Census to ask “are you a citizen.”
https://www.alipac.us/f13/diamond-silk-2020-federal-census-citizenship-question-357280/
THOMAS JEFFERSON – A PRESCIENT GENIUS
Thomas Jefferson
His portrait is on the $2.00 Dollar Bill.
This is amazing. There are two parts to this.
Be sure to read the 2nd part (in RED ).
Thomas Jefferson was a very remarkable man who started learning very early in life and never stopped.
At 5, began studying under is cousin’s tutor.
At 9, studied Latin, Greek and French.
At 14, studied classical literature and additional languages.
At 16, entered the College of William and Mary.
Also could write in Greek with one hand, while writing the same in Latin with the other.
At 19, studied Law for 5 years starting under George Wythe.
At 23, started his own law practice.
At 25, was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses.
At 31, wrote the widely circulated “Summary View of the Rights of British America,” and retired from his law practice.
At 32, was a delegate to the Second Continental Congress.
At 33, wrote the Declaration of Independence.
At 33, took three years to revise
Virginia’s legal code and wrote a Public Education bill and a statute for Religious Freedom.
At 36, was elected the second Governor of Virginia, succeeding Patrick Henry.
At 40, served in Congress for two years.
At 41, was the American minister to France and negotiated commercial treaties with
European nations along with Ben Franklin and John Adams.
At 46, served as the first Secretary of State under George Washington.
At 53, served as Vice President and was elected President of the American Philosophical Society.
At 55, drafted the Kentucky Resolutions and became the active head of the Republican Party.
At 57, was elected the third president of the United States.
At 60, obtained the Louisiana Purchase, doubling the nation’s size.
At 61, was elected to a second term as President.
At 65, retired to Monticello.
At 80, helped President Monroe shape the Monroe Doctrine.
At 81, almost single-handedly, created the University of Virginia and served as its first
president.
At 83, died on the 50th Anniversary of the Signing of the Declaration of Independence,along with John Adams.
Thomas Jefferson knew because he himself studied, the previous failed attempts at government.
He understood actual history, the nature of God, His laws and the nature of man. That happens to be way more than what most understand
today.
Jefferson really knew his stuff…
A voice from the
past to lead us in the future:
John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the White House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement:
“This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House, with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”
“When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe,
we shall become as corrupt as Europe.”
—Thomas Jefferson
“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
“It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes.
A principle which if acted on, would save one-half the wars of the world.”
“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them.”
“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes, the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors,
is sinful and tyrannical.”
MEXICANS LOOKING DOWN THE BARREL OF A GUN
The criminal Latino/Hispanic wave traveling through Mexico with vigor will be met with TrumpForce. These illegals are intent on crashing the United States. They bring with them Rap Sheets longer and wider than the Rio Grande. Once here, as Trump on numerous occasions repeated, they will rape, plunder and murder innocent United States citizens. Matter of fact, 80% of the women coming north have been raped. Not satisfied with building their own country, these malcontents want to destroy ours. They will be met at the border by the National Guard.
Justice Department announces ‘zero tolerance’ border policy for illegal immigrants crossing into US
“The situation at our Southwest Border is unacceptable,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement announcing the policy. “Congress has failed to pass effective legislation that serves the national interest — that closes dangerous loopholes and fully funds a wall along our southern border. “
“As a result, a crisis has erupted at our Southwest Border that necessitates an escalated effort to prosecute those who choose to illegally cross our border,” he said.
The Trump administration says the number of attempted border crossings has increased by 203 percent since March 2017. In response, Trump this week signed a proclamation sending the National Guard to the border. He has said he would like to see 2,000-4,000 members sent to the border.
Beggars want to litter our streets, collect welfare, food stamps, use our hospital, rob, steal and loiter. Trump will stop this new wave Spanish Armada in its tracks.
HATE FROM THE DESPICABLE DEMOCRATS KEEPS ON COMING
Not a day goes by without some progressive pundit, talking head journalist, also-ran comedian mocking the Trump administration and his family. But it goes to far when they cast their wrath at the FLOTUS. 
These pukes have gone so low as to target the President’s son Barron. But this is was unexpected. To see the left demagogues take the law road attacking the President’s wife and son is beyond the pale.
