coworkers or schools. Those teachers account for about 13 percent of U.S. educators, according to Gallup.com.

 

Americans Lose More High-Tech Jobs: Rubio, Hatch, Flake Co-Sponsor Bill to Increase H-1B Guest Workers Visas

This is not theory. This very writer has watched as tech companies fired hundreds of Americans and replace them with foreign workers who are flown in, crammed in tiny apartments, paid very little, and sent home when their time expires.

This is a big part of the reason why IT wages have stagnated and why so many Americans who graduate with hi-tech degrees are not finding work.

US News – STEM Grads Can’t Find Jobs

DML – Majority of IT Jobs Given to Immigrants

PBS – The Bogus High-tech Worker Shortage

Sen. Jeff Sessions: No Shortage of High-tech American Workers

There are law firms and companies that specialize in showing companies how to make it look like they are trying to hire Americans, but have no intention of doing so.

Breitbart News:

On Tuesday, three Republican Senators joined three Democrats to introduce legislation that would expand the number of guest-workers for the tech industry even though there is a surplus of American high-tech workers.

The Immigration Innovation (“I-Squared”) bill, introduced by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chris Coons (D-DE), and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), would also enable companies to hire an unlimited number of workers with advanced degrees from U.S. institutions in science, technology, engineering and math, which critics have said would turn some universities into diploma factories for foreign students. Currently, the first 20,000 H-1B applications for those with advanced STEM degrees are exempted.

Hatch said he hoped the bill could be a gateway to “more progress” on a broader immigration bill.

“I’m calling on everyone — the President, members of both parties, and stakeholders in the tech community – to support this bill and help make it the first step towards real immigration reform,” he said in a statement. “We must find make concrete progress to solve some of the many critical problems facing our nation. I-Squared is an obvious solution to an undeniable need, and I want to work with everyone to get it done now.”

In addition to increasing the annual cap on H-1B visas from 65,000 to 115,000, the bill would reform student visas, “authorize employment for the dependent spouses of H-1B visas holders, and allow a grace period for foreign workers to “change jobs and not be out of status.” It would also, among other things, allow for the recapturing of green cards “that were approved by Congress in previous years but were not used” and dependents of employment-based immigrant visa recipients, U.S. STEM advance degree holders, “persons with extraordinary ability,” and “outstanding professors and researchers” would be exempt from cap on green cards.

The high-tech industry, like Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us lobbying group, has pushed for massive increases in guest-worker permits even though companies like Microsoft have been laying of thousands of U.S. tech workers. As Breitbart News has documented, “despite evidence to the contrary, the tech industry has spent millions trying to get massive increases in the number of H-1b guest-worker visas, claiming that they ‘can’t find’ Americans to do various tech jobs” even though there is a proven surplus of America high-tech workers.

House Republican leaders are expected to introduce similar legislation.

But as Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) noted in his immigration roadmap for the new Republican Congress, “a stunning 3 in 4 Americans with a STEM degree do not hold a job in a STEM field—that’s a pool of more than 11 million Americans with STEM qualifications who lack STEM employment.” In a chapter titled, “The Silicon Valley STEM Hoax,” Sessions cites Rutgers public policy professor Hal Salzman, who has calculated that 100% of new hires in the tech industry could be guest workers if Congress continues to increase the number of H-1B visas, which would hold “down wages for both them and new hires.”

 

Obama is wrong, most illegals do not pay their “fair share”

The numbers just don’t add up. Most illegals would not earn enough to have to pay the income tax anyways….

Via American Thinker:

Last night’s presidential address on decreeing that millions of illegal aliens can stay here in violation of the law contained a deep deceit, buried in words that were, on the surface, true. President Obama’s rhetoric left the impression that at last, illegal immigrants would “pay their fair share.” From the official transcript:

We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded. So we’re going to offer the following deal: If you’ve been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes — you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. That’s what this deal is. (snip) (emphasis added)

…millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time.

The problem with this rhetoric is that very few illegal immigrants make enough money to actually pay taxes. Instead, their “fair share” will amount to a substantial gift from American citizen and legal immigrant taxpayers who have played by the rules.

Avik Roy writes:

 …the vast majority of undocumented aliens don’t make enough in income to have a net income-tax liability. As I note in Forbes, a 2006 analysis by the Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, concludes that “we can be virtually certain that illegal immigrants earned less than $24,000 per year, on average, probably much less.” That amounts to around $29,000 in 2014 dollars, well below the threshold where an American has a net income-tax liability.

Not only will they not pay income taxes, many are likely to get a check from the IRS, thanks to the Orwellian-named Earned Income Tax Credit, which send a gift from taxpayers to low income families.

Neil Munro explains in the Daily Caller:

…once illegal immigrants are enrolled in the tax system, they’re would be entitled to EITC payments

The payments may be huge, and will rise each year.

According to the Internal Revenue Service, two parents with three or more children would receive up to $6,143 in 2014 if they earn less than $46,997.

A family with two kids, and an income of $20,000, would receive $14,590 in taxpayer funds this year alone. Parents who earn less than the threshold would get $3,305 if they have one child, and $5,460 if they have two children.

The EITC program is already poorly monitored and may be subject to large amounts of fraud, according to critics.

Another study says that 47 percent of legal and illegal immigrants and their children are classified as living in poverty or in near-poverty, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors reduced annual immigration.

In addition, the Social Security trust fund will lose billions. Roy explains:

…many illegals have fake Social Security numbers that their employers use to pay payroll taxes on their behalf. Century estimates that “about $6 billion in annual payroll taxes are allocated to non-existent Social Security accounts. . . .

Instead of subsidizing Social Security, these illegals will now be in a position to claim benefits, likely far in excess of what they will pay into the system.

