10 federal employees and 1 w/ criminal charges
Posted By: nm on 2008-09-10
In Reply to:
over improper relationships between interior dept officials who oversee offshore drilling and oil executives...............Big oil? Offshore drilling? Run afoul of the law?Nahhhhh
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
criminal
Incompetent? I would call it criminal from a criminal administration.
Criminal behavior..
Down below somebody cites lack of opportunity as a reason for blacks in American having a high incarceration rate... Well, yes, that's one piece of the pie. I say that ALL of the reason can be traced to the rampant fatherlessness in the black community, where 69% of all black children in this country are born to a single mother. Everything else from A to Z can be derived from the broken family syndrome. But of course this has nothing to do with race other than than the statistic above. Whites and Hispanice from the same social situation suffer the same fate described below.
WHAT HAPPENS TO CHILDREN DEPRIVED OF THEIR NATURAL FATHERS
Compared to children in male-headed traditional families where their
natural parents are married to each other, children living in
female-headed single-parent, lesbian or other environments where they are
deprived of their natural fathers are:
1. Eight times more likely to go to prison.
2. Five times more likely to commit suicide.
3. Twenty times more likely to have behavioral problems.
4. Twenty times more likely to become rapists.
5. 32 times more likely to run away.
6. Ten times more likely to abuse chemical substances.
7. Nine times more likely to drop out of high school.
8. 33 times more likely to be seriously abused.
9. 73 times more likely to be fatally abused.
10. One-tenth as likely to get A's in school.
11. On average have a 44% higher mortality rate.
12. On average have a 72% lower standard of living.
Source: The Garbage Generation by Daniel Amneus Ph.D. It is posted in
HTML format at http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/damneus/garbgen.htm
==============
Fathers' Absence
- 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes.
- 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
- 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes.
- 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes.
- 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes.
- 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes.
- 70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes.
- 85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home.
- California has the nation's highest juvenile incarceration rate and the nation's highest juvenile unemployment rate.
- Juveniles have become the driving force behind the national increase in violent crime; the epidemic of youth violence and gangs is related to the breakdown of the two-parent family.
- 71% of teenage pregnancies are to children of single parents. Daughters of single parents are 2.1 times more likely to have children during their teenage years than are daughters from intact families. Daughters of single parents are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a premarital birth, and 92% more likely to dissolve their own marriages. All these intergenerational consequences of single motherhood increase the likelihood of chronic welfare dependency.
- In 1983, a study found that 60% of perpetrators of child abuse were women with sole custody. Shared parenting can significantly reduce the stress associated with sole custody, and reduce the isolation of children in abusive situations by allowing both parents' to monitor the children's health and welfare and to protect them.
- 18 million children live in single-parent homes. Nearly 75% of American children living in single-parent families will experience poverty before they turn 11. Only 20% in two-parent families will experience poverty.
- The feminization of poverty is linked to the feminization of custody, as well as linked to lower earnings for women. Greater opportunity for education and jobs through shared parenting can help break the cycle.
- Kidnapping: family abductions were 163,200 compared to non-family abductions of 200 to 300, attributed to the parents' disenchantment with the legal system.
Reestablishing fatherhood is not just a minor issue to the Signatories to the Fathers' Manifesto. It is the only way to rid this world of its current social pathology, and they know it. Any and every plan for doing this must be presented and carefully scrutinized, regardless of its political correctness. There is too much at stake to ignore any possible solution.
The Constitutional right to freedom of religion clearly requires the preservation of families -- and this requires strong fatherhood.
Sources:
The False Child Abuse Industry by John Knight
Fathering Magazine
Even if she did not "pal around" with this criminal
she certainly professed eager willingness to have her daughter become a member of this woman's family and allow this woman to be involved in her grandchild's life. To my mind, that is far worse that any association or claim she made about Obama. It shows very poor judgment on her part.
GM employees
I will agree that I it is really hard to conceive the government bailing out the big 3 needing billions of dollars, ok so what happened to all the money the big 3 made in the past? They need a plan. Everywhere I look I see foreclosed houses in my area, it is very sad. For the person with the pharmacist dad in Flushing...Let me guess, Cherry Street Pharmacy?
Well the GM salaried retirees, which includes my father-in-law, are losing their health benefits come the first of the year. He is a colorectal survivor with a permanent colostomy and self catherization for the past 13 years, those are a lot of mandatory daily supplies, so I hope that Medicare kicks in on coverage. I don’t think that “working in the shop” was at all glamorous, my dad busted his butt for GM for 38 years plus worked on the farm with my grandparents and my brother went of to the fire pits of h3ll (100+ degrees every day) at Saginaw Grey Iron (which is a foundry) for the last ten years of his GM “career”. Back in the day, GM provided a good income to people, like my dad, who was a hard worker, but had no means of gaining an education. He married my mother, who was a widow with four children before they had me, without being a GM employee, he could have never provided for an instant family on the wages he made as a farmer. I think there are a lot of people in Michigan who forget how thankful they should be to GM. Another way to look at it is, every GM employee coming to your dad’s pharmacy had insurance to pay for their medicine, so he knew that he was going to get paid as well. Just another perspective. Thanks.
It is criminal neglect, IMHO
The more I read articles and watch videos in the net, the more horror it all becomes, I truly believe it is criminal neglect. I would think whomever will be found responsible after investigations (I assume Bush will be, the evidence is there), should be put on trial. This was just simply neglect by the federal govt to respond to a national emergency and hundreds or thousands have died because of it, animals are dying, billions will have to be spent to rebuild, people no doubt will be traumatically scarred for years to come, especially the children. Some will never know what happened to their family as the longer the bodies lay in the water and heat, their DNA breaks down. Beautiful New Orleans destroyed. Its like Bush is truly disconnected..he does not comprehend impending emergencies, he just does not get it and he would rather joke about disasters, like he did last week. I wonder if all that alcohol and cocaine he did in his youth burned part of his thought processes? Im just wondering what the next catastrophe will be under Bush's watch. 9/11, Iraq war and now this..American's dirty little secret is out to the world..we dont take care of the less fortunate, we would rather spend billions killing people in other countries than helping poor American citizens and strengthening our infrastructure. I hope the momentum continues and we demand from our servants, the politicians, to put America back on the right track.