Once they saw the handwriting on the wall on the night of November 8th the accusations, vilification, false accusations, scorn and ridicule movement went into high gear. 
Hillary called us Deplorable and then she trampled on the Women who voted for Trump as if they didn’t have a mind of their own. We waited eight years to depose a president who sided with the enemy and BTW while Hillary was Secretary of State she was responsible for four of our brave men being slaughtered to death in Benghazi. Then she lied about it. She, a megalomaniac, who has accepted the devistating defeat she took at the hands of the American voter.
Trump came to Washington because most of Americans were fed up, fed up with Big Government, fed up with lies and fed up with Fake news. 
Trump is in the process of outing the skeemers and skammers, he is slowly cleaning up the Swamp and the hellhole of the insiders who work for themselves and not us. The bureaucracy is hell bent on destroying Trump – they are prejudiced, biased and belligerent.
In a bizarre response, late night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel launched an attack on Melania Trump over the White House annual Easter Egg Roll. First he derided Melania as being uninvolved in the set-up of the event. “Not a chance she did one thing to help set that up. There’s no — she didn’t dye eggs, she didn’t fill baskets.”
Cal Thomas: We’re heading for a breaking point in Washington
That is why certain issues resurface during (and between) election cycles. Issues like the poor (but likely only when Republicans are in power, not when Democrats hold the majority), education (stated goals are never achieved, and no matter how much is spent it is never enough, which is why the left opposes school choice), the environment (“climate change” appears to remain an unchallengeable doctrine for the left, though there is some evidence ignored by liberal media that strongly suggests otherwise), taxes and spending (history shows the benefits of small government and low taxes, but in an age of envy, greed and entitlement one finds it increasingly difficult to teach self-reliance when the federal government is seen by too many as a giant ATM).
CRIMINALS ATTACKING THE BORDER WILL BE MET WITH FORCE
Criminals shall be warned that testing our will has consequences; Trump must exercise the power he has and protect the citizens of the United States with Brut Force. Be it cutting them down on the ground or to take to the air it must be said and done. Either way this show of force is necessary, not for intimidation, but for our right to keep out the the trash coming to our the Homeland.
Trump says the military will secure the southern border until wall can be built!
We don’t have laws, we have catch-and-release,” he said. “You catch and then you immediately release and people come back years later for a court case, except they virtually never come back.”
Trump did not offer specifics, but the move appears to be at least partly motivated by a caravan of over 1,000 Central American migrants heading toward the U.S. border. Buzzfeed, which first reported on the caravan, said that Mexican officials had not yet attempted to stop the flow.
Reports of the caravan angered Trump, who has sent out a number of tweets threatening to end the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and to cut foreign aid to countries such as Honduras, from where many of the migrants originate.
Brandon Judd, President of the National Border Patrol Council, said on Fox News Radio’s “The Todd Starnes Show” that it gives Border Patrol “certainty of apprehension.”
“The criminal smugglers, this is a multibillion dollar industry. They smuggle humans, they smuggle drugs,” he said. “This criminal enterprise, if we arrest the majority of people that cross the border illegally, we put a dent into their criminal enterprise, and if you put a dent into their criminal enterprise, then you can possibly stop them.”
LITTLE RUNT RUNNING WITH THE MOUTH ON APRIL FOOLS DAY
As we headed into the Easter weekend, Turkey’s little runt ran his diarrhea mouth once again. Has the Muslim Dog bit off more than he can chew? Will he suffer from a chemical infusion sometime in the future? Only Israel’s Mossad knows. They know how to return the favor.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blasted Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Sunday for calling Israel’s actions on the Gaza border “inhumane,” saying this must be the way they celebrate April Fool’s Day in Turkey.
“The most moral army in the world,” Netanyahu said of the IDF, “will not be preached to from someone who for years has indiscriminately bombed civilian populations. Apparently this is the way they mark April Fool’s Day in Ankara.”
WHERE ARE THE INDICTMENTS? RICO – THROW THE BOOK AT THEM – LOCK THEM UP
Charitable charity ! ! ! !
Just good down home folks doing good work!
A Charitable Foundation Folds
Have you wondered why the Clinton Foundation folded so suddenly after Hillary was no longer in a position of influence? Perhaps this summary will provide some insight??