Reactions to Obama’s Illegal Amnesty Speech (videos)

Obama jump fence amnesty funny

The polling on this isn’t good – LINK.

The first person President Obama is in conflict with is President Obama who has stated no less than 22 times himself that the action he took tonight was illegal and unconstitutional. We have posted a transcript of each one below at the bottom of this post, but here is some of the video so you can see for yourself courtesy of the Washington Post fact Checker who called Obama’s action “a royal flip flop:

 

Senator Ted Cruz:

 

Obama’s 22 times via Speaker.gov:

With the White House poised to grant executive amnesty any day now despite the American people’s staunch opposition, on Sunday President Obama was asked about the many, many statements he made in the past about his inability to unilaterally change or ignore immigration law. His response was astonishingly brazen: “Actually, my position hasn’t changed. When I was talking to the advocates, their interest was in me, through executive action, duplicating the legislation that was stalled in Congress.”

This is a flagrant untruth: “In fact, most of the questions that were posed to the president over the past several years were about the very thing that he is expected to announce within a matter of days,” reported The New York Times. “[T]he questions actually specifically addressed the sorts of actions that he is contemplating now,” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker agreed, awarding President Obama the rare “Upside-Down Pinocchio,” which signifies “a major-league flip-flop.” Even FactCheck.org piled on.

President Obama is once again trying to mislead Americans, but he can’t run from what he’s said over and over (and over) again. Not only are Americans not stupid – they can read:

  1. “I take the Constitution very seriously. The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with [the president] trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m President of the United States of America.” (3/31/08)
  2. “We’ve got a government designed by the Founders so that there’d be checks and balances. You don’t want a president who’s too powerful or a Congress that’s too powerful or a court that’s too powerful. Everybody’s got their own role. Congress’s job is to pass legislation. The president can veto it or he can sign it. … I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We’re not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end-run around Congress.” (5/19/08)
  3. “Comprehensive reform, that’s how we’re going to solve this problem. … Anybody who tells you it’s going to be easy or that I can wave a magic wand and make it happen hasn’t been paying attention to how this town works.” (5/5/10)
  4. “[T]here are those in the immigrants’ rights community who have argued passionately that we should simply provide those who are [here] illegally with legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws. … I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. And it would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally. Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship.  And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable.” (7/1/10)
  5. “I do have an obligation to make sure that I am following some of the rules. I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there. I’ve got to work to make sure that they are changed.” (10/14/10)
  6. I am president, I am not king. I can’t do these things just by myself. We have a system of government that requires the Congress to work with the Executive Branch to make it happen. I’m committed to making it happen, but I’ve got to have some partners to do it. … The main thing we have to do to stop deportations is to change the laws. … [T]he most important thing that we can do is to change the law because the way the system works – again, I just want to repeat, I’m president, I’m not king. If Congress has laws on the books that says that people who are here who are not documented have to be deported, then I can exercise some flexibility in terms of where we deploy our resources, to focus on people who are really causing problems as a opposed to families who are just trying to work and support themselves. But there’s a limit to the discretion that I can show because I am obliged to execute the law. That’s what the Executive Branch means. I can’t just make the laws up by myself. So the most important thing that we can do is focus on changing the underlying laws.” (10/25/10)
  7. “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the President, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that. That’s part of my job. But I can advocate for changes in the law so that we have a country that is both respectful of the law but also continues to be a great nation of immigrants. … With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed …. [W]e’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.” (3/28/11)
  8. “I can’t solve this problem by myself. … [W]e’re going to have to have bipartisan support in order to make it happen. … I can’t do it by myself. We’re going to have to change the laws in Congress, but I’m confident we can make it happen.” (4/20/11)
  9. “I know some here wish that I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself.  But that’s not how democracy works.  See, democracy is hard.  But it’s right. Changing our laws means doing the hard work of changing minds and changing votes, one by one.” (4/29/11)
  10. “Sometimes when I talk to immigration advocates, they wish I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that’s not how a democracy works. What we really need to do is to keep up the fight to pass genuine, comprehensive reform. That is the ultimate solution to this problem. That’s what I’m committed to doing.” (5/10/11)
  11. “I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books …. Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. Believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you. Not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.” (7/25/11)
  12. “So what we’ve tried to do is within the constraints of the laws on the books, we’ve tried to be as fair, humane, just as we can, recognizing, though, that the laws themselves need to be changed. … The most important thing for your viewers and listeners and readers to understand is that in order to change our laws, we’ve got to get it through the House of Representatives, which is currently controlled by Republicans, and we’ve got to get 60 votes in the Senate. … Administratively, we can’t ignore the law. … I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true.  We are doing everything we can administratively.  But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce.  And I think there’s been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetrating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things.  It’s just not true. … We live in a democracy.  You have to pass bills through the legislature, and then I can sign it.  And if all the attention is focused away from the legislative process, then that is going to lead to a constant dead-end. We have to recognize how the system works, and then apply pressure to those places where votes can be gotten and, ultimately, we can get this thing solved.” (9/28/11)

In June 2012, President Obama unilaterally granted deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA), allowing “eligible individuals who do not present a risk to national security or public safety … to request temporary relief from deportation proceedings and apply for work authorization.” He then argued that he had already done everything he could legally do on his own:

  1. “Now, what I’ve always said is, as the head of the executive branch, there’s a limit to what I can do. Part of the reason that deportations went up was Congress put a whole lot of money into it, and when you have a lot of resources and a lot more agents involved, then there are going to be higher numbers. What we’ve said is, let’s make sure that you’re not misdirecting those resources. But we’re still going to, ultimately, have to change the laws in order to avoid some of the heartbreaking stories that you see coming up occasionally. And that’s why this continues to be a top priority of mine. … And we will continue to make sure that how we enforce is done as fairly and justly as possible. But until we have a law in place that provides a pathway for legalization and/or citizenship for the folks in question, we’re going to continue to be bound by the law. … And so part of the challenge as President is constantly saying, ‘what authorities do I have?’” (9/20/12)
  2. “We are a nation of immigrants. … But we’re also a nation of laws. So what I’ve said is, we need to fix a broken immigration system. And I’ve done everything that I can on my own[.]” (10/16/12)
  3. I’m not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I’m required to follow the law. And that’s what we’ve done. But what I’ve also said is, let’s make sure that we’re applying the law in a way that takes into account people’s humanity. That’s the reason that we moved forward on deferred action. Within the confines of the law we said, we have some discretion in terms of how we apply this law.” (1/30/13)
  4. I’m not a king. You know, my job as the head of the executive branch ultimately is to carry out the law.  And, you know, when it comes to enforcement of our immigration laws, we’ve got some discretion. We can prioritize what we do. But we can’t simply ignore the law. When it comes to the dreamers, we were able to identify that group and say, ‘These folks are generally not a risk. They’re not involved in crime. … And so let’s prioritize our enforcement resources.’ But to sort through all the possible cases of everybody who might have a sympathetic story to tell is very difficult to do. This is why we need comprehensive immigration reform. To make sure that once and for all, in a way that is, you know, ratified by Congress, we can say that there is a pathway to citizenship for people who are staying out of trouble, who are trying to do the right thing, who’ve put down roots here. … My job is to carry out the law. And so Congress gives us a whole bunch of resources. They give us an order that we’ve got to go out there and enforce the laws that are on the books.  … If this was an issue that I could do unilaterally I would have done it a long time ago. … The way our system works is Congress has to pass legislation. I then get an opportunity to sign it and implement it.” (1/30/13)
  5. “This is something I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that I’m the president of the United States, I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed. And Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system. And what that means is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic.” (2/14/13)
  6. “I think that it is very important for us to recognize that the way to solve this problem has to be legislative. I can do some things and have done some things that make a difference in the lives of people by determining how our enforcement should focus. … And we’ve been able to provide help through deferred action for young people …. But this is a problem that needs to be fixed legislatively.” (7/16/13)
  7. My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed. Congress has said ‘here is the law’ when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they’ve allocated a whole bunch of money for enforcement. And, what I have been able to do is to make a legal argument that I think is absolutely right, which is that given the resources that we have, we can’t do everything that Congress has asked us to do. What we can do is then carve out the DREAM Act folks, saying young people who have basically grown up here are Americans that we should welcome. … But if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally. So that’s not an option. … What I’ve said is there is a there’s a path to get this done, and that’s through Congress.” (9/17/13)
  8. [I]f, in fact, I could solve all these problems without passing laws in Congress, then I would do so. But we’re also a nation of laws. That’s part of our tradition. And so the easy way out is to try to yell and pretend like I can do something by violating our laws. And what I’m proposing is the harder path, which is to use our democratic processes to achieve the same goal that you want to achieve. … It is not simply a matter of us just saying we’re going to violate the law. That’s not our tradition. The great thing about this country is we have this wonderful process of democracy, and sometimes it is messy, and sometimes it is hard, but ultimately, justice and truth win out.” (11/25/13)
  9. “I am the Champion-in-Chief of comprehensive immigration reform. But what I’ve said in the past remains true, which is until Congress passes a new law, then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do. What I’ve done is to use my prosecutorial discretion, because you can’t enforce the laws across the board for 11 or 12 million people, there aren’t the resources there.  What we’ve said is focus on folks who are engaged in criminal activity, focus on people who are engaged in gang activity. Do not focus on young people, who we’re calling DREAMers …. That already stretched my administrative capacity very far. But I was confident that that was the right thing to do. But at a certain point the reason that these deportations are taking place is, Congress said, ‘you have to enforce these laws.’ They fund the hiring of officials at the department that’s charged with enforcing.  And I cannot ignore those laws any more than I could ignore, you know, any of the other laws that are on the books. That’s why it’s so important for us to get comprehensive immigration reform done this year.” (3/6/14)
  10. “I think that I never have a green light [to push the limits of executive power].  I’m bound by the Constitution; I’m bound by separation of powers.  There are some things we can’t do. Congress has the power of the purse, for example. … Congress has to pass a budget and authorize spending. So I don’t have a green light. … My preference in all these instances is to work with Congress, because not only can Congress do more, but it’s going to be longer-lasting.” (8/6/14)

– See more at: http://www.speaker.gov/general/22-times-president-obama-said-he-couldn-t-ignore-or-create-his-own-immigration-law#sthash.Ouj3Nb8W.dpuf

Top 10 Lies from Obama’s Illegal Amnesty Speech

“The one [a president] can confer no privileges whatever; the other [the king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies.” – Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 69

Via Daniel Horowitz at Conservative Review:

Lie #1: Every President has Taken Executive Action on Immigration: No other president has ever issued an amnesty of anywhere near this scope, created it out of thin air, or built it upon a prior executive action instead of a statute. And in the case of President Eisenhower, his executive action was to deport 80,000 illegal immigrants.

Lie #2: Illegal Immigrant Crossings are Down: Actually, this is the third straight year that border crossings have gone up, not to mention the entirely new wave from Central America.

Lie #3: It does not grant citizenship or the right to stay here permanently: Under the royal edict, the work permits can be renewed every three years, and most likely, they will be renewed at the same 99.5% acceptance rate as DACA applications.  And once they get Social Security cards, they are going nowhere.  So yes, this is permanent.  And yes, they will be able to get green cards, which puts them on an automatic path to citizenship: “we are reducing the time that families are separated while obtaining their green cards.  Undocumented immigrants who are immediate relatives of lawful permanent residents or sons or daughters of US citizens can apply to get a waiver if a visa is available.”