Fraudulent voting is not criminal??
Um, fraudulant voting is NOT a crime?? Since when? I was watching CNN (if they would report on something that makes the democrats look bad, it must be bad), and they showed ballots from people named after businesses, and people who were dead or didn't even exist! One name was Jimmie Johns. When they went to find Mr. Johns, they found the address was actually a restaurant named Jimmie Johns. No such person there. There are approximately 200,000 of these kind of ballots in Ohio alone. And you dems think this is not a problem, or an attempt to win the election? What are you people smoking? Get your head out of the sand and WAKE UP! If these were Republicans doing this fraudulent voting you people would have your lawyers on it pronto style. But because the fraudulent votes are for the Democrats, that's okay, and not a crime...
MC (master criminal) Rove........yep.......nm
x
Citigroup to cut another 53,000 employees
Citigroup Inc. is shedding approximately 53,000 more employees in the coming quarters as the banking giant struggles to steady itself after suffering massive losses from deteriorating debt.
The New York-based bank, which has already reduced its assets by about 20 percent since the first quarter of the year, also plans to trim expenses by 19 percent in 2009 from third-quarter levels, to $50 billion.
The plans, posted on the company’s Web site, were discussed by CEO Vikram Pandit at the company’s town hall meeting in New York Monday with employees.
The company said it is shrinking its work force by 20 percent from its 2007 peak of 375,000. The company had already announced in October that it was eliminating about 22,000 jobs from that level.
About half of the expected work force reductions will come from business sales; Citigroup already announced that it was selling Citi Global Services and its German retail banking business, accounting for about 18,000 jobs. Citi is planning to sell other businesses, too, but has not announced them yet, a spokesman said.
The other half of the work force reductions will come from layoffs and attrition, the spokesman said.
The New York-based bank has posted four straight quarterly losses, including a loss of $2.8 billion during the third quarter.
In an effort to instill confidence in the company, Citigroup emphasized in its presentation Monday that its Tier 1 capital ratio, a measure of financial strength, is 10.4 percent after a $25 billion investment from the government — part of the $700 billion financial rescue package passed by Congress last month. That ratio is higher than peers Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co., after their purchases of Merrill Lynch and Wachovia Corp., respectively.
Citigroup also stressed that it has doubled reserves in a year to $24 billion; that its revenues are stable; and that Citigroup has lower exposure to U.S. consumer mortgages than JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America and Wells Fargo.
But the announcements were not met with enthusiasm from investors. Citi shares fell 46 cents, or 4.8 percent, to $9.06 in morning trading. The company’s shares have been trading at 13-year lows.
Shortly before the town hall meeting in New York, Citigroup Chairman Win Bischoff said at a business forum in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, that it would be irresponsible for Citi and other companies not to look at staffing in the event of a prolonged economic downturn.
“What all of us have done — and perhaps injudiciously — we’ve added a lot of people over ... this very benign period,” Bischoff said.
“If there is a reversion to the mean ... those job losses will obviously fall particularly heavily on the financial sector,” he added. “Certainly they will fall particularly heavily on London and New York.”
A Citigroup spokesman said that while certain regions and businesses might have higher concentrations of job cuts, they would generally be across the entire company and around the world.
In his comments to The Associated Press, Bischoff did not rule out the likelihood that Citi’s leaders would go without bonuses this year — a move that would effectively amount to a substantial pay cut for the company’s executives.
“Watch this space,” he said when asked about lost bonuses.
On Sunday, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said seven top executives, including Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein, opted out of receiving cash or stock bonuses for 2008 amid the ongoing credit crisis.
Letter to my employees...
Not sure who wrote this letter, but its quite a good read..
To All My Valued Employees,
There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is the changing political landscape in this country.
However, let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might help you decide what is in your best interests.
First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you have to understand that for every business owner there is a back story. This back story is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You've seen my big home at last years Christmas party. I'm sure; all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life.
However, what you don't see is the back story.
I started this company 28 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300 square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire living apartment was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you.
My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business -- hard work, discipline, and sacrifice.
Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a modest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting the Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the Goodwill store extracting any clothing item that didn't look like it was birthed in the 70's. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, will be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had.
So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9am, mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5pm, I don't. There is no "off" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have the freedom. I eat, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day this business is attached to my hip like a 1 year old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that garden -- the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations... You never realize the back story and the sacrifices I've made.
Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail-out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for.
Yes, business ownership has is benefits but the price I've paid is steep and not without wounds.
Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit and let me tell you why:
I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and use taxes. Payroll taxes. Workers compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates and regulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most of my time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my "stimulus" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.
The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country.
The fact is, if I deducted (Read: Stole) 50% of your paycheck you'd quit and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree which is why your job is in jeopardy.
Here is what many of you don't understand ... to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had suddenly government mandated to me that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now.
When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the poor of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change you can keep.
So where am I going with all this?
It's quite simple.
If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple. I fire you. I fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem any more.
Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, will be my citizenship.
If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the constitution, and will have changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about....
Signed,
Your boss
Trying to make political hay out of this tragic criminal act
Anyone who would carve ANYTHING in human flesh is obviously mentally deranged.
The money from employees and their families...
is called "bundling." Lobbyists use "bundling" to get around finance limits.