They list 486 employees (line 5)! It took 486 people who are paid $34.8 million and $91.3 million in fees and expenses, to give away $5.1 MILLION
This is real. You can check the return yourself (see below). The real heart of the Clintons can be seen here. Staggering but not surprising.. These figures are from an official copy of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation for the tax year 2014. The copy of the tax return is from the National Center for Charitable Statistics web site. You can obtain the latest tax return on any charitable organization there.
The Clinton Foundation:
Number of Employees (line 5) 486
Total revenue (line 12) $177,804,612.00
Total grants to charity (line 13) $5,160,385.00 (this is less than 3%)
Total expenses of $91,281,145.00
Expenses include:
Salaries (line 15) $34,838,106.00
Fund raising fees (line 16a) $850,803.00
Other expenses (line 17) $50,431,851.00 HUH??????
Travel $8,000,000.00
Meetings $12,000,000.00
Net assets/fund balances (line 22) $332,471,349.00
So it required 486 people, who were paid $34.8 million, plus $91.3 million in fees and expenses, to give away $5.1 MILLION! And they call this a CHARITY?
(It is alleged that this is one of the greatest white-collar crimes ever committed. And just think—one of the participants was a former president and one (gasp!) wanted to be elected president of the United States. If justice was truly served they would both be in prison).
Feel free to pass this on to your friends so they can also be informed
A 2011 memo that raises questions as to where Bill Clinton’s philanthropic endeavors ended and for profit ventures began.
The memo was released on Wednesday as part of a Wikileaks dump of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s hacked emails.
Doug Band, a long-time aide to Bill Clinton, wrote the 2011 memo as part of an internal audit at the Clinton Foundation. In trying to explain his role in the Foundation, Band also brought up a series of instances he and his consulting company, Teneo Holdings, helped Bill Clinton secure for-profit contracts.
The memo, which was being circulated to some in Clinton’s inner circle including Podesta, reinforces Republican criticisms of the blurred lines between the foundation and professional interests of the Clintons and their associates.
“Independent of our fundraising and decision-making activities on behalf of the Foundation, we have dedicated ourselves to helping the President secure and engage in for-profit activities — including speeches, books, and advisory service engagements,” Band wrote. “In that context, we have in effect served as agents, lawyers, managers and implementers to secure speaking, business and advisory service deals. In support of the President’s for-profit activity, we also have solicited and obtained, as appropriate, in-kind services for the President and his family — for personal travel, hospitality, vacation and the like.”
At one point, Band even referred to the former president’s money-making enterprises as “Bill Clinton, Inc.”
Band said he and Justin Cooper, another long-time aide, weren’t separately compensated for helping Bill Clinton profit.
“We do not receive a fee for, or percentage of, the more than $50 million in for-profit activity we have personally helped to secure for President Clinton to date or the $66 million in future contracts, should he choose to continue with those engagements,” he continued.
Band offered specific examples of donors who also worked with Bill Clinton in a private capacity as well.
Band noted that Laureate International Universities was a foundation donor, having donated $1.4 million at the time the memo was written. The for-profit college network ultimately retained the former president as an adviser, paying him millions of dollars over several years.
“Laureate is a Foundation relationship that evolved into a personal advisory services business relationship for President Clinton,” Band wrote in the memo. He said he began managing the relationship which Teneo partners took over in 2011, and which Band said “is very time-consuming. Laureate pays President Clinton $3.5 million annually to provide advice and serve as their Honorary Chairman.”
Another Teneo client, GEMS education, had donated approximately $780,000 by the time the memo was written in 2011.
“Gems approached President Clinton in 2009 to seek his personal services as an advisor to the company,” Band wrote. “Justin and I convinced them to initiate a relationship to the Foundation, which they did; that relationship has grown into a business relationship for President Clinton and a donor relationship for CGI.”
In an email to Podesta, who at the time was involved with the Clinton Foundation, Band brought up the fact he had been required to sign a conflict of interest policy because his wife designed bags for the charity and his consulting firm represented some of the foundation donors.
“Oddly, wjc (William Jefferson Clinton) does not have to sign such a document even though he is personally paid by 3 cgi (Clinton Global Initiative) sponsors, gets many expensive gifts from them, some that are at home etc,” Band wrote. “I could add 500 different examples of things like this.”
