Feeds:
Posts
Comments

On April 28 a “transcript was released from the most recent hearing at a federal court in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on the lawsuit filed on behalf of Bernie Sanders supporters against the Democratic National Committee and former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz for rigging the Democratic primaries for Hillary Clinton. Lawyers for the DNC argued the DNC has a right to pick candidates in a back room.

The corporate press is doing its best to ignore this class action lawsuit alleging the Democratic National Committee (DNC) worked directly in conjunction with Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign to keep Bernie Sanders out of the White House. This lawsuit has been raging on in the courtrooms for months on end–and yet, most people have no idea of its existence, in large part thanks to the corporate media’s total lack of coverage.

The lawsuit alleges the Democratic National Committee, which is managed by Wall Street toadies who fear Bernie Sanders, worked side-by-side with the Hillary Clinton campaign to derail the Sanders challenge last year in the Democratic presidential primary. If true this violated the Democratic Party’s own charter, specifically Article 5, Section 4, which specifically states the DNC cannot work with a “single campaign to effectively choose who would win the Democratic ballot, the attorneys stated in the suit.”

According to Newsweek, “The most recent court hearing on the case was held on April 25, during which the DNC reportedly argued that the organization’s neutrality among Democratic campaigns during the primaries was merely a “political promise,” and therefore it had no legal obligations to remain impartial throughout the process.”

In other words, the DNC is admitting guilt while insisting it did no wrong in directly supporting Wall Street’s choice to be the Democratic Party candidate for US president because they certainly didn’t want the people’s candidate

For more on this story click the links below.

The Lawsuit—Newsweek

DNC Lawyers Argue DNC Has Right to Pick Candidates in Back Rooms

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Administrator Scott Pruitt has fired at least five members of one of its scientific review boards. Through a spokesman, Pruitt has vowed to replace the scientists with industrial polluter representatives. Of course, Pruitt is an industrial polluter representative. President Donald “Industry Polluter” Trump has vowed to cut the EPA’s budget by 40 percent. Conservative Republican President Richard Nixon must be turning over in his grave, for it was Nixon who signed the legislation creating the EPA as an entity to protect human health from industrial polluters. Now the polluters are in charge of the EPA. It is effectively ineffective at doing what it is supposed to do,

The corporate and Wall Street billionaires prefer it this way. Those pesky rules and regulations protecting human health also cut into profits, share prices and dividends. Getting rid of the enforcer of those rules by making it a puppet and hostage of the industries it’s supposed to regulate means the EPA will no longer be enforcing anything.

By poisoning the EPA and holding it hostage, Trump and Pruitt will loosen up some significant amounts of cash to spur the stock market bubble to new heights, but it also does something more sinister in the process; it redistributes the health of every American to one degree or another to the rich by morphing our health into greater corporate profits.

Click below for more on this story.

The Big Banks are at it again and nobody is listening. Not a single bankster went to trial for the numerous crimes they committed during the last recession, including laundering Mexican drug cartel money, fraud, racketeering, tax evasion, manipulating credit ratings, conspiring to rig housing prices (which is why house prices and rent keep going up), and much more. See The Big Banks are Manipulating the Housing Market, and Another Big Bank Pays an $800 million Fine for Drug Laundering and Nobody Goes to Trial.

Richard Rodriquez needs your help to overcome a banking giant. Rich was the victim of an overzealous manager at US Bank who rigged a credit rating higher than it should have been. That means US Bank is fiddling with credit rating numbers, making them look better than they are. Doesn’t that sound like 2008 all over again? Rodriquez blew the whistle and now needs your help to bring down the corrupt giant. Listen to his story in the video above and decide for yourself.

President Donald Trump admitted on national television a couple days ago that Australia’s universal health care system was vastly superior to the private for profit system of the United States. If Trump knows that, then every major US politician in both major political parties know this, and yet, the US still does not have universal health care. This suggests the only reason the US doesn’t have universal health care is because of the massive US government corruption, which is a function of the corruption of the two major US political parties who dominate the US federal, state and local governments. We in the US have an inefficient but profitable system, though it’s only profitable for a relative few. The rest of us pay the price in higher costs, while the rich profit from it via higher profits, rising share prices, and surging dividends.

How superior is the Australian universal health care system to the USA?

1. Australian life expectancy is over 82 years, compared with 78.5 years in the USA.

2. Australians spend 8.9 percent of their GDP on healthcare compared to 17.7 percent in the USA. The USA has the highest healthcare costs in the entire Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development nations.

I could, of course, go on and on. One thing is clearly certain. The US has the most inefficient healthcare system in the entire developed world, and that is mainly due to political corruption and the financial abilities of those who benefit from this bloated system to control the corrupt US corporate media establishment, allowing them to effectively hide the truth from most of us and play on our fears.

Last Friday, Brazilian unions ratcheted up the pressure on president Michel Temer Last Friday, Brazilian unions ratcheted up the pressure on president Michel Temer with a nationwide general strike that closed schools, disrupted transport networks and led to clashes with public security in several cities. Thirty-five million Brazilians took part in the strike out of 208 million. Now if only we could get US citizens so united against the massive corruption of both major political parties and the corrupt US government.

Demonstrators in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo blocked key roads with barricades of burning tires on. Riot police used teargas and percussion grenades to try to disperse the crowds and open the routes.

Brazilian media reported protests in 26 states and strikes by teachers, bus drivers, healthcare providers, oil industry workers and public servants.

As night fell on Friday, there were multiple clashes in central Rio between protesters, who set fire to a bus, and riot police, who fired dozens of rounds of tear gas.

