Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Tens of Thousands of Cuban Refugees Crossing the Border

www.krgv.com

HIDALGO – At least 7,000 Cuban refugees are expected to come to the border in the next coming days.

The activity at the Hidalgo International Bridge continues. For 40 years, Jose Angel Rodriguez has made his living driving a cab.

He said he’s seeing more Cubans crossing the port of entry. “They get here every night, in the morning, and at night they get here. They go to Laredo, too,” Rodriguez said.

Rodriguez remembered taking a few to a hotel or store. It gets busier each week that passes by.

Down the road from the bridge were a handful of 15-passenger vans. They had Florida license plates. Giovanni Acosta is one of them.

“In Cuba, there’s nothing. There’s no freedom. We came from Cuba because the pressure that we have there,” Giovanni Acosta said.

Acosta said he’s waiting for his wife to come to the bridge so he can take her back to Miami. She’s taking the same track as he once did. “I did the same path, like all the Cubans did. I came from Ecuador. I walked for 27 days on the road,” he said.

Congressman Henry Cuellar’s office said Cuban refugees are coming to Laredo’s Point of Entry every day and the numbers are increasing. They’re coming from Central America through Mexico to the border.

Acosta’s van can take more than just his family. He said he can help the Cuban refugees, but his goal is to pick up his family, to bring them safely back home.

CHANNEL 5 NEWS spoke to U.S. Customs and Border Protection to see if they were prepared for the influx. They released a statement that said in part, "U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is prepared to process the expected increase in Cubans applying for admission at South Texas ports of entry. CBP officers will process Cuban nationals in accordance with established procedures as expeditiously as possible while maintaining requirements and standards for individuals in our care."

COMMENTS

Americans hate the U.S. government more than ever

www.cbsnews.com

A handful of industries are those "love to hate" types of businesses, such ascable-television companies andInternet service providers.

The federal government has joined the ranks of the bottom-of-the-barrel industries, according to a new survey from the American Customer Satisfaction Index. Americans' satisfaction level in dealing with federal agencies --everything from Treasury to Homeland Security -- has fallen for a third consecutive year, reaching an eight-year low.

The declines represent some backsliding for the U.S. government, given that satisfaction saw some improvement in 2011 and 2012, which may have been the result of spending in the wake of the recession. While the comparison with private enterprise isn't apples to apples given the nature of government services, the findings have some implications for bureaucrats.

"Satisfaction is linked to broader goals in the political system that it wants to maximize, like confidence and trust," said Forrest Morgeson, director of research at the ACSI. "It's much more difficult to govern if the entire population dislikes you."

Although satisfaction is down for the federal government as a whole, the research found that consumers have vastly different views of specific agencies. The department that received the highest score was the Department of the Interior, which received a ranking of 75 points. That could reflect Americans' positive feelings toward national parks, which many visit while on vacation, Morgeson noted.

The lowest-ranked department may not be much of a surprise to taxpayers: Treasury, which received a score of just 55 points, or 20 points below the Department of the Interior. Treasury, as a reminder, oversees the IRS.

"If you think about the most contacted government agency, it'll be the IRS," Morgeson said. "If you think about what the IRS does, which is take money from citizens, you'll have low satisfaction."

Despite the overall lower score for the government, there were some signs of improvement in citizens' experiences, with the feds earning improved scores in customer service and information, which means many citizens believe agencies are delivering information in a clearer way than a year ago.

The government report is based on surveys with more than 2,000 people who were surveyed late last year.

COMMENTS

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Trump will ‘definitely not’ participate in Fox debate, campaign says

www.washingtonpost.com

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign stop at Farmington High School,in Farmington, N.H. on Jan. 25, 2016. (AP/John Minchillo)

MARSHALLTOWN, Iowa -- Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump's campaign manager Corey Lewandowski confirmed to The Washington Post Tuesday that Trump would "definitely not" participate in Thursday's Fox News debate.

“He’s definitely not participating in the Fox News debate," Lewandowski said. "His word is his bond."

He said Trump would remain in Iowa as planned and would instead host a event in the state to raise money for wounded warriors and other veterans groups.

Trump has made such threats before, but he said that the Fox News Channel had gone too far by issuing press statements on Tuesday that he said kicked his concern about Megyn Kelly, one of the debate co-moderators.

When Trump saw the press release from Fox, "I said, 'Bye bye,'" he said.