A spokesperson from Teneo forwarded a statement to USA TODAY.
“As the memo demonstrates, Teneo worked to encourage clients, where appropriate, to support the Clinton Foundation because of the good work that it does around the world. It also clearly shows that Teneo never received any financial benefit or benefit of any kind from doing so,” the statement said.
The email with the memo was part of a near-daily dump by Wikileaks. The Clinton campaign has neither confirmed or denied the authenticity of the emails, but they blame the Russians for the hack, saying President Vladimir Putin is trying to skew the election for Donald Trump.
Trump immediately jumped on the report at a rally in Ohio Thursday.
“The more emails Wikileaks releases the more lines between the Clinton Foundation, the secretary of state’s office and the Clinton’s personal financiers — they all get blurred,” Trump said.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed Thursday a federal prosecutor was evaluating certain issues involving the FBI, the (click)Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, but said he would not appoint a second special counsel at this point.
ARE YOU A CITIZEN? THE QUESTION UPSETS THE CRIME SYNDICATE OF SANCTUARY STATES
The question is this. Back when the Constitution was written just about everyone in the United States was a citizen; well except the Native Americans. We doubt that they were counted, a great many of them lived in the West and South; areas which did not become states until later on.
So we pose a salient question! What would the Founding Fathers have said if say, Virginia brought in two million Englishmen for a one year visit in 1790? Would they be counted in the Census? We doubt it.
Or what would the powers in charge say if two million Quebecois strolled down from the North landing in Massachusetts due to an invite? The possibility of them being counted is highly unlikely.
In today’s very volatile theater the Supreme Court must weigh in on the counting of illegals who flood states like the Sanctuary State of California, thereby garnering them a higher portion of representation that would ordinarily not happen.
Counting of ILLEGALS IS ILLEGAL – THE SUPREME COURT HAS TO PUT A STOP TO IT.
The United States Census is a decennial census mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which states: “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States … according to their respective Numbers .
The United States Census is a decennial census mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which states: “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States … according to their respective Numbers … . The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years.” The United States Census Bureau (officially the Bureau of the Census, as defined in Title 13 U.S.C. § 11) is responsible for the United States Census. The Bureau of the Census is part of the United States Department of Commerce.
The first census after the American Revolution was taken in 1790, under Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson; there have been 22 federal censuses since that time. The current national census was held in 2010; the next census is scheduled for 2020 and will be largely conducted using the Internet. For years between the decennial censuses, the Census Bureau issues estimates made using surveys and statistical models, in particular, the American Community Survey.
Title 13 of the United States Code governs how the Census is conducted and how its data are handled. Information is confidential as per 13 U.S.C. § 9. Refusing or neglecting to answer the census is punishable by fines of $100, for a property or business agent to fail to provide correct names for the census is punishable by fines of $500, and for a business agent to provide false answers for the census is punishable by fines of $10,000, pursuant to 13 U.S.C. § 221-224.
Why putting a citizenship question on the census is a big deal
(CNN)It sounds like a small change, in a survey many people forget about minutes after they take it.
But the Trump administration’s plan to put a citizenship question back on the US census is a big deal.
Even if talk about polls and statistics usually makes your eyes glaze over, here’s why you should pay attention:
The census isn’t just an academic exercise. It’s the basis for deciding the number of representatives each state gets in Congress and how billions of dollars in federal funds are distributed.
Monday’s announcement by the Commerce Department marked the beginning of what’s likely to be a lengthy battle in the political arena and in court. California has already filed a legal challenge, and other states and civil rights groups have also threatened to sue.
Here’s a look at the issues at play — and what’s at stake:
Why is this coming up now?
The Justice Department asked officials to add the citizenship question, saying it needed better data on the voting age population to help enforce the Voting Rights Act. In a memo Monday, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, whose department runs the census, said he was granting the Justice Department’s request.
Supporters say this is a common-sense question that simply makes sense to ask.
Critics argue that the Justice Department has other ways to get citizenship data without interfering with the census. They say the change is a political decision aimed at shifting the balance of power — and that it’s no coincidence administration officials made the push to add a question that runs the risk of significantly undercounting immigrant, minority and low-income populations.
What exactly are critics concerned about?