Lie #4: Only 5 Million: Make no mistake about it.  Obama’s illegal amnesty will not just apply to 5 million individuals.  It will apply by default to all 12-20 million illegals in the country as well as the millions more who will now come here to enjoy the permanent cessation of borders and sovereignty.  Given the numerous options for people to become eligible for amnesty, ICE and CPB will be restricted from enforcing the law against anyone because each individual has to be afforded the opportunity to present themselves and apply for status.  There is no way those who were here for less than 5 years will be deported and there’s no way the new people rushing the border and overstaying their visas will be repatriated.

Lie #5: Deport Felons: Obama claims he is going to focus on deporting felons. Yet, he has done the opposite.  36,000 convicted criminal aliens were released last year, 80,000 criminal aliens encountered by ICE weren’t even placed into deportation proceedings, 167,000 criminal aliens who were ordered deported are still at large, 341,000 criminal aliens released by ICE without deportation orders are known to be free and at large in the US.  Again, this is cessation of deportations for everyone. They are leaving no illegal behind.

Lie #6: Don’t deport families: Obama is playing the family card. It works like this: people are encouraged to come here illegally, Obama grants them amnesty, then their relatives all get to come, even though they would otherwise be ineligible under public charge laws.  Yet, at the same time, because the bureaucracy will be flooded with applications of illegals, and those are the applications that will be prioritized, those families who came here legally will have to wait longer to be united. There is no longer an incentive to enter the legal immigration process.

Lie #7: They have to pay taxes to stay: Aside from the absurd notion that they would turn someone away for not paying taxes, almost every one of these illegal immigrants lacks a high enough income to incur a net positive tax liability.  Hence, by paying taxes, he actually means they will collect refundable tax credits!

Lie #8: Background Checks: Just the thought of a criminal background check of people coming from the third world on a lawless program is a joke.  But the reality is that Obama has already done this with DACA, and 99.5% of applications were approved, including those of criminals.

Lie #9: Cracking Down on Illegal Immigration at the Border: Obama promises to beef up resources at the border.  But as we’ve seen over the past few years, what good are more agents if they are explicitly intimidated into turning a blind eye.  Moreover, there is no promise to build a fence or implement a visa tracking system, so any talk of enforcement is an insult to our intelligence.  Moreover, he is unilaterally abolishing the Secure Communities program, the only successful interior enforcement program left after he abolished 287g state-federal cooperation in 2012.  At a time when we are facing threats from Islamic terror and deadly diseases, this invitation to the world will present a security nightmare.

Lie #10: Scripture tells us, we shall not oppress a stranger: It’s great to see him quoting the Bible for once, but nice try.  There are different variations of this verse throughout the Bible, but each one uses the Hebrew word “Ger” to describe what Obama translates as “stranger.”  A Ger is a convert to Judaism.  The commandment was not referring to people who illegally migrate to a nation state.  And more importantly, it is downright offensive to Americans to insinuate that not granting them benefits is tantamount to oppression, especially given the fact that they have been the biggest recipients of our generous legal system.  Moreover, if there is oppression taking place it is to the American taxpayer and worker and those who suffer from gangs like MS-13.

– See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2014/11/top-10-lies-from-obamas-nullification-speech#sthash.Eocfnnzx.dpuf

IRS Admits to Court it Hasn’t Searched for Missing Lerner Emails

UPDATE – June 23, 2022. DoJ and IRS still engaging in coverup. Judicial Watch suing!

How lawless will they get?

Via Judicial Watch:

“…it has become apparent that the IRS did not undertake any significant efforts to obtain the emails from alternative sources following the discovery that the emails were missing”

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) admitted to the court that it failed to search any of the IRS standard computer systems for the “missing” emails of Lois Lerner and other IRS officials. The admission appears in an IRS legal brief opposing the Judicial Watch request that a federal court judge allow discovery into how “lost and/or destroyed” IRS records relating to the targeting of conservative groups may be retrieved. The IRS is fighting Judicial Watch’s efforts to force testimony and document production about the IRS’ loss of records in Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation about the IRS targeting of Tea Party and other opponents of President Obama(Judicial Watch v. IRS (No. 1:13-cv-1559)).  The lawsuit is before U.S. District Court Judge Emmett G. Sullivan.

In its September 17 Motion for Limited Discovery, Judicial Watch argues that, despite two orders, the IRS had consistently failed to provide information detailing how “the missing emails could be retrieved from other sources and produced to Judicial Watch.” On October 17, IRS attorneys asked the court to deny the Judicial Watch request, even while admitting that additional Congressional requests “could result in additional documents being located ….”

In its October 27 Reply in Support of Motion for Limited Discovery, Judicial Watch argued that declarations submitted by the IRS in response to the Judge Sullivan’s orders “fail to answer important questions about the missing emails:”

[I]t has become apparent that the IRS did not undertake any significant efforts to obtain the emails from alternative sources following the discovery that the emails were missing. The emails are potentially responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA requests, and the IRS’s failure to search for them in other recordkeeping systems raises material questions of fact about whether the agency has conducted a reasonable search.

Judicial Watch lawyers reviewed the IRS court filings and concluded that the agency “did not undertake any significant efforts to obtain the emails.”

IRS attorneys conceded that they had failed to search the agency’s servers for missing emails because they decided that “the servers would not result in the recovery of any information.” They admitted they had failed to search the agency’s disaster recovery tapes because they had “no reason to believe that the tapes are a potential source of recovering” the missing emails.  And they conceded that they had not searched the government-wide back-up system because they had “no reason to believe such a system … even exists.”