The donkey in the room here, that you seem content to ignore, is that the Democrats, including Barack Obama, created this mess. They had a chance to stop it in 2005-2006 and did not. That is a fact. McCain tried to get legislation passed, they balked. If they did not do it for mnoney, I don't know why they did it...but the fact is, they did it, and WE are left holding the bag. And now, when Obama has a chance to help fix it, he is refusing again. Said "call me if you need me." Well I want a President I don't have to call. I expect when he is "multitasking" that he prioritizes, and the looming economic failure and the $700 billion it is going to take to get us out of it, is more important than a debate. What difference does 3 days make in the face of that?
Would you like the employees to work for free?
The union already made major concessions in their contract whereas new hires make 50% of what longer term employees make plus they do not receive the same benefits. I don't know it to be fact but I expect they have already got rid of a lot of the higher paid workers and replaced them with lower cost new hires. Sorta like what has been going on in the MT industry!!!! They'll probably end up filing bankruptcy, using that to void the union contracts and workers will probably be paid $10 an hour with no benefits...if they're lucky. Of course they'll likely get rid of all union workers as they won't want any union organizers around to rock their corporate boat.
It makes me angry to hear supposedly American worker brothers and sisters trying to lay the blame at the feet of the workers. Complaining about workers pay while not mentioning a word about the corporate jets that flew these A-hole CEOs to Washington to beg for money is sort of like, as one person said, "going to a soup kitchen in a tuxedo." Makes me furious.
Who do you think hires employees? It AINT the
nm
Alaska AG: State employees won't honor
By STEVE QUINN
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) - Alaska's investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power, a potentially damaging distraction for John McCain's presidential campaign, ran into intensified resistance Tuesday when the attorney general said state employees would refuse to honor subpoenas in the case.
In a letter to state Sen. Hollis French, the Democrat overseeing the investigation, Republican Attorney General Talis Colberg asked that the subpoenas be withdrawn. He also said the employees would refuse to appear unless either the full state Senate or the entire Legislature votes to compel their testimony.
Colberg, who was appointed by Palin, said the employees are caught between their respect for the Legislature and their loyalty to the governor, who initially agreed to cooperate with the inquiry but has increasingly opposed it since McCain chose her as his running mate.
"This is an untenable position for our clients because the governor has so strongly stated that the subpoenas issued by your committee are of questionable validity," Colberg wrote.
Last week, French's Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed 13 people. They include 10 employees of Palin's administration and three who are not: her husband, Todd Palin; John Bitney, Palin's former legislative liaison who now is chief of staff for Republican House Speaker John Harris; and Murlene Wilkes, a state contractor.
French did not immediately return a telephone call Tuesday for comment.
Earlier in the day, Harris, who two months ago supported the "Troopergate" investigation, openly questioned its impartiality and raised the possibility of delaying the findings.
Like Colberg's letter, the surprise maneuver by Harris reflected deepening resolve by Republicans to spare Palin embarrassment or worse in the final weeks of the presidential campaign.
And it marked a further fraying of a bipartisan consensus, formed by a unanimous panel before Palin became McCain's running mate, that her firing of the state's public safety commissioner justified the ethical investigation.
In a letter, Harris wrote that what "started as a bipartisan and impartial effort is becoming overshadowed by public comments from individuals at both ends of the political spectrum," and he urged lawmakers to meet quickly to decide on a course.
"What I may be in favor of is having the report delayed, but only if it becomes a blatant partisan issue," he told The Associated Press, while indicating he already believes it has become politically tainted.
Democratic state Sen. Kim Elton, chairman of the Legislative Council, the 14-member panel that authorized the probe, had no immediate comment on Harris' request. Under an unusual power-sharing agreement, the council is made up of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats.
At issue is whether Palin abused her power by pressing the commissioner to remove her former brother-in-law as an Alaska state trooper, then firing the commissioner when he didn't.
The matter risks casting a shadow on Palin's reputation, central to her appeal in the campaign, that she is a clean-government advocate who takes on entrenched interests - not a governor who tried to use her authority behind the scenes to settle a personal score.
Palin has defended her behavior and said she welcomed the investigation. "Hold me accountable," she said. But she and the McCain campaign have taken actions that could slow the probe, possibly past Election Day.
Also Tuesday, five Republican state lawmakers filed a lawsuit against an investigation they called "unlawful, biased, partial and partisan." None serves on the bipartisan Legislative Council that unanimously approved the inquiry. They want it pushed past the election or top Democrats removed from the probe.
Making clear the dispute has ramifications beyond Alaska, Liberty Legal Institute, a Texas-based legal advocacy group, was working on the lawsuit. The institute has taken on a variety of cases in defense of conservative Christian positions.
Elton called the lawsuit "a distraction."
"The silver lining in this action initiated by the five lawmakers is that some of that debate now has been kicked to the judicial branch which, unlike the Legislature and the governor's office, is more insulated from the red-hot passion of presidential politics," he said.
Palin fired public safety commissioner Walt Monegan in July.
Weeks later, it emerged that Palin, her husband, Todd, and several high-level staffers had contacted Monegan about state trooper Mike Wooten, who had gone through a nasty divorce from Palin's sister before Palin became governor. While Monegan says no one from the administration ever told him directly to fire Wooten, he says their repeated contacts made it clear they wanted Wooten gone.
Palin maintains she fired Monegan over budget disagreements, not because he wouldn't dismiss her ex-brother-in-law. She has sought through her lawyer to have the matter investigated in a more favorable forum, the state personnel board.
Paleocon Paul Craig Roberts: A Criminal Administration
Conservative Columnist Paul Craig Roberts: A Criminal Administration
A Criminal Administration
by Paul Craig Roberts
Caught in gratuitous and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has defended its illegal activity and set the Justice (sic) Department on the trail of the person or persons who informed the New York Times of Bush's violation of law. Note the astounding paradox: The Bush administration is caught red-handed in blatant illegality and responds by trying to arrest the patriot who exposed the administration's illegal behavior.