Advocates fear that when undocumented immigrants or people in immigrant families receive the census form in the mail, the citizenship question will stop them from completing and returning it.
Immigrant rights groups say this couldn’t come at a worse time, as many in immigrant communities are already losing trust in officials and afraid to answer their doors.
“In the past, the census would always make a big effort to tell people that they don’t share their information with other government agencies. I think that’s something people will not take too seriously this time,” said William Frey, a demographer and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Citizenship question: political power shift? 05:24
Demographers and other experts — including several former directors of the census — have warned that adding a citizenship question could result in reduced response rates and inaccurate answers.
In his memo outlining the decision, Ross said he’d weighed concerns about an undercount, but didn’t see enough evidence showing that the citizenship question would materially decrease response rates.
“I find that the need for accurate citizenship data and the limited burden that the reinstatement of the citizenship question would impose outweigh fears about a potentially lower response rate,” he wrote.
Who is the census supposed to count?
The decennial census is supposed to count everyone who lives in the United States, whether or not they are citizens.
That data is used to calculate all sorts of things, including the number of representatives each state gets in Congress, the number of votes each state gets in the Electoral College and the amount of federal funding local governments get for programs like Medicaid, Head Start and the National School Lunch Program.
Are certain geographic areas more likely to lose representatives in Congress or federal funding?
The 2020 census is still years away. And it’s too soon to say for certain how things will play out.
But if response rates drop significantly, some states could find themselves losing a House seat or federal funding.
States with large immigrant populations like Texas, California, Florida, New Jersey, New York and Illinois could be affected, Frey said.
But it’s important to note that population trends have shifted in recent years beyond these traditional gateways. Significant growth in immigrant populations has occurred largely in the Southeast, from small towns in rural communities to bigger cities like Charlotte, North Carolina, and Atlanta.
States like Georgia and North Carolina could see an impact, too, Frey said.
What are the political implications of this?
Even before the Commerce Department’s announcement, the 2020 census was becoming a political flashpoint.
President Trump’s re-election campaign sent an email to supporters last week, endorsing the idea of adding a citizenship question and slamming opponents of the move.
“The President wants the 2020 United States census to ask people whether or not they are citizens. In another era, this would be COMMON SENSE … but 19 attorneys general said they will fight the President if he dares to ask people if they are citizens. The President wants to know if you’re on his side,” the email said.
Democratic lawmakers fired back on Tuesday, slamming the administration.
“Trump is worried about losing power so he’s trying to take ours away,” California Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard said on Twitter.
Hasn’t this question been on the census before?
Yes, but not since 1950.
For years, however, it has appeared on the American Community Survey, an ongoing sample survey conducted by the Census Bureau.
It’s no surprise to see census questions shifting with the times, said Margo J. Anderson, a professor of history at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.
“It was a big deal to ask if someone had a radio in 1930. In 1940, not so much,” she said.
Citizenship questions were regularly on the census until 1950. In 1960, they were removed from the list.
“Lots of questions go off the census when they’re not very important anymore,” Anderson said. “In 1960, we had essentially had very low levels of immigration for 30-35 years. … There weren’t very many new immigrants coming. When you started collecting the data, there wasn’t much to find out.”
A citizenship question reappeared in 1970 on the long-form questionnaire sent to a sample of households at the time.
“We passed major new immigration legislation in 1965, and so the question became relevant again,” Anderson said.
It remained on subsequent long-form questionnaires until they were discontinued after 2000. It became part of the American Community Survey, which the Census Bureau began using to collect more detailed household data in 2005.
So is this a done deal?
Not necessarily.
The state of California immediately challenged the plan, filing a lawsuit in federal court on Tuesday. Former Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder also blasted the move and said his organization, which focuses on voting enfranchisement and redistricting, would also pursue litigation against what he called an “irresponsible decision.”
And some Democratic lawmakers are also trying to block the move in Congress.
This much is clear: With immigration increasingly a political flashpoint and midterm elections looming, debate about this controversial census question is just beginning.
FOO = FACEBOOK
(click)Controversy continues to swirl around how the consulting firm Cambridge Analytica obtained personal data from over 50 million Facebook users without their knowledge and used it to target ads to individuals in an effort to help Donald Trump be elected president in 2016.