Earlier Tuesday, Fox News Channel President Roger Ailes told The Post that "Megyn Kelly is an excellent journalist, and the entire network stands behind her. She will absolutely be on the debate stage on Thursday night."

Later, the network poked fun at Trump in a satirical statement: "We learned from a secret back channel that the Ayatollah and Putin both intend to treat Donald Trump unfairly when they meet with him if he becomes president. A nefarious source tells us that Trump has his own secret plan to replace the Cabinet with his Twitter followers to see if he should even go to those meetings."

Trump's feud with Kelly began during the first debate in August, when she questioned him about disparaging remarks he has made about women with her opening question.

Trump is scheduled to appear later Tuesday in Iowa City. On Wednesday, he is scheduled to travel to Lexington, S.C. for a rally before returning to Iowa for Thursday night's GOP debate in Des Moines.

COMMENTS

Hillary Clinton: I Did Not Know What the Email Issue Was All About

AP Photo/Patrick Semansky

by PATRICK HOWLEY25 Jan 2016433

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton claimed ignorance when asked about her private email scandal at Monday night’s CNN town hall.

“Yes, I think that’s a fair criticism,” Clinton said of the Des Moines Register’s point that she should have apologized for the scandal sooner. “I have no intention of doing anything other than find a convenient way” to communicate, Clinton said. “It turned out not to be so convenient.”

Clinton refused to call it an error in judgment.

“Maybe being faster, trying to figure out what all of this means,” Clinton said, when asked what she could have done differently, suggesting that she did not know what she was doing was wrong and potentially illegal.

“When you’re facing something like that, you’ve got to get the facts. And it takes time to get the facts,” Clinton said of her delayed response to the scandal.

“Some of them are frankly a little embarrassing,” Clinton said of her released emails. “You find out sometimes that maybe I’m not the best at technology, things like that.”

Despite Clinton’s appeals to ignorance, the FBI investigation into her email scandal is heating up. The case hinges on whether Clinton violated a provision of the Espionage Act of 1913.

The law (18 U.S. Code & 793 subsection f) makes clear that anyone who has materials “relating to the national defense” cannot lose or give them away. The law is broken if “through gross negligence permits [materials] to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed.”

The penalty? A fine, a prison term of up to ten years, or “both.”

Since the FBI seized Clinton’s emails in August, the scandal has haunted her campaign.

Senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett threw Clinton under the bus, saying that the White House provided guidance to the State Department, telling employees to use official government email accounts.

Breitbart News first reported, based on high-level government sources, that of seven emails originally being analyzed by investigators to determine their classification status, two were deemed “Top Secret” and at least two were already classified when they were sent. Meaning, Clinton was sending and receiving classified information that she knew to be classified. The classifications were made by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

Our exclusive report galvanized our readers and other media outlets, quickly picking up more than 12,000 social media shares and 5,000 comments. The Clinton campaign could not find a suitable talking point on the issue. The campaign tried to claim that Clinton did not send emails that were classified “when originated.”

But Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCollough, now under attack by Team Clinton, confirmed, “IC classification officials reviewed two additional emails and judged that they contained classified State Department information when originated.”

The inspector general went on to make a comprehensive report, filed earlier this month. He found that “several dozen” emails had classified information in them. “These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined… to be at the confidential, secret and top secret/sap levels,” McCollough wrote in a letter to Congress. That’s right. A “sap” level is an even higher classification status than “top secret.”

Clinton’s server was highly vulnerable to attack, like the kind that occurred to multiple of her email contractors and could have happened to her when she opened a virus-infected email from her friend.

Breitbart News reported that Clinton’s server was operating on the same email network, and was housed in the same exact physical space, as the server for the Clinton Foundation, indicating that they were sharing a server. Additionally, that space was in New York City, not in the basement of Clinton’s Chappaqua, New York, home, as she claimed. Daughter Chelsea Clinton’s office was also using the email network.

Numerous Clinton Foundation employees used the clintonemail.com server for their own email addresses, which means that they were using email accounts that, if hacked, would have given any hacker complete access to Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails, as well.

Clinton’s server had an open webmail portal that gave potential hackers unrestricted access to Clinton’s personal information.

In fact, Clinton’s server went down at least three times during her tenure as Secretary of State, including weeks after the Benghazi terrorist attack. Clinton never even told her own IT Help Desk at the State Department that she was using a private server, keeping them in the dark about her secret activities.