The IRS admitted to Judge Sullivan that the agency failed to “submit declarations about any of the foregoing items because it had no reason to believe that they were sources from which to recover information lost as a result of Lerner’s hard drive failure.” [Emphasis added]  Department of Justice attorneys for the IRS had previously told Judicial Watch that Lois Lerner’s emails, indeed all government computer records, are backed up by the federal government in case of a government-wide catastrophe. The Obama administration attorneys said that this back-up system would be too onerous to search. In the October federal court filing, the IRS does not deny that the government-wide back-up system exists, and acknowledges to the court that 760 other email “servers” have been discovered but had not been searched.  The IRS also refuses to disclose the names of the IRS officials who may have information about the IRS scandal, citing unspecified threats.  The IRS says it pulled documents about the scandal from various employees into a “Congressional database” and that it has only searched this one “database” for missing records.  Incredibly, the IRS has not searched any of the IRS’s regular computer systems for any missing records and admits that it has only searched a “database” that it knows does not contain the missing records being sought by the court, Judicial Watch, and Congress.

Rather than provide information to Judicial Watch and the court under oath about the missing records, the IRS intends for Judicial Watch to wait indefinitely for its production of the records.  Judicial Watch argues the IRS’ continuing “failure to provide complete information highlights the need for limited discovery. Neither Judicial Watch nor the court should have to rely on incomplete transcripts, out-of-court conversations, or the other, limited information Judicial Watch’s attorneys have been able to glean from congressional correspondence, media reports, and the internet to determine what system of records the IRS should reasonably search to recover the missing emails. As in all FOIA litigation, an “asymmetrical distribution of knowledge” exists between the IRS on the one hand, and Judicial Watch and the court on the other. It is precisely because the IRS has refused to provide pertinent, complete information that limited discovery is necessary.”

“The Obama IRS couldn’t care less about the federal court’s orders to provide full information about the ‘missing’ Lois Lerner emails,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Instead, the IRS, with the help of a compromised Justice Department, has engaged in a series of transparently evasive distractions.  The IRS would have Judicial Watch wait for years before we can ask questions about the cover-up that is going on now.  The IRS thinks it can game a federal court, Congress, and the American people.  Having delayed accountability for over two years, the Obama administration is prepared to stonewall on the IRS targeting of Obama’s ‘enemies list’ until after the 2016 presidential election. Judicial Watch’s lawsuit can continue to break through this obstruction of justice, especially if the court approves our effort to put select Obama officials under oath.”

Sign Up for Updates!

  •  

FLASHBACK: Obama Says Illegal Immigration HURTS ‘Blue-Collar Americans,’ STRAINS Welfare [VIDEO]

Via The Daily Caller:

See the video HERE.

President Barack Obama once declared that an influx of illegal immigrants will harm “the wages of blue-collar Americans” and “put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”

“[T]here’s no denying that many blacks share the same anxieties as many whites about the wave of illegal immigration flooding our Southern border—a sense that what’s happening now is fundamentally different from what has gone on before,” then-Senator Obama wrote in his 2006 autobiography, “The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.”

”Not all these fears are irrational,” he wrote.

“The number of immigrants added to the labor force every year is of a magnitude not seen in this country for over a century,” Obama noted. “If this huge influx of mostly low-skill workers provides some benefits to the economy as a whole—especially by keeping our workforce young, in contrast to an increasingly geriatric Europe and Japan—it also threatens to depress further the wages of blue-collar Americans and put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”

If these feel like the words of one of Obama’s opponents, it’s because they’re the exact argument the president’s critics have been making as he now rushes to announce a sweeping executive order that would give work permits to millions of illegal immigrants in the country.

In the passage, Obama also reveals that he personally feels “patriotic resentment” when he sees Mexican flags at immigration rallies.

 

Ohio public school textbook: Rights come from who?

In case you are unaware, the Declaration of Independence as well as countless writings from the Founders state that human rights are God given and thus man and government have no authority to deny them. This kind of mistake is no accident.

Via EAG News:

FAIRFIELD, Ohio – According to a citizenship lesson for 8-year-olds, rights are given to Americans by their government.

Parent Andrew Washburn posted a picture on Facebook of a handout titled “Being a Good Citizen” by Phyllis Naegeli.

So Emma brought home a very interesting handout from school the other day. So informative! I didn’t know that our rights come from the government! Thank you, government!” he sarcastically wrote.

“And thank you, (Butler County school district), for teaching my eight year old daughter all about her rights!” he added.

Washburn tells EAGnews his daughter attends a Butler County, Ohio district.

Among other things, the worksheet claims:

* Rights are special privileges the government gives you.
* Because the government gives us rights, we have the duty to be good citizens.
* Someday you will be given the right to vote.

Washburn posted the entire worksheet on the social media site.

Being a Good Citizen

Continue reading HERE.

Television Icon Glen A. Larson Dead at 77

What a terrible loss.

Glen A. Larson — who created the hit shows “Magnum P.I.”, “Knight Rider”,”Battlestar Galactica,” “The Fall Guy,” “B.J. and the Bear,” and “Buck Rogers in the 25th Century” and “Quincy M.E.” — has died from esophageal cancer at the age of 77.

He also wrote the original “Six Million Dollar Man” pilot and TV movies.

The incredibly successful writer died Friday night at UCLA Medical Center … according to his son James.

CNN Warning: You Are About To Hear The NATIONAL ANTHEM!

How reflexively anti-American has the left become? This one almost surprised us.

When CNN felt the heat of the push-back on this, they claimed it was an accident by a lone employee…..sure it was.

CNN-screenshot-550x272 national anthem warning

Via The Daily Caller:

CNN, which bills itself as “The Most Trusted Name in News,” sure knows how to put a weird damper on a perfectly heartwarming, patriotic and downright tearjerker story during the week of Veterans Day.