But a more serious case of apparent misconduct involves Facebook data going to a different presidential campaign – this time in 2012. In this case, which is getting far less attention, Facebook reportedly voluntarily provided data on millions of its users to the re-election campaign of President Obama.
If true, such action by Facebook may constitute a major violation of federal campaign finance law as an illegal corporate campaign contribution. The matter should be investigated by the Federal Election Commission – an agency I am quite familiar with, because I served as one of its commissioners from 2006 to 2007. The commission enforces campaign finance laws for congressional and presidential elections.
A federal law bans corporations from making “direct or indirect” contributions to federal candidates. That ban extends beyond cash contributions to “any services, or anything of value.” In other words, corporations cannot provide federal candidates with free services of any kind. Under the Federal Election Commission’s regulations, “anything of value” includes any “in-kind contribution.”
Whether or not the Obama campaign and Facebook violated this ban is an open question. It should be investigated by the Federal Election Commission and potentially the U.S. Department of Justice.
For example, if a corporation decided to offer a presidential candidate free office space, that would violate federal law. Corporations can certainly offer their services, including office space, to federal campaigns. But the campaigns are required to pay the fair market value for such services or rental properties.
According to Carol Davidsen, the former media director for Obama for America, Facebook gave the 2012 Obama campaign direct access to the personal data of Facebook users in violation of its internal rules, making a special exception for the campaign. The Daily Mail, a British newspaper, reported that Davidsen said on Twitter March 18 that Facebook employees came to the campaign office and “were very candid that they allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.”
The type of data that the Obama campaign was mining from Facebook is a more sophisticated version of the type of data that has long been provided by professional direct mail marketers – something pioneered by Richard Viguerie. Viguerie, for example, has detailed personal data on “12 million conservative donors and activists” to whom his company sends letters and emails on behalf of his clients. He provides information to campaigns looking for votes and money, and to nonprofit and advocacy organizations raising funds.
Political campaigns must pay for these services. Under a Federal Election Commission regulation, giving a mailing list or something similar to a campaign is considered an “in-kind contribution.”
So if Facebook gave the Obama campaign free access to this type of data when it normally does not do so for other entities – or usually charges for such access – then Facebook would appear to have violated the federal ban on in-kind contributions by a corporation. And the Obama campaign may have violated the law by accepting such a corporate contribution.
What about the story currently in the news about Cambridge Analytica using Facebook data for the Trump campaign? The important legal distinction may be in the way the data were obtained. Fox News reported that the Trump campaign hired Cambridge Analytica to do political research on voters and reportedly to “help the campaign target specific voters with ads and stories.”
The real controversy now involving the Trump campaign deals with exactly how Cambridge Analytica obtained the data it used for the campaign. A CNBC report says that Cambridge Analytica bought the data from Aleksandr Kogan and his company, Global Science Research, which obtained the data through an app and a psychological test taken by Facebook users.
The amounts paid by the Trump campaign to Cambridge Analytica for its services – and the use of the Facebook data – are listed in its spending reports filed with the Federal Election Commission. This proves that the Trump campaign paid for services in the same way that campaigns routinely hire and pay direct mail marketers. So the Trump campaign did not get an illegal corporate contribution from Cambridge Analytica or Facebook when it received free access to very valuable data.
Whether or not Global Science Research and Cambridge Analytica violated any Facebook rules regarding this data is not the responsibility of the Trump campaign. From the standpoint of federal campaign finance law, the Trump campaign met its obligation to pay for and report this spending and did not violate the ban on corporate contributions.
However, whether or not the Obama campaign and Facebook violated this ban is an open question. It should be investigated by the Federal Election Commission and potentially the U.S. Department of Justice. The commission handles most routine violations of the law, which are civil matters. The Justice Department is responsible for investigating knowingand intentional violations of the law, which are criminal matters.
Although the statute of limitations may have already run out on this conduct by the Obama campaign, one thing seems certain: Carol Davidsen’s admissions should provide a sufficient basis for opening a federal investigation of what may have been a serious violation of the law by the Obama campaign.