Bush has actually declared it treasonous to reveal his illegal behavior! His propagandists, who masquerade as news organizations, have taken up the line: To reveal wrong-doing by the Bush administration is to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
Compared to Spygate, Watergate was a kindergarten picnic. The Bush administration's lies, felonies, and illegalities have revealed it to be a criminal administration with a police state mentality and police state methods. Now Bush and his attorney general have gone the final step and declared Bush to be above the law. Bush aggressively mimics Hitler's claim that defense of the realm entitles him to ignore the rule of law.
Bush's acts of illegal domestic spying are gratuitous because there are no valid reasons for Bush to illegally spy. The Foreign Intelligence Services Act gives Bush all the power he needs to spy on terrorist suspects. All the administration is required to do is to apply to a secret FISA court for warrants. The Act permits the administration to spy first and then apply for a warrant, should time be of the essence.
The problem is that Bush has totally ignored the law and the court. Why would President Bush ignore the law and the FISA court? It is certainly not because the court in its three decades of existence was uncooperative. According to attorney Martin Garbus (New York Observer, 12/28/05), the secret court has issued more warrants than all federal district judges combined, only once denying a warrant.
Why, then, has the administration created another scandal for itself on top of the WMD, torture, hurricane, and illegal detention scandals?
There are two possible reasons.
One reason is that the Bush administration is being used to concentrate power in the executive. The old conservative movement, which honors the separation of powers, has been swept away. Its place has been taken by a neoconservative movement that worships executive power.
The other reason is that the Bush administration could not go to the FISA secret court for warrants because it was not spying for legitimate reasons and, therefore, had to keep the court in the dark about its activities.
What might these illegitimate reasons be? Could it be that the Bush administration used the spy apparatus of the US government in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election?
Could we attribute the feebleness of the Democrats as an opposition party to information obtained through illegal spying that would subject them to blackmail?
These possible reasons for bypassing the law and the court need to be fully investigated and debated. No administration in my lifetime has given so many strong reasons to oppose and condemn it as has the Bush administration. Nixon was driven from office because of a minor burglary of no consequence in itself. Clinton was impeached because he did not want the embarrassment of publicly acknowledging that he engaged in adulterous sex acts in the Oval Office. In contrast, Bush has deceived the public and Congress in order to invade Iraq, illegally detained Americans, illegally tortured detainees, and illegally spied on Americans. Bush has upheld neither the Constitution nor the law of the land. A majority of Americans disapprove of what Bush has done; yet, the Democratic Party remains a muted spectator.
Why is the Justice (sic) Department investigating the leak of Bush's illegal activity instead of the illegal activity committed by Bush? Is the purpose to stonewall Congress' investigation of Bush's illegal spying? By announcing a Justice (sic) Department investigation, the Bush administration positions itself to decline to respond to Congress on the grounds that it would compromise its own investigation into national security matters.
What will the federal courts do? When Hitler challenged the German judicial system, it collapsed and accepted that Hitler was the law. Hitler's claims were based on nothing but his claims, just as the claim for extra-legal power for Bush is based on nothing but memos written by his political appointees.
The Bush administration, backed by the neoconservative Federalist Society, has brought the separation of powers, the foundation of our political system, to crisis. The Federalist Society, an organization of Republican lawyers, favors more energy in the executive. Distrustful of Congress and the American people, the Federalist Society never fails to support rulings that concentrate power in the executive branch of government. It is a paradox that conservative foundations and individuals have poured money for 23 years into an organization that is inimical to the separation of powers, the foundation of our constitutional system.
September 11, 2001, played into neoconservative hands exactly as the 1933 Reichstag fire played into Hitler's hands. Fear, hysteria, and national emergency are proven tools of political power grabs. Now that the federal courts are beginning to show some resistance to Bush's claims of power, will another terrorist attack allow the Bush administration to complete its coup?
_____
Dr. Roberts is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
Copyright © 2006 Creators Syndicate
Not in time for Chrysler, its employees, downstream businesses
x
AIG Employees Starting to Give Back Bonuses
WASHINGTON -- The chief executive officer of failed insurance conglomerate AIG told lawmakers Wednesday that he has asked executives to give back at least half of their bonuses.
Edward Libby, chairman and CEO of the American International Group, said that some workers there already have volunteered to return the money.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/18/aig-chairman-faces-congressional-grilling-bonuses/
What were the charges?
and let's press charges
someone who kills someone who is pregnant for a double homocide but WAIT A MINUTE...... that is not an actual life...
Murder charges for 3 U.S. soldiers..sm
I have mixed feelings about this y'all. There is no doubt in my mind that mental issues are involved given the situation. However, they could have just been following orders. Or, worse just murdered the Iraqis on their own volition and threatened a fellow soldier.
Definitely worth the investigation, which sends the message that we (the US) does not tolerate this type behavior from our soldiers.
---------------------------------
Murder charges for 3 U.S. soldiers
They are accused of killing 3 Iraqis
Julian E. Barnes, Los Angeles Times
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
(06-20) 04:00 PDT Washington -- Three U.S. soldiers have been charged with the premeditated murder of three Iraqi detainees as well as with threatening the life of a fellow soldier who they feared would challenge their accounts of the deaths, military officials said Monday.
The three Americans were identified as staff Sgt. Raymond L. Girouard, Spc. William B. Hunsaker and Pfc. Corey R. Clagett, all members of the 3rd Brigade of the 101st Airborne Division. They were charged with shooting the detainees May 9 during a military operation near Thar Thar Canal in Salahuddin province north of Baghdad.
A murder conviction in the military carries the possibility of the death penalty. The accused soldiers are being held in Kuwait, a Pentagon official said. No personal information was available Monday about the soldiers.
The latest charges come as the military is conducting a separate investigation of the killing of 24 civilians in Haditha in November. Military investigators are examining possible murder charges against a group of Marines for those deaths. In addition, seven other marines and a Navy corpsman are being held in the brig at Camp Pendleton (San Diego County) in connection with the death of an Iraqi man in another town, Hamandiya. Since the start of the Iraq war, the military has brought criminal charges against at least 20 other service members in deaths of Iraqis.