The video story is entitled “Sailor mom surprises daughter at school.” It first appeared on CNN on Thursday — on loan from an Indianapolis Fox affiliate.

Prior to CNN’s presentation of the video (just after the mandatory commercial), a warning message appeared for several seconds in bold font atop a two-tone black background.

“Please be advised you are about to hear an excerpt of the national anthem,” the warning declared.

Got that? Brace yourselves, America, because a snippet of the song expressing America’s patriotic soul is about to hit your tender ears.

 

Obamacare Architect: Obamacare deliberately written to fool American poeple, CBO… (video) – UPDATED!

This is Jonathan Gruber, a far left “health care economist” from MIT. He is one of the key architects of the Obamacare law. If you ever doubted what we tell you here on a regular basis about how far politicians will go to lie to the American people, prepare to have those doubts evaporated:

Gruber does not mince words. He states that Obamacare was written in a deliberately “tortured” way and relied on the “stupidity of the American voter” to ensure its passage.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes,” Gruber said. “If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK, so it’s written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.”

“Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” Gruber said. “And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass.”

Better for Americans to be slapped with a law they don’t understand, than for them to understand the law and work against it, Gruber claimed. “Look, I wish … we could make it all transparent,” Gruber said, “but I’d rather have this law than not.”

So much for the consent of the governed.

See more of Jon Gruber here, in which you can catch him in another whopping lie:

UPDATE – Megyn Kelly responds HERE. Congressman Trey Gowdy responds HERE.

UPDATE II – Another video of Gruber saying the American people are stupid HERE.

UPDATE III – Third video where he says it again:

UPDATE IV – OH look! Another big shot Democrat lying about Obamacare. Keep in mind in the video linked, that 71% of so called Obamacare signups are really people who have signed up for Medicaid – LINK.

UPDATE V – Nancy Pelosi says that she has never heard of Jonathan Gruber and that he had nothing to do with writing the bill. Unfortunately for Pelosi has mentioned him by name several times on video and on her web site:

Pelosi cited ObamaCare architect in push for law – now claims she hasn’t heard of him – LINK.

https://twitter.com/BrianFaughnan/status/532932619328303105

https://twitter.com/FirstTeamTommy/status/532932891991609344

https://twitter.com/FirstTeamTommy/status/532933664976678912

https://twitter.com/FirstTeamTommy/status/532934269279420416

 

UPDATE VI – Harry Reid quoting the Obamacare lies of Jonathan Gruber on the Senate Floor. Keep in mind that Gruber said that the bill was written “in a tortured way” to fool the CBO:

Here is Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid calling MIT’s Jonathan Gruber “one of the most respected economists in the world,” Harry Reid confidently predicts that thanks to Obamacare, 93% of Americans will see reductions in health care premiums of up to 60%, and 30 million more people will be covered, all while reducing the deficit.

UPDATE VII – Here is more history of Jonathan Gruber as well as his history in writing Obamacare – LINK.

UPDATE VIII – Melissa Francis: When I Worked At CNBC They Stopped Me From Telling The Truth About Obamacare, “I was silenced.”

UPDATE IX – More video shows Jonathan Gruber dismissing (mocking) voter concerns about government-run health care. Via Watchdog.org and The Blaze:

UPDATE X – Obamacare Architect Flat-Out Admits Administration ‘Mislabeled’ Key Part of Health Care Law in Sixth Video – LINK.

UPDATE XI – Hitler Finds Out Field Marshal Gruber Spilled the Beans

UPDATE XII – Gruber in an Obamacare campaign video

UPDATE XIII – Brit Hume blasts…

UPDATE XIV – More Democrats praising Gruber before denying him:

UPDATE XV – Sharyl Attkisson: Bias in Media Coverage of Gruber Comments:

UPDATE XVI – Kirsten Powers ‘Truly Stunned’ By Media Blackout of ‘Stupid Americans’ Videos – LINK.

UPDATE XVII – Gruber: Obama personally asked me to help disguise unhelpful Obamacare facts – LINK.

UPDATE XVIII – Jon Stewart torches Jon Gruber and Nancy Pelosi – VIDEO LINK.

UPDATE XIX – AWESOME – Jake Tapper explains why “Grubergate” is so important:

2014 Election Thoughts and Reactions

UPDATE – Wow, this is a very interesting piece from Jon Stewart on the 2014 shellacking. It is also a good lesson in strategic political deception. See the video HERE.

2014 election by house dist

Congratulations to Mia Love, the first black Republican woman in Congress and to Tim Scott the first black Senator from the South since Reconstruction. Congratulations to Joni Ernst, the first female Senator from Iowa. Has President Obama called them yet?

Meet 18-year-old Saira Blair — a Republican from West Virginia — who just became the youngest elected lawmaker in the country!

78% Say Politicians Play ‘Race Card Just to Get Reelected…

All newly elected GOP Senators campaigned on repealing Obamacare.

Obama does not feel repudiated…. no kidding.

Krauthammer: The worst wall to wall shellacking you will ever see in an election.

Democrats who ran on more gun control crushed.

Immigration a losing issue for Democrats even in liberal states.

Cruz: ‘The era of Obama lawlessness is over

Liberal media trashes female voters who turned out for Republicans…MOREMORE….MORE.

More liberal media reaction: liberal media reaction 2014

More stupid reactions from the liberal media elites.

Sarah Palin: It wasn’t a vote for the GOP, it was a vote against Democrats…

Mitch McConnell is a pinhead. Why? In an absurd statement and immediate capitulation on spending and borrowing, Mitch McConnell just surrendered Congress’s power of
the purse to Obama: “Let me be clear,” McConnell said, “there will be no government shutdown and no default on the national debt.”

Point 1 – There is no default on the debt because every day the Treasury brings in more than enough to service the debt.