CHINA WINS 51 to 49 – HOW WE CAN STOP THEM BY TURNING THE TABLES
President Trump has engaged China in battle; no more patsy U.S, we now will play by our rules. Like it or not they have no choice. Behind the scenes fisticuffs, bare knuckle Asian martial arts will occur. But don’t sell Trump short on this pugilistic octagon rumble, he is no Clinton, Bush, Obama, the patsies of old relinquished our technology to the enemy – for WHAT? Corporate America wanted to expand, they wanted to make more money and they knew that China was ripe for the taking; or were they? We find out decades later that the Chinese played the game of Three-card Monte expertly. Shells, cards or marbles whatever the game was it was fixed from the beginning. China said take it or leave it; 51 to us 49 to you. Technology poured in like the icon waters of the Yangtze. Their ability enhanced to such a degree they now threaten America with inovation.
In the mean time we racked up trillions of dollars of debt buying Chinese products. They converted this windfall purhasing companies worldwide. Technology, manufacturing, software, biotech, oil and mining were not unscathed. Their hand reached into Latin America and Africa. Their thirst to become a world wide leader in all aspects by 2035 has them driven. Hegemony in shipping lanes, contested islands and seas without contestation manifests their ability to threaten the free world. Who will stand up to the Chinese Dragon?
But a view from afar is it possible that we hold the cards? When an entity owes the bank $100, the bank owns the entity, but when an entity owes the bank a $1,000,000,000 the entity now owns the bank. Getting in too deep in the borrowers side can have unintended consequence. We shall see if the United States plays hardball in the tariff arena.
Our suggestion to address the Chinese threat is simple. Notify China that imports into the United States will be halted immediately. Repercussions yes? This will cause chaos in the China workspace. Three hundred fifty million people will be out of work. They will not be happy campers, but will be dragons out for vengeance. What could China do? Threaten us, with what? They have a trillion or two in treasury bills, so what. Paper, is all it is; paper tiger holding paper. Revolution will ensue, workers of the China hinterland world will unite. Leaders will be targeted. No Tienanmen Square here – this will be the Peoples Army taking to the street seeking blood. And blood it will be for the Commies. Will it happen? Time will tell.
China leadership mostly never takes a calculated risk, their adventures are planned decades ahead. Case in point, Boeing made a deal with the Chinese devil transferring jet engine technology and trade secrets to the Chinese. And now China is building civilian aircraft to compete with China. They also have prototype F-35 to challenge us in the skies. This is no checker game, it is for real. And the controversy continues as the United States is set to sell and transfer nuclear reactors along with technology to suppress submarine detection. This vividly brings to mind the iconic saying by Vladimir Lenin, “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” Lenin was most prescient.
Over the years we have bought Chinese made products manufactured by slave labor thereby transferring trillions of dollars to China. In turn they have purchased manufacturing firms, oil companies, mining companies, software-computer companies and technology. Their industrial espionage is well known . On their way to equivalency in many industries China now is an existential threat to the United States and its neighbors. Take the most recent Spratly Island dispute for evidence of such.
Where do we stand now? China has amassed one trillion in U.S treasury bills. Their present currency reserves top three billion. Trump has continue to criticize China for currency manipulation. Actually the are not currency manipulators. He is mistaken.
What China actually has done is to enslave 350 million people over the years (the early stage of the accumulation process) producing products for export – mostly to the United States. These employees effectively were slaves. As stated above, China amassed billions of dollars through this paradigm. Then with the haul in hand they bought worldwide companies with the loot; companies such as those involved in manufacturing, technology, mining, oil, pharmaceutical and retail.
A very simple solution to solve our China problem. China demands that if American companies want to do business in China they have to partner with a Chinese company to enter the market; in most cases our companies are minority players owning 49% of the enterprise.Trump has to read China the riot act. How will that work? We no longer will take it the 49% deal; it is 100 or nothing.
It is time for us to tell them point blank: we demand that our companies be allowed to own 100% and be able to repatriate their profits, if not we have an alternative. No more Chinese imports into the United States will be allowed from China starting tomorrow.
The fallout here will be the same as if a nuclear bomb hit China. Mass layoffs will challenge the leaders. Revolution will ensue. We don’t think the Chinese leadership wants to see this happen.