The reason for the protests is simple. The corrupt Brazilian government wants to redistribute income from the 99 percent to the 1 percent by cutting pensions and new labor laws that weakened workers rights. This is called a policy of austerity, which is well known to be a failure at economic stimulus. Since austerity is a proven failure, there is no reason to attempt such a remedy of the economic downturn Brazil has fallen into.

According to the Guardian, “Many voters are furious that politicians are insisting on the need for cuts in benefits and public services even as evidence grows that they benefited personally from illegal kickbacks on overinflated contracts.”

Cutting pensions and benefits will only make the economic downturn worse, and this President Temer must know, otherwise he is ignorant, stupid or corrupt. Obviously, we’re looking at “corrupt.”

The Guardian went on, “Eight cabinet ministers have been implicated in the Lava Jato (Car Wash) investigation into corruption at the country’s two biggest companies, Petrobras and Odebrecht. Temer’s approval ratings have slipped into single digits, similar to the level of his predecessor, Rousseff, when she was impeached last year.”


More than 200,000 people took to the streets in Washington, DC, Saturday April 29th for the People’s Climate March. Tens of thousands more joined via sister marches across the globe, including Japan, the Philippines, New Zealand, Uganda, Kenya, Germany, Greece, United Kingdom, Brazil, Mexico, Costa Rica and more.

In the U.S., more than 370 marches in nearly all 50 states took place, from the town of Dutch Harbor in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands to the streets of Miami, Denver, Los Angeles, Chicago and other major American cities.

A coalition of communities, faith leaders, labor activists, civil rights champions and climate justice advocates led the march while demanding commonsense protections for the air we breathe, the water we drink and the health of the vulnerable communities who have the most to lose under President Trump’s administration.

The battle over climate change is a sticky one. The fossil fuel industry which own plenty of politicians in both major political parties spends millions of dollars a year denying it’s happening, but my rhododendron is now blooming in early December. Twenty-five years ago, it began blooming in late March and early April. Fifteen years ago, it began blooming in January. I also have roses blooming in snowy December, and that is something that never happened in the forty years I’ve lived in this house.

Quite naturally, the war over climate change is a battle over ever increasing profits and share prices. Major corporations and their shareholders, as well as Wall Street (which controls the Democratic Establishment like puppets), want ever increasing profits because this produces ever increasing share prices and dividends. Getting rid of fossil fuels will force the oil corporations out of business, and cut into the profits and share prices of other manufacturers.

This means the battle over climate change is a battle between ultra rich shareholders and millionaire and billionaire CEO’s on the one hand, and the rest of the world’s people on the other. Naturally, the rich and their corporations fund bogus studies showing global warming in not real in order to influence the voters of the 99 percent to believe climate change is a communist plot to destroy the American way of life, when it is really the rich destroying the US middle class way of life. My roses and rhododendron tell me climate change is real, but then, so is the class warfare the rich are waging on the rest of us.

I should point out that the folks at Exxon now admit fossil fuels are causing global warming. The company denied it for decades, but knew as early as the middle of the 1970s that it was happening.

President Donald Trump is proposing more tax cuts for the rich. He claims there will be no loss of federal revenue with his tax cuts. This is the standard Republican Party Establishment lie.

Given that Trump’s plan is similar to what Trump proposed on the campaign trail, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) did a rough cost estimate of his latest ideas and concluded they could cost $5.5 trillion in lost revenue during the first decade.

CRFB estimates the overall cost could go as high as $7 trillion if limits on tax breaks that the plan suggests apply only to high earners. Or the cost could fall to $3 trillion “assuming credits and exclusions are eliminated as well as deductions.”

This means sharp cuts to programs the middle class and poor need, while, no doubt, keeping welfare programs for the rich, such spending more on the military than the next 25 nations combined, 24 of whom are US allies. Corporate subsidies are also welfare for the rich since they help keep corporate profits and the stock market bubble growing, all of which mostly redounds to the rich.

Oh, and we can’t forget the next biggest lie; tax cuts for the rich trickles down the the 99 percent in the form of jobs. There is not one shred of evidence that giving tax cuts to the rich has created a single net job. There is plenty of evidence, on the other hand, that tax cuts for the wealthy have destroyed millions of US jobs.

That’s because the rich usually invest their tax cuts gains in the stock, bond and political markets. They buy up politicians by the barrel full and then have their politicians pass legislation that will keep inflating their stock, bond and housing bubbles, which means exporting millions of jobs overseas and then redistributing the difference between the old higher US pay and the new lower third world slave labor pay to the rich via higher corporate profits, surging stock and bond markets, and rising dividends.

In the meantime, due to the reduced tax revenue, our roads and bridges will continue to crumble, our public schools will continue to be financially gutted, the cost of entering a public park will continue to rise, the unemployment rate will rise, and so on and so forth.

Don’t be fooled by the same lies President Ronald Reagan and Dick Cheney and Arthur Laffer fed us. Tax cuts for the rich will not pay for themselves, nor will they create jobs, but they will corrupt your government more, and it is already the most corrupt in the developed world. Both major political parties are corrupted to the core.

 

This suggests that any working class concerns addressed by Trump during the campaign has been rendered moot. Trump, in other words, is now completely owned and 100 percent influenced by Wall Street and the Republican National Committee and their corporate owners.

By the way, a story in Newsweek puts it a little less scary than I. “‘…while major tax cuts have been enormously beneficial to the wealthy by reducing their taxes and increasing their incomes the most, the distribution of benefit for working people has been comparatively negligible. That is not the argument of some liberal politician—it was the finding of Martin Feldstein, the chief economic adviser to President Ronald Reagan, in his analysis of the Tax Reform Act of 1986.'”

Feldstein, in other words, said the creation of jobs by tax cuts for the rich “has been comparatively negligible.”

Click here for the full Newsweek story.