Military officials first mentioned the Salahuddin investigation in a brief news release June 16. But details of how the three soldiers shot the men, near the Muthana Chemical Complex, have remained sketchy. The military has not said why the three Iraqis were being detained.
In addition to murder, the soldiers were charged with conspiracy and with threatening another soldier. Military officials said the accused initially reported they shot the detainees while they were trying to flee.
But that account was contradicted by a junior soldier who saw the shooting. Defense Department charge sheets released Monday identify the object of the threats as Bradley Mason, an Army private first class. The legal papers do not specify whether Mason is the soldier who witnessed the killings.
The accused soldiers are charged with threatening to kill Mason on May 29, as the group was traveling from its own operating base to Camp Speicher, near Tikrit, where the Criminal Investigation Division has an office.
You better not say anything, or I swear I will kill you, Girouard allegedly told Mason, according to charge sheets.
Girouard is accused of threatening to kill Mason six different times in the weeks after the detainees died. Hunsaker is accused of threatening Mason four times, and Clagett twice.
They face a hearing to determine if there is enough evidence for a court-martial. The first proceeding, known as an Article 32 hearing, is likely several weeks away, a military officer said.
The military has not executed anyone since April 1961, but nine people are on death row, including a sergeant in the 101st Airborne who killed two officers and wounded 14 soldiers in Kuwait in March 2003.
No offense taken. The charges she made sm
are based on the evidence, which is overwhelming. Popular Mechanics definitely did not debunk it. I think it shattered her belief system, just like it did mine.
Bush and rape charges....
He was never charged. A very mentally ill woman filed a lawsuit. I outlined it above. The one against Reagan was never a charge either....was in that Kitty Kelley rag of a book. Never substantiated.
Read the transcript of the charges
I know, I know, it's Fox News that most of you don't believe, but this is the whole transcript, 78 pages long. Hope you all are speed readers. 
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/rrb_-jh_FINAL_complaint_cover_and_aff.pdf
What about the charges and mysterious death of this woman...sm
Do you not find anything fishy here???
Never heard of rape charges against Reagan or GW. sm
Also, Kaye Summersby, Ike's *supposed* mistress said that they were very close but never consummated anything.
Hope they bring charges against him for war crimes.
I wonder if there is any member of the GOP who is able to accept these realities and own up to just a fraction of this despicable behavior? His inevitable legacy as the worst US President of all time does not even begin to address the justice he deserves.
911 widow charges Bush in RICO suit.sm
911 Victim Ellen Mariani Open Letter To The POTUS
Thursday, 27 November 2003
Press Release: Ellen Mariani Lawsuit
=======================================
Open Letter To The President Of The United States
Mr. Bush,
This ''open letter'' is coming from my heart. I want you to know that I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat and that this is not an attempt to ''bash the Government''.
You Mr. Bush should be held responsible and liable for any and all acts that were committed to aid in any cover up of the tragic events of September 11, 2001. As President you have a duty to protect the American people. On September 11th you did not instruct your staff to issue a nationwide emergency warning/alert to advise us of the attack on America. We had to receive the news of the attacks via the news networks.
In the months leading up to the attacks you were repeatedly advised of a possible attack on American soil. During your daily intelligence briefings you were given information that had been uncovered that the very real possibility existed that certain undesirable elements would use commercial aircraft to destroy certain target buildings. You never warned the American people of this possible threat. Who were you protecting?
When you took no responsibility towards protecting the general public from the possibility of attack, you were certainly not upholding the oath you spoke when you took office. In that oath you pledged to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America.
On the morning of the attack, you and members of your staff were fully aware of the unfolding events yet you chose to continue on to the Emma E. Booker Elementary School to proceed with a scheduled event and photo op. While our nation was under attack you did not appear to blink an eye or shed a tear. You continued on as if everything was business as usual.
In the days following the attacks all air traffic was grounded and Americans, including myself, were stranded wherever they had been when the flight ban was imposed. I was stranded at Midway Airport in Chicago, unable to continue on to California for my daughter's wedding. Imagine my surprise when I later found out that during this no fly period a number of people were flown out of the country on a 747 with Arabic lettering on the fuselage. None of these people were interviewed or questioned by any local, State or Federal agencies. Why were they allowed to leave and who exactly was on that flight. We know for a fact that some of the people on the flight were members of (or related to) the royal family of Saudi Arabia and members of the Bin Laden family. Were these people allowed to leave because of the long-standing relationships that your family has with both families?
It is my belief that you intentionally allowed 9/11 to happen to gather public support for a war on terrorism. These wars, in Afghanistan and Iraq, have not accomplished what you stated were your goals. Why have you not captured Osama Bin Laden? Where are Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? All that has happened is a bill that is passed before Congress for 87 billion dollars to rebuild what you ordered blown to bits. As an American who lost a loved one in the war on terror I do pray and support our troops who were sent to Afghanistan and Iraq by you. These troops have and will continue to die for your lies. As an American I can make this statement as it appears that associates of your family may stand to prosper from the rebuilding of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Mr. Bush the time has come for you to stop your control over us. Stop blocking the release of certain evidence and documents that were discovered by the 9/11 Investigation Commission if you have nothing to hide proving you did not fail to act and prevent the attacks of 9/11. Your reason for not releasing this material is that it is a matter of national security. When in fact I believe that it is your personal credibility/security that you are concerned with. You do not want the public to know the full extent of your responsibility and involvement.