CHINA SYNDROME BY MICHAEL OBERNDORF
Posted on
China? CHECK THE LAST TWO PARAGRAPHS
I have been spending time in Hong Kong this past year, and recently took a short trip into China proper. Several things struck me as being not at all what I expected, in both places. Not surprising, though, given the Ministry of Propaganda, aka, the “mainstream” media, filtering of what we are allowed to hear about. The skewed, leftist-agenda driven misinformation and downright lies that they spew out daily rarely paint a picture of what the world is actually like. Thus, I thought I would share some of my personal observations that if skewed, are skewed in the direction of proudly-American patriotic conservatism.
Hong Kong was taken as a colony by the British in 1841, as part of a treaty ending a brief war over opium. Over time, it became a great Asian commercial center and lots of people got very rich there, including many Chinese. In 1992, Hong Kong was returned to China by the British who were definitely watching the sun set on their former empire, and on their standing as a first tier nation.
However, rather than imposing the idiotic central planning that communists are infamous for, the ChiComs allowed business to continue pretty much as usual: largely unregulated and untaxed. As a result, Hong Kong continued to prosper, bringing huge amounts of capital and trade to, and through, it. I saw more Ferraris in 10 days last winter than I had seen in the previous 10 years in the US. Unemployment appears to be minimal. The parks have only retired people, not the jobless, in them, and the homeless are very hard to find. Poverty seems darn near non-existent, and, unlike America’s Democrat-run cities, it’s safe and clean. It reminds me of what America was like back when I was growing up, in the 1950s and early ’60s. And though they have experienced some recent unrest among the Chinese residents regarding the local political process, international business – the source of Hong Kong’s fabulous wealth – has been mostly unaffected. This, of course, may change, but for the more or less immediate future, Hong Kong will likely maintain its #1 ranking as the most free place for doing business in the world. The USA, by the way, under Obozo and his Merry RINOs, has sunk to #17.
China proper, too, had some surprises. When I crossed the border into Shenzhen – Hong Kong and the New Territories are not part of the Mainland and you have to have a visa to cross from them into China – I expected there to be a big change from booming Hong Kong. Instead, it looked very much the same – well dressed (often expensively) people, lots of luxury cars, but with China license plates, lots of big construction projects, and so on. Unlike our border with Mexico, where the poverty, crime, filth, and pollution are a stark contrast, Shenzhen clearly has benefited from its proximity to the epitome of free enterprise. But while Shenzhen was similar to Hong Kong, there were recognizable differences.
One of the first things I noticed on the cab ride from the crossing to my hotel – a marvelous Crowne Plaza – was that there were, what were clearly homeless wino-types, sleeping in the parks. These people are not supposed to exist in Mao’s worker’s paradise, but they do indeed, though not in great numbers. I wonder how they have managed to stay out of sight of the all-seeing eye of the People’s Police. And this relates somewhat to another Chinese anomaly – ghost cities and unfinished housing.
The Ministry of Propaganda has mentioned ghost cities, but mostly as curiosities, with little or no serious analysis. These cities are complete, with wonderful housing and shopping malls, but no more than 10% occupancy in any of them. And out in the smaller cities and towns and the countryside, I saw hundreds of relatively new three and four story western-style buildings, constructed to the point of just needing finishing – wall and ceiling finish, window glass, etc. – and then apparently left to sit, some obviously for more than just a few months. So, with all this vacant, potentially occupiable housing, why are there still homeless on the streets? And who is supposed to fill it all, since other than the handful of homeless, everyone seemed to have places to live?
What this suggests to me is that all these are make-work projects, to keep people busy, who would otherwise be idle, and thus, potential trouble-makers, but producing nothing of real value to the country. Indeed, I saw lots of idle workers, sitting around day after day, playing cards (gambling! shocking!) apparently victims of government dictating which businesses operate when. While it is always possible that there is some brilliant central master plan behind all this, it sure isn’t obvious, and instead hints at endemic systemic problems for which they are unsuccessfully groping for a solution.
Add to this the obvious popularity of Western Culture, and China becomes less of a stable, monolithic, communist state than we are led to believe it is. Virtually no one wears traditional Chinese clothes, except a few ethnic minorities in very rural areas of southwest China, and it is not unusual to see spiked, blue/green/red hairdos. Western music is everywhere, and television and advertising are clearly modeled after ours and Europe’s. This embracing of Western, non-Chinese culture hints at the adoption of Western values, sooner or later, and may be a major factor in the increasing crackdown on internal dissent. Interesting times, indeed!