Clinton even went so far as to hide the identity of the people running her private server, paying a company called Perfect Privacy, LLC. That company, based in Jacksonville, enters its own meaningless contact information into official Internet databases so that its clients’ identities will not be exposed.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,CNNHillary ClintonState DepartmentFBI,Clinton FoundationValerie JarrettHillary Clinton Email Scandalsecretary of state,CIAclintonemail.comClassified Information

EXCLUSIVE – Bernie Sanders Blasts Billionaires, Has Unreported Ties to George Soros

JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

by AARON KLEIN26 Jan 2016138

Self-proclaimed socialist and presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) presents himself as a warrior battling the wealthiest one percent, especially investment bankers and billionaires.

Breitbart News has found, however, that Sanders’ economic policies have been molded in part by experts with deep ties to top one-percenter and billionaire George Soros.

In 2011, Sanders convened what he referred to as an “expert advisory panel” to help draft legislation for Federal Reserve reform in the wake of a damning top-to-bottom Congressional audit of the U.S. central banking system.

Sanders’ panel of experts was stacked with economists tied to Soros. One prominent member advocates a “new economic order” no longer dominated by the U.S., while another is the leading proponent of the “shock therapy” economic doctrine of radical economic transformation deployed at times to detriment in Eastern Europe.

Last July, Sanders convened another panel of economists to advise the Senate on the Greek and international debt crises. The panel consisted of many of the same Soros-tied experts.

New Global Economic Order

Sanders’ 2011 panel on Federal Reserve reform included Nobel Prize-winning Columbia University economics professor Joseph Stiglitz, a proponent of substantial government regulation of the economy.

Stiglitz has been involved in numerous projects with Soros and serves on the boards of numerous Soros organizations, including the billionaire’s signature Open Society Foundation.

Stiglitz conducted teach-ins at Occupy Wall Street, which was reportedly launched by the Soros-funded Adbusters magazine.

It is instructive to note that Sanders is backed by a coalition calling itself “People for Bernie,” which states it consists of “veteran grassroots organizers of Occupy Wall Street, and are joined by many energized brothers and sisters we have met along the way.”

Stiglitz, meanwhile, also served in President Bill Clinton’s administration as a member of the presidential cabinet of advisers and chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers. He was credited with helping to define an economic philosophy referred to as the “third way,” which holds that business and government should be “partners,” while recognizing that government intervention cannot always correct the limitations of financial markets.

Discover the Networks criticized the theory thusly: “In short, Big Business would own the economy (as under capitalism), while Big Government would run it (as under socialism). Corporations would be persuaded to comply with government directives through subsidies, tax breaks, customized legislation, and other special privileges.”

On Sept. 17, 2010, Stiglitz delivered a lecture to the Swiss and Global Asset Management group accompanied by a Power Point presentation – reviewed in full by Breitbart News – calling for a “New Global Economic Order” in which the world is “no longer dominated by one ‘superpower.’”

Stiglitz has criticized President Obama as being “too conservative” to assert a progressive economic vision, and “too afraid to take the bold kind of action that President Roosevelt took” during the Great Depression, MSNBC reported.

‘Shock treatment’

Stiglitz is an active member on the board of the Institute for New Economic Thinking, or INET, an organization that seeks nothing less than to remake the global economy. INET was founded with a $25 million five-year donation from Soros.

In April 2011, Stiglitz was featured at INET’s annual summit, which takes place at the same hotel that hosted the 1944 Bretton Woods economic conference, which sought to reconstruct the post-World War II international monetary system.

Other INET members served on Sanders’ 2011 economic advisory panel, including the keynote speaker at the 2011 Bretton Woods conference, Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs.

Sachs serves on the INET board and is associated with Soros and Stiglitz.

Sachs famously coined the “shock therapy” economic doctrine, which he helped to deploy internationally in countries including Bolivia and Poland.

Critics charge that Sachs’ doctrine led to economic turmoil in some countries where it was deployed.

The Wilson Center argued:

A side effect of shock therapy in Russia and in Latin America has been to weaken legal institutions by degrading the powers of the legislature and extending the use of executive decrees. This serves to de-legitimize state power, erode the democratic basis of state authority, undermine the fiscal capacities of the state, and, thus destabilize the political system over the long term.