After 9/11 the Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act were passed. Both of these allow the government to tap your telephone, search your home, and seize whatever they feel they need to do on a whim. They can do this without a judge's review or a warrant. I feel that this is in direct conflict with our rights as stated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
We the families of 9/11 victims need to have answers to the following questions:
1. Why were 29 pages of the 9/11committee report personally censored at your request?
2. Where are the black boxes from Flight 11 and Flight 175?
3. Where are the voice recorders from Flight 11 and Flight 175?
4. Why can't we gain access to the complete air traffic control records for Flight 11 and Flight 175?
5. Where are the airport surveillance tapes that show the passengers boarding the doomed flights?
6. When will complete passenger lists for all of the flights be released?
7. Why did your brother Jeb (the Governor of Florida) go to the offices of the Hoffman Aviation School and order that flight records and files be removed? These files were then put on a C130 government cargo plane and flown out of the country. Where were they taken and who ordered it done?
It has been over two years since hundreds of our lost loved ones remains have still yet to be identified and their remains placed in a landfill at Fresh Kill. We want our heroes brought back and given a public and proud resting place where we all can pay our respects and honor them. These innocent people never had a chance as they were taken from us on that sad September Day.
In the court of public opinion Mr. Bush, your lies are being uncovered each day. My husband, all of the other victims and their families and our nation as a whole, has been victimized by your failed leadership prior to and after 9/11!
I will prove this in a court of law!
Ellen M. Mariani ###
Germany seek charges against Rumsfeld for prison abuse sm
Friday, Nov. 10, 2006
Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the outgoing Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo
By ADAM ZAGORIN
Just days after his resignation, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called 20th hijacker and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a special interrogation plan, personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that one of the witnesses who will testify on their behalf is former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the one-time commander of all U.S. military prisons in Iraq. Karpinski — who the lawyers say will be in Germany next week to publicly address her accusations in the case — has issued a written statement to accompany the legal filing, which says, in part: It was clear the knowledge and responsibility [for what happened at Abu Ghraib] goes all the way to the top of the chain of command to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld .
A spokesperson for the Pentagon told TIME there would be no comment since the case has not yet been filed.
Along with Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Tenet, the other defendants in the case are Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone; former assistant attorney general Jay Bybee; former deputy assisant attorney general John Yoo; General Counsel for the Department of Defense William James Haynes II; and David S. Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Senior military officers named in the filing are General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top Army official in Iraq; Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of Guantanamo; senior Iraq commander, Major General Walter Wojdakowski; and Col. Thomas Pappas, the one-time head of military intelligence at Abu Ghraib.
Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides universal jurisdiction allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. Indeed, a similar, but narrower, legal action was brought in Germany in 2004, which also sought the prosecution of Rumsfeld. The case provoked an angry response from Pentagon, and Rumsfeld himself was reportedly upset. Rumsfeld's spokesman at the time, Lawrence DiRita, called the case a a big, big problem. U.S. officials made clear the case could adversely impact U.S.-Germany relations, and Rumsfeld indicated he would not attend a major security conference in Munich, where he was scheduled to be the keynote speaker, unless Germany disposed of the case. The day before the conference, a German prosecutor announced he would not pursue the matter, saying there was no indication that U.S. authorities and courts would not deal with allegations in the complaint.
In bringing the new case, however, the plaintiffs argue that circumstances have changed in two important ways. Rumsfeld's resignation, they say, means that the former Defense Secretary will lose the legal immunity usually accorded high government officials. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue that the German prosecutor's reasoning for rejecting the previous case — that U.S. authorities were dealing with the issue — has been proven wrong.
The utter and complete failure of U.S. authorities to take any action to investigate high-level involvement in the torture program could not be clearer, says Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a U.S.-based non-profit helping to bring the legal action in Germany. He also notes that the Military Commissions Act, a law passed by Congress earlier this year, effectively blocks prosecution in the U.S. of those involved in detention and interrogation abuses of foreigners held abroad in American custody going to back to Sept. 11, 2001. As a result, Ratner contends, the legal arguments underlying the German prosecutor's previous inaction no longer hold up.
Whatever the legal merits of the case, it is the latest example of efforts in Western Europe by critics of U.S. tactics in the war on terror to call those involved to account in court. In Germany, investigations are under way in parliament concerning cooperation between the CIA and German intelligence on rendition — the kidnapping of suspected terrorists and their removal to third countries for interrogation. Other legal inquiries involving rendition are under way in both Italy and Spain.
U.S. officials have long feared that legal proceedings against war criminals could be used to settle political scores. In 1998, for example, former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet — whose military coup was supported by the Nixon administration — was arrested in the U.K. and held for 16 months in an extradition battle led by a Spanish magistrate seeking to charge him with war crimes. He was ultimately released and returned to Chile. More recently, a Belgian court tried to bring charges against then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for alleged crimes against Palestinians.
For its part, the Bush Administration has rejected adherence to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on grounds that it could be used to unjustly prosecute U.S. officials. The ICC is the first permanent tribunal established to prosecute war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity.
Abuse of Power charges stick to Palin like glue.
So, what goes around comes around. After a hard week out on that campaign trail attacking Obama right, left and center, seems Sarah has a character issue of her own now to deal with. Oops!
Baby daddy's mommy arrested on drug charges
I heard today Palin is responding to Levi's charges
by throwing the dirt back at him. I say that is how every woman her age should behave, right? Tit for tat.
Bristol's future MIL arrested on 6 counts of felony drug charges.
Palins can't seem to catch a break this past week.
Obama is letting them drop charges against terrorists for this horrible sick crime???
What orifice did you pull this out of?
but that's the right way to do it, not federal
xx
Looks we all need Federal
Or start taking birth control if you are already not on them.
http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/video/nancy_pelosi_birth_control_will_stimulate_the_economy/
cut what federal programs??
So the Federal govt is gonna cut back in entitlement programs to fund the rebuilding of NO? Not gonna cease his tax cuts for the rich, just gonna cut back on programs for.....the disadvantaged, of course, the ones whose voices will not be heard..Whose fault was NO? Bush and his administration. I say Bush should donate some of his millions to the rebuilding of NO, let some of the unfortunate ones camp on his 1700 acres that he boasts about..He got us into this awful mess. His speech the other night was a joke..Just another press moment, trying to pull on Americans heart strings but it aint working, LOL..**Long live equality**..Three more years? Oh gee, can we survive? What will be the next catastrophe under this fool? 9/11, Iraq and now NO..**America where are you**?