Point 2 – McConnell has already surrendered to the Democrats. All they have to do is threaten a government shutdown and McConnell will give them what they want.

Point 3 – This already undermined the Constitution. The “Power of the Purse”, the power to defund certain projects and agencies, is the primary “check and balance” power given to Congress in the Constitution.

Mitch McConnell is still a pinhead. Remember this? “Shutting down 17% of the government would be disastrous for Republicans in the 2014 mid terms.”

“Old Guard” Republicans who trashed conservatives got fewer votes.

Veronique de Rugy: Democrats have nothing to fear from GOP victory.

What should Republicans do now?

 

In the Great Lake States “union retribution” fizzles.

The Democratic Party and leftist union leadership threw everything they had against Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin:
Scott Walker 2014 huge win
Rush Limbaugh analyzes the Wisconsin race:

Game show TV legend Chuck Woolery weighs in:

Democrats predicting Election Day victory!

 

 

71% of Obamacare Signups Actually Government Medicaid Enrollment

The Daily Signal:

The vast majority of Americans  gaining health coverage under Obamacare actually qualified for Medicaid because of loosened eligibility —and that’s what boosted enrollment among those previously uninsured, according to a new report from The Heritage Foundation.

The Obama administration has boasted that the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, would allow those previously uninsured to purchase quality, affordable health care.

“The inescapable conclusion is that, when it comes to covering the uninsured, Obamacare so far is an expansion of Medicaid,” Heritage Foundation health policy experts Edmund F. Haislmaier and Drew Gonshorowski write in a research paper scheduled for release today.

Officials announced in May that more than 8 million Americans had picked a health plan on the Obamacare website, HealthCare.gov.

Haislmaier and Gonshorowski conclude that 8.5 million Americans gained coverage through Obamacare from January to July.

However, their paper says, more than 70 percent of those signups can be traced to the expansion of Medicaid eligibility in 24 states:

Of the 8.5 million total individuals who gained health insurance coverage, 71 percent of that net coverage gain was attributable to Obamacare’s expansion of Medicaid to able-bodied, working-age adults.

Continue reading HERE.

New wave of Obamacare cancellations hitting with a twist

Via Insurance Broker C. Steven Tucker:

So this is what I’ve been dealing with today. Fielding angry calls from my HumanaOne clients who ALL received a policy termination notice because of Obamacare. Not only my HumanaOne clients, but my Aetna clients and even Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas. All of their policies will be cancelled as of December 31, 2014.

This is the second year I’ve had to deal with this but this year it’s much different. For the first time in 20 years I cannot even quote a replacement product because Barack Obama has issued a GAG ORDER to the health insurance industry instructing them not to disclose their January 2015 health insurance rates until after the mid term elections. This is absolutely unprecedented. Normally health insurance premiums are released for public viewing 60 days before the January 1st effective date.

Where are the reports on these cancellations and Barack Obama’s gag order from NBC News ABC News, CBS News and CNN.News? The only news organization that I am aware of that has reported on any of this is the Fox News Channel.

I can guarantee you one thing not ONE of my clients is voting Democrat on Tuesday. Republicans have outstanding alternatives to this disastrous health care law. The two most recent are the American Health Care Reform Act and the Universal Exchange Plan. Please read them. For it will be up to us to forge a path forward for the American people and time is of the essence. The insurance company bail outs are temporary and they will expire in 2016. Without a bailout the health insurance industry will pull out of the individual and family health insurance market. Before that happens we need to be able to articulate intelligent, market based alternatives. It’s up to us.

Continue reading HERE.

ocare cancellation tucker1ocare cancellation tucker2

Aetna: 30% of Obamacare signups have dropped since May

Thirty percent of Obamacare signups have dropped since May.

Maybe because Obamacare is too expensive, has freakishly high deductibles, and the job market is a disaster.

Via The Daily Caller:

The number of Obamacare enrollments for top health insurer Aetna is plummeting, according to a report from Investor’s Business Daily.

Aetna’s enrollment reached 720,000 by May 20, after the final end to the the extended open enrollment period. But by the end of June Aetna had less than 600,000 paying customers, IBD reports, and the company expects paying customers to fall to “just over 500,000″ by the end of 2015. That would be a drop of just under 30 percent from the May sign-up numbers — the last time the Obama administration released its official Obamacare enrollment tally.

Aetna’s reported drop-off rate appears to be more extensive than other companies. Cigna reported that between both its exchange customers and those in the private individual market, it expects to lose around 20,000 paying customers throughout the year, out of 300,000.

The federal government released monthly enrollment reports throughout Obamacare’s first open enrollment period, but stopped offering details when widespread enrollment ended in mid-May. But Americans with certain qualifying life changes can still sign up for coverage on an Obamacare exchange at any time, and customers are regularly dropping coverage as well.

But the administration refuses to give out any details on the total enrollment and has never released information on the percentage of Obamacare sign-ups that followed through and paid their first premiums to activate their coverage. Most insurance companies have reported that by the end of the open enrollment period, only around 85 percent of those who signed up on Obamacare exchanges ended up buying a health insurance plan.

Forbes: Obamacare Has Increased Non-Group Premiums In Nearly All States

Via Forbes Magazine:

Now There Can Be No Doubt: Obamacare Has Increased Non-Group Premiums In Nearly All States

Remember this categorical assurance from President Obama?

“We’ll lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year. .  .  . We’ll do it by the end of my first term as president of the United States”

OK, it’s probably a little unfair to take some June 2008 campaign “puffery” literally–even though it was reiterated by candidate Obama’s economic policy advisor, Jason Furman in a sit-down with a New York Times reporter: “‘We think we could get to $2,500 in savings by the end of the first term, or be very close to it.” Moreover, President Obama subsequently doubled-down on his promise in July 2012, assuring small business owners “your premiums will go down.”  Fortunately, the Washington Post fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, honestly awarded the 2012 claim Three Pinocchios (“Significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions”).