In every case since 1985, when it was first employed in Bolivia, shock therapy has caused either major constitutional changes or declarations of states of emergency that suspended normal democratic procedures, where it resembles more of a revolutionary than a legal process. It can fundamentally alter the nature of the political system in new democracies.


Sachs was the narrator of a 2009 audio bookentitled “George Soros and Joseph Stiglitz – America: How They See Us.”

Stiglitz has other Soros ties that trace back to Sanders’ economic panel. Stiglitz servedas the chair of the U.N.’s Commission of Experts on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System, a commission that included other Soros-tied economists, such as Robert Johnson.

Johnson was on Sanders’ economic panel and served as the managing director of Soros Fund Management. Johnson sits on the boards of the Soros-funded Economic Policy Institute, or EPI, and the Institute for America’s Future.

Also on the board of the Soros-financed EPI is former Boston University law professor Jane D’Arista, who served on Sanders’ economic panel.

Aside from Stiglitz, Sachs, Johnson and D’Arista, other Soros-tied economists on Sanders’ 2011 panel of experts included:

Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute.Nomi Prins, a senior fellow at the Soros-funded Demos, a progressive think tank where President Obama’s controversial former “green” jobs czar, Van Jones, has served as a long-time fellow and is currently a board member.Dean Baker, co-director of the Soros-funded Center for Economic and Policy Research and former senior economist at the Soros-financed Economic Policy Institute.

Meanwhile, last July, Sanders convened apanel of three economists to discuss the Greek debt crisis. Stiglitz was on the panel, which assembled at the Hart Senate Office Building.

War on billionaires

The great irony of Soros’ ties to Sanders is that the presidential candidate’s stated economic policies would target the billionaire’s wealth. Sanders’ presidential campaign focuses on income inequality. He has set his sights on the likes of the uber-wealthy billionaire Koch brothers while failing to mention that what he calls the “billionaire class” also includes progressive funders like Soros and Bill Gates.

Bernie’s recipe to fix “economic inequality” is to force multi-millionaires and multinational corporations to pay their “fair share” in taxes by removing tax loopholes and tax breaks that benefit only them, in addition to raising tax rates for the “rich.” These tax reforms, he claims, would allow for expansion of “social safety net programs.”

Sanders explained his plan last April: A constitutional amendment to limit corporate campaign donations; legislation that would end off-shore tax havens where corporations “stash” their money and profits; do away with corporate tax breaks; break up Wall Street firms that are “too powerful to be reformed”; lift the cap on the amount of earnings subject to taxes for a retirement fund; and enact a progressive estate tax to increase estate tax rates on the top three-tenths of one percent of Americans who inherit more than $3.5 million” while “eliminating loopholes that have allowed the wealthiest Americans to avoid billions in taxes.”

With research by Brenda J. Elliott.

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow.Follow him on Facebook.

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentWhite House2016 Presidential RaceBernie SandersGeorge Sorosoccupy wall streetJeffrey Sachs,open Society Institutejoseph stiglitz

National Review Goes Full-Snob: Attacks Donald Trump Voters as Ignorant Bigots

UNKNOWN NATIONAL REVIEW GOES FULL RETARD.

LISTEN TO MILITARY VETERAN TALK RADIO 

IHEART.SMYTHRADIO.COM


by JOHN NOLTE26 Jan 20164533

After the massive belly-flop that was the poorly thought out, very-poorly executedand way-late “Against Trump” diatribe last week, “National Review” is apparently still so bitter that on Monday morning another fatal decision was made — to attack everyday Americans as stupid homophobes.

With conservatives like these, who needs leftists, or the mainstream media?

The National Review Online (NRO) lead piece was written by Thurston Howell IIIKevin Williamson, titled “Our Post-Literate Politics” (the title changed later in the day), and puts forth the theory that Donald Trump is winning because the everyday Americans who support the billionaire businessman do not or cannot read.

[T]he candidacy of Donald Trump is something that could not happen in a nation that could read.

This is the full flower of post-literate politics.


Trump supporters are also bigots:

Thomas Aquinas cautioned against “homo unius libri,” a warning that would not get very far with the typical Trump voter stuck sniggering over “homo.” (They’d snigger over “snigger,” too, for similar reasons.)


The word “insalubrious” is then used, which I had to look up:

Donald Trump is the face of that insalubrious relationship, a lifelong crony capitalist who brags about buying political favors. But his enthusiasts, devoid as they are of a literate politics capable of thinking about all three sides of a triangle at the same time[.]