Huh? You think Fox created the Federal
Heaven help us, I certainly hope and pray they wanted to make the government SMALL. I cannot believe you just said what you did and do not even understand the point you made, which is government is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE BIG. That is the problem!!!!!! I definitely want my government as small as possible, small enough we can drown it in the bathtub!!!!
Are you daft poster? Don't you see where BIG government has us now? They are DROWNING US!!!!!!! That's the entire point of small government, not regulating the h@ll out of me and my family.
I realize generations of people think that is what government is supposed to do....tell you how to think, what to read, how to raise our children (give them another pill if that's what the government says too),who to associate with, take away our civil rights one by one until we have nothing left of the country this was supposed to be.
Of course you want the government small. Did you think it was SUPPOSED to be big! That's what Obama wants.....MORE GOVERNMENT, BIGGER GOVERNMENT, more control of YOUR life. No thanks!!!!!!!! My life has been invaded enough by our out of control government.
Federal Reserve
The world central banks are printing money like crazy to try and free up the markets. E-mail congress and tell them the Federal Reserve is not elected by the people and should not be allowed to devalue our currency by printing it out of thin air until it is worthless. This is way past republicans and democrats now. Call or flood them with e-mails and get Congress to protect us.
Oh please.......that's now the Federal Reserve
I said last night these were very old families, especially the Rothschild who have very deep deep filthy rich pockets and contribute greatly to the Federal Reserve and that this goes all the way back to England and British rule in the early 1900s. You act as if you found something no one else could find.
This is not news, maybe just to you or those who don't have a clue about the Federal REserve and I can guarantee you most liberal dems running their mouth on here didn't have a clue about the Fed Res....probably thought it was part of their government. And I hope this litle chart has clarified everything for you, which wouldn't surprise me, because you should already know the Rothschild family is part of this....it's who the others are that are kept quiet. They are listed as the Bank of England. You really need to understand where the Fed Res comes from, the fact that we have never really broken free from England. Someone asked last night about JP Morgan and why he was the beloved son or something, well, gee, get a clue. Look where his family comes from, their contributions to this country alone, and their very deep pockets. Those you will never know the names of put out little pawns in this country, i.e., JP Morgan and let them do their bidding. Unfortunately, they got greedy but don't think for a minute the Feds didn't know this was going on...they had to have known. The bigger question is what are they planning in order to continue to lower rates, allow these institutions to offer such fraudulent loans in the first place, taking advantage of anyone and everyone who walked through their doors.
If you knew half as much as you think you do, you would have realized a long time why Ron Paul has begged to abolish the Federal Reserve in this country, to disallow it to ever rule this country again, as it has done for soooo long. We are being ruled by an elite few, who pull the strings of every government they have their hands in.....is that what you want? That isn't a free country my friend...that is British rule.
I believe that a federal sales tax........sm
REPLACING the current income tax system would be a fairer, more equitable way of collecting taxes from the US citizens. The more you spend, the more you would pay in taxes. The rich who buy nicer cars and top of the line merchandise would pay more, reflecting their ability to be able to do so, while the poorer would pay less based on their ability to afford less. I also believe a system such as this, in place for a number of years, would tremendously cut the waste in America drastically by causing the American people, especially those in the middle class and lower class to consider their purchases more carefully. However, I doubt it would have as much of an affect on the higher income class in terms of wastefulness.
Most of these are federal prisons and
military bases that do have prisons for military personnel plus the barracks.
Don't get so upset. I think most of that link is just to fire up people's imagination. What do you think they would do with the prisoners in these federal prisons???? Turn them loose? Don't think so. It's scare tactics.
Look at your bills. There are federal
"excise" taxes on just about everything you mentioned.
a federal prison where we pay taxes
to feed her, clothe her and provide her with medical care. She ought to be extricated to her own country. I wonder what the Mexican feds would do with her. I don't feel sorry for these people. They were in the wrong in the first place by sneaking into this country. They deserve whatever they get. As for the unborn child, if the mother wasn't so selfish, she would put the child up for adoption in the US where people who could afford to love and raise that child right would have the opportunity to.
She's committing a federal crime
Nofify the Federal Marshalls and they'll bust her. I lived down the street from a girl doing that and she went to federal prison!
I agree. I think those federal dollars could be used...
for other things. It is not like the news is not out there. Kids know more today at 10 or 11 than I knew at 15 or 16. It is discussed on TV ad nauseam, all of the shows aimed at kids have discussed every aspect of sex you can imagine including STDs, AIDS, homosexuality, abortion, keeping a child rather than aborting, birth control, the whole 9 yards. And I figure most parents have had "the talk" with kids. The culture has been created that sex is an expression, it is no longer saved for marriage, multiple partners don't matter and you don't even have to like each other...that is the culture that has been created. No amount of birth control programs, sex ed programs, is going to put that horse back in the barn. We reap what we sow.
So why spend even more federal dollars on this? It makes no sense to me. You do the best you can to talk to your kids and explain the consequences of choices...but in the end, you cannot force them not to engage in premarital sex. It is ultimately their choice, and federally funded programs at this stage in our culture...waste of money in my view, because it is only repeating what is already out there.
Just my two cents.
Federal Reserve folks......
Stop throwing accusations at one another and blaming whatever party on Capitol Hill you hate!!!!!!!!! All this blame game crap is absolutely nauseating..... all parties have been part of the government since way back when. The parties in Washington at this moment had absolutely NOTHING to do with the situation at hand......the problem started decades ago with an absolutely desperate president who started up the Federal Reserve program, trying to coax people into believing their money was safe to put in the banks after the banks collapsed. They were lulled into a false sense of security in hopes they would start putting their money back in the bank and being told their government would guarantee it.........nothing to do with rep or dem, just a desperate president at the helm at the time and all those idiots who should have known better but let it continue nonetheless.