Unfortunately, this has never settled the debate. When the Society of Actuaries estimated spring 2013 that the ACA would result in increasing claims costs by an average of 32 percent nationally by 2017, such estimates could be dismissed as “projections” since at the time of this study, actual premiums in the Exchanges had not yet been announced.  A subsequent plethora of studies showed there had been double-digit increases in premiums (when comparing actual Exchange premiums to previously-prevailing premiums in the non-group market). However, virtually all of these studies focused only on Exchange premiums rather than premiums in the entire non-group market (only half of which consists of Exchange coverage). As a consequence, Obamacare proponents tended to dismiss these studies either as partisan attacks or methodologically limited, making what amounts to apples-to-oranges comparisons.

However, a new study from the well-respected and non-partisan National Bureau of Economic Research (and published by Brookings Institution), overcomes the limitations of these prior studies by examining what happened to premiums in the entire non-group market. The bottom line? In 2014, premiums in the non-group market grew by 24.4% compared to what they would have been without Obamacare.  Of equal importance, this careful state-by-state assessment showed that premiums rose in all but 6 states (including Washington DC).  It’s worth unpacking this study a bit to understand the ramification of these findings.

Non-Group Premiums Rose in 45 States Due to Obamacare

The non-group market can only be accurately assessed on a state-by-state basis. Obamacare. The law creates a single risk pool in each state for non-group coverage. That is, health insurers can sell policies inside or outside the Exchanges but they all are part of the same risk pool.  Unlike virtually all other studies that have been conducted to date, this new study examined premium data from both Exchange and non-Exchange plans, i.e., providing a picture of the complete non-group market rather than one segment.  This is crucially important since in nearly one third of states (16), Exchange coverage constitutes 40% or less of the entire non-group market (Table 1).

Of equal importance, unlike prior studies which simply compared pre-Obamacare premiums in 2013 to actual premiums offered on Exchanges in 2014, this new study isolates the causal impact of Obamacare statistically by using trend data in each state to figure out what non-group premiums in 2014 would have been in the absence of Obamacare. Thus, critics could dismiss many other so-called “pre-/post” studies by effectively saying “Well, premiums in the non-group have always gone up by a large amount, so what’s happening under Obamacare is no different.”  Such criticisms cannot be levied at this study. All of the percentage changes shown in the chart below represent the net change attributable to Obamacare after accounting for all the other factors that would have made premiums go up.[1]

PremiumIncreasesKowalski

Clearly, the adverse impact of Obamacare on non-group premiums varies sizably across states. The law is estimated to result in lower premiums in only 6 states. However, it should be noted that while the author presented premium estimates for California and New Jersey, the data for these two states is incomplete due to anomalous data reporting requirements. Thus, the large estimated premium decline of 37.5% in New Jersey likely would be different were full data available, but there is no way of telling by how much.

What is disturbing is to see premium increases in excess of 35% in 9 states, including some of the nation’s largest states (Florida and Texas). Remember, these are increases above and beyond normal premium trends.  No one can credibly claim that these massive premium increases would have happened anyway since the study was specifically designed to isolate the law’s impacts from all the other factors that have driven up premiums in recent years.

Taxpayers Will Pay About 24% More for Exchange Subsidies Due to Obamacare-induced Premium Increases.

Continue Reading HERE.

Senator Dick Durbin to Walgreens: Stay in Illinois or else….

Senator Durbin is the second most powerful Democrat in the Senate. Illinois has the highest taxes in America so companies are leaving in droves. Time to whip out the thug card….

National Review:

Score another victory this week for the Senate’s lead political thug, Dick Durbin. The second-highest-ranking Senate Democrat and lead political henchman coerced retail giant Walgreens to stay in Illinois and not move as planned to Switzerland.

The government’s intimidation campaign against Walgreens was so heavy-handed that it would make Richard Nixon blush. Walgreens was set to move in order to reduce its tax liability and avoid the 40 percent income tax rate it pays as an Illinois-based corporation. This would have saved the company and its mostly American shareholders an estimated $4 billion over five years.

But back in July Mr. Durbin sent an astounding letter to Walgreens CEO Gregory Wasson warning the company, and demanding that it abandon its plans to relocate.

He lambasted the company’s move as a “clever tax dodge,” and threatened that “deeply patriotic” customers would not “support Walgreen’s decision to turn its back on the United States.” He added, subtly, that “nearly all of your $2.5 billion in profits earned last year were from sales to U.S. taxpaying customers.”

That was followed by other threats of political retaliation. “Much of Walgreens financial success was built on programs and infrastructure provided by the U.S. government” and “the future success of Walgreens will continue to depend on U.S. taxpayers and government-funded programs.” Just in case Mr. Wasson didn’t get the point, he reminded him that “nearly 25% of Walgreens profits were from U.S-funded Medicare and Medicaid programs.”

Unfortunately, our elected officials in Congress now feel they have the political power to carry out these threats with impunity.

Now Mr. Durbin is celebrating the Walgreens shakedown. The big losers here were the shareholders — including thousands and thousands of middle class Americans — whose retirement funds include Walgreens stock. The stock fell in the 24 hours after the announcement by more than 10 percent and so shareholders lost at least $6 billion on the announcement. That’s a lot of financial wreckage from one single senator.

In case there is any doubt that Mr. Durbin’s threats were heard, the statement by Walgreens about why it was not moving after all was revealing. The firm cited big risks of “consumer backlash and political ramifications, including the risk to our government book of business.” In other words: We got your message, Mr. Durbin.

 

“If you are not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” – Malcolm X