You have to read the whole thing to believe it. Had this published word-for-word at Salon, no one would blink an eye. In other words, anyone who believed NRO would be circumspect in the face of last week’s backlash was sorely mistaken.

NRO itself has become the very caricature it paints of Trump. All the once-necessary publication has is insults as opposed to ideas — as though pomposity itself is argument enough. Don’t you understand, if the rubes could quote Thomas Aquinas like us snobs, the rubes would know what is best for them!

Apparently it is unforgivable that the hoi polloi are simply too busy going about the business of keeping our world turning to have the time to read “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”;  too busy fighting our wars, unplugging our toilets, fixing our cars, processing our food, delivering our heating oil, and working three part-time jobs.

The Unwashed have, however, read enough to know that Democrats never do this — never attack their own voters like NRO and the rest of the Establishment have this year.

But maybe — just maybe — because they spend all their time in the Real World and not hiding inside NRO’s erudite reading list, the Unwashed also intuitively understand that what NRO and the Establishment have been peddling for five presidential cycles is pure undiluted, self-serving bull shit.

The Unwashed might not have read Shakespeare, but they can read a paycheck.

The Unwashed might not have read “Capitalism and Freedom,” but they have read a pink slip as their job went overseas or to an exploited illegal immigrant.

The Unwashed might not have consumed the same library of Greek and Roman classics (in the original or in translation) but they have consumed years of “Dial 1 for English,” Common Core math problems, terror attacks committed by immigrants, and an Establishment so removed Jeb Bush is being sold as a winner because … he  speaks Spanish.

The Unwashed might not read a publication that still pines for a Real Conservative, no less than the architect of ObamaCare who has already lost a nationwide presidential election, but they can read a country slipping away into a morass of political correctness, identity politics, and a Republican Party more concerned with the trough that comes with treating illegal immigrants better than America’s working class.

NRO simply can’t believe Americans are stupid enough to fall for a slogan like “Make America Great Again.”

Maybe NRO should read more.

NRO appears to have been caught off guard by an electorate that isn’t falling for The Establishment’s snake oil this year.

Maybe NRO should step out of the Velvet Bubble now and again.

The publication that once served up a cup that runneth over with ideas is  now reduced to lashing out with ad hominem — not against the Powerful (like Trump), but against the everyday Americans found in William F. Buckley’s fabled phone book.

Things really have changed at NRO.

Impotent rage is a helluva drug.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

My link says Buckley used the “Manhattan” phone book in his famous quote. Twitter is telling me it was “Boston.” The piece has been edited to avoid an insalubrious battle. 

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential Race,Donald Trump 2016National Review,William F. Buckley

Donald Trump just surged to a new high in a poll — and he's doubling his closest competitor

Listen To Military Veteran Talk Radio


Joshua Lott/Getty Images
Gretchen Ertl/REUTERS Donald Trump.
Real-estate mogul Donald Trump has hit a new high-water mark in the CNN/ORC survey, garnering 41% support among national Republican-primary voters in a poll released Tuesday.
That was more than double the support of Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, Trump's closest rival in the GOP presidential primary. Cruz had the support of 19% of GOP voters in the survey. No other candidate hit double digits.
An ABC News/Washington Post pollpublished Tuesday found similar results, with Trump leading Cruz nationally 37% to 21%. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida came in third at 11%, but no other Republican candidate ticked up to double digits.
That poll also found, significantly, that 64% of Republican voters viewed Trump as the most likely Republican nominee. And a majority — 56% — said Trump was the most electable potential nominee.
The poll results came out less than a week before Monday's caucus in Iowa, where the first votes of the 2016 primary will be cast. Trump and Cruz have been locked in an increasingly bitter back-and-forth ahead of the caucus, in which polls have shown the race tighter than in the national surveys.
Quinnipiac University survey of the Hawkeye State released Tuesday found Trump leading Cruz there 31% to 29%. But Trump has led in seven of the past eight Iowa surveys after briefly falling behind Cruz in the state, according toRealClearPolitics. According to the website's average of six recent polls, Trump leads Cruz by about 6 points in the state.
Trump also finds himself in exceedingly good shape in polls of New Hampshire, which on February 9 will hold the first primary. A new Boston Herald/Franklin Pierce University pollreleased Monday night found Trump leading there with 33% support. Cruz was again his next-closest competitor, garnering 14% in the survey.