The corrupt companies in this fix now have been allowed to go this route because of an institution that was started up a looooong time ago, this just didn't happen overnight or a few years.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553
You really need to google Federal Reserve
Sorry you're that drawn in by Fox news or think everyone else is, but you probably need to understand that just because posters may be more educated than you on some things, i.e., the Federal Reserve, doesn't mean you can't educate yourself. Now, granted, it will take more than 5 seconds of scant reading because this institution goes back a long ways, but more than likely you will hear those words "Federal Reserve" mentioned time and time again. They are the reason we are in this mess.
You will probably hear a LOT of economists preaching this....they should know; this is what our economy leans on instead of our own two feet. You need to understand who has been running the show behind the scenes for decades.....it ain't rep or dem; it's the Federal Reserve and it should never have happened!!!!
Federal Reserve....... I have done my homework
The Federal Reserve is not a bank...it has absolutely nothing to do with government, though it does run our government as well as many governments throughout the world. The Federal Reserve is made up of very deep filthy rich pocket individuals. Just try to find the names of those that make up the Federal Reserve....you can't. You can only find their board of governors. Our President does elect the chairman, in this case Bernanke. Fed Res is a private central bank that decides everybody's interest rates. The history on that is a good read and sickens me frankly, because it is a deceitful organization with a corrupt history. NOBODY owns the Federal Reserve except those you will never know of.....these families go back to the days of British rule, though by carefully reading, you will get the picture of who those families are.
Paulson worked for Goldman Sachs among being elected to other high boards (and has very close ties with China which scares the crap out of me); don't know what he really has going with them, so everyone should be concerned there, as half of the billions they have taken from us are now going to foreign investors/countries....why? No foreign country is going to pay us if we invest and their country fails to profit.
JP Morgan was a very powerful banker and during his time alive, he helped combine GE and actually financed steel companies in this country which created a huge economic boom for this country when it really needed it, so he basically is considered a man who saved the US economy and more imporantly, the US government on at least two occasions. This is a man who dates back to England, where his dad was also a wealthy banker, so like I said, we have always had strong ties with British banking since we tried to break from the British rule. Morgan's contributions to this country go way back and are really good ones, so he has handed down quite a good legacy. He even helped our railroads succeed. He is responsible for establishing U.S. Steel, so you can see why this company is basically gold to many. Matter of fact, he helped sell push gold to keep this country afloat. His life is a good read as well.
Now, common sense dictates why Citigroup is fighting with Wells Fargo, even though Wachovia did agree to sell to Citigroup to begin with. That's the behind-the-scenes deals that you will never know the truth about. As far as FDIC, the Federal Reserve was pushing for it, but our government did NOT want to make any financial guarantees of funds. THere is a block on that buyout for a good reason; if this took place, with a sell to either Wells Fargo or Citigroup, this would put the US citizens' money in the hands of three banks, Bank of American, JP Morgan, and whoever bought Wachovia. Whoever buys Wachovia would literally own 30% of the banking industries profits (bad, bad, bad). If only these three banks exist, they would dominate the banking industry and would have so much power that they could set their own prices for loans and services. I'm sure then stricter federal regulations would be placed on them but no doubt then the smaller banks would be so squeezed, they would have to look for buyers as well and guess who would buy them then? Wah lah....a monopoly will be formed......
So, in answer to your question, the banks don't own the governement, the Federal Reserve owns the government and always has since Roosevelt's days back in 1913. That is why those of us who understand how wrong it is for the fed res to even exist, want it abolished. Ron Paul has brought this before the floor on many occasions, to many deaf ears. Now, ask yourself why that is. Mostly, because most those nitwits don't have a clue what the federal reserve is, where it came from, and what it does.
So when you end up with just three banks, look out folks!! This has happened before with three central banks in our history and they all participated in fractional banking...creating money out of thin air.....sound familiar?
So if you want to solve this problem, blame the Federal Reserve and petition your government to abolish it NOW. I beg everyone to please do your homework on the Federal Reserve and when you think you could puke knowing the corruption of it all, then here is a site for a petition to sign to abolish it. Ron Paul has been all over this for years. President Andrew Jackson abolished the first version of a centralized governing bank. Thomas Jefferson could see this coming.....
Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." This is serious business folks!!
http://www.petitiononline.com/fedres/petition.html
all that means is doing away with the federal part -
He says that states should be able to mandate it on their own. He does not intend to overturn Roe v. Wade
I would favor a federal sales tax if
there were no exemptions whatsoever. If, say you earned a dollar, you owed a dime. No exceptions regarding where the money comes from. Tax welfare benefits too. Social Security is already taxed for some recipients. Those of us who receive Social Security and have enough income to pay taxes on 85% (maximum) of it ALL had the opportunity for a better life. Some took advantage of that and some didn't. Young people today have little hope of receiving Social Security and they also have little hope of being able to live while saving for their future.
In my usual long-winded way, t hat's what I think.
I am not in favor of a federal sales tax....
as much as I am in favor of a flat percentage income tax. For the sake of argument...let's say 10%. No deductions, no nothing. Flat 10%. I don't care if you make a dollar or 10 million dollars. Everyone pays the same amount. Cut back the IRS because if you pay a flat tax you don't need them and the incessant forms and reams of laws. Cutting back on the IRS would save millions in and of itself. Then every American pays the same tax. THAT is equality. Everyone gets the same shake. You make less, you pay less. You make more, you pay more. They should also abolish the death tax. IF the feds have already taxed all your money, they should not tax it AGAIN just because you die. That is unfair to the heirs you worked to provide for. Just my opinion.
|
