Police ruled Welsh’s death a suicide, but have not released any details about what may have motivated it.
But his post took dark turn, even for a piece discussing a Donald Trump victory.
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
by BREITBART NEWS12 May 20161,469
advertisement
Brendan Gauthier writes in Salon:
“Clinton Clash,” premiering at the Cannes Film Festival on May 16, is a “devastating” documentary, according to MSNBC, alleging Bill and Hillary Clinton used the Clinton Foundation to “help billionaires make shady deals around the world with corrupt dictators, all while enriching themselves to the tune of millions.”
The film, written and produced by Breitbart News executive chairman Stephen K. Bannon and directed by M.A. Taylor, is based on the New York Times bestselling book of the same name (subtitled “The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich”) by Peter Schweizer.
Read the rest here:
Watch the “Clinton Cash” trailer below:
Read More Stories About:
2016 Presidential Race, Big Hollywood,Clinton Cash, Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton, Peter Schweizer
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
by BREITBART NEWS12 May 2016412
Philip Elliot pens the followingreview for TIME Magazine of the new documentary “Clinton Cash,” based on the bestselling book by Peter Schweizer. Read the excerpt below.
It would be easy to dismiss an hour-long film adaptation of Peter Schweizer’s book about the charitable-political-nonprofit complex of Bill and Hillary Clinton as nothing more than conservative propaganda. But sitting in a Manhattan screening room late Wednesday, it quickly became clear that conservatives weren’t the intended audience for Clinton Cash.
Environmentalists. Anti-nuke activists. Gay-rights advocates. Good-government folks. They’re all going to find themselves increasingly uncomfortable over claims that the likely Democratic nominee, in the film’s words, takes cash from the “darkest, worst corners of the world.”
The 60-minute indictment of the Clintons will soon find its way to an awful lot of televisions ahead of November’s elections. Based on a heavily researched book by the same name, Clinton Cash is careful in laying out a series of facts that are mostly true, though both the book and the movie sometimes draws connections and conclusions that aren’t as solid as their evidence.
“When it comes to the Clintons, you have to follow the money,” Schweizer says in a rough-cut previewed for TIME.
No doubt, there are many places where dotted lines are smudged into solid ones, and some assumptions are made where concrete evidence of quid pro quo is impossible to prove. But as a work of persuasion, the movie is likely to leave on-the-fence Clinton supporters who see it feeling more unsure about casting a vote for her. Made by the conservative Breitbart News’ executive chairman, Stephen K. Bannon, and director M.A. Taylor, this film rises above the traditional campaign hit job.
[…]
advertisement
There are a lot of leaps of logic in the film, but the insinuations, told through a pattern of favorable results following cash to Clintons, make for a disheartening watch. For instance, Clinton pal Joe Wilson, a former U.S. Ambassador at the center of the Bush-era controversy over weapons of mass destruction, allegedly got a leg up for his investment firm with help from the Clintons in South Sudan. Then there is a $100 million pledge to the Clintons that coincided with favorable contracts in Nigeria and a $1.4 million speaking fee for Bill Clinton personally. Investor Marc Rich, who received a controversial last-minute pardon in 2001, even makes an appearance.
This is not a movie that is going to dissuade the #imwithher crowd from supporting Clinton. But it is a movie that might keep disaffected liberals at home, energize the Sanders supporters to keep up the fight even after their preferred candidate bows to reality and serve up new fodder for conservative talking heads on cable news. This isn’t a game-changing movie, but one that could keep some less enthusiastic voters on the sidelines.
Read the rest here.
Watch the film’s trailer below:
advertisement
Read More Stories About:
2016 Presidential Race, Big Hollywood,Hillary Clinton, Clinton Cash, Clinton Foundation, Clinton Foundation foreign donations scandal, Hillary Clinton, Peter Schweizer
Sen. Sessions: Election offers a simple choice
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.usatoday.com
Sen. Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump in Madison, Ala., on Feb. 28, 2016.(Photo: John Bazemore, AP)
For the first time in a long time, this November will give Americans a clear choice on perhaps the most important issue facing our country and our civilization: whether we remain a nation-state that serves its own people, or whether we slide irrevocably toward a soulless globalism that treats humans as interchangeable widgets in the world market.
In Donald Trump, we have a forceful advocate for America. Trump has said that our trade, immigration and foreign policies must be changed to protect the interest of American workers and our nation.
In Hillary Clinton, we have a committed globalist. Clinton was an ardent supporter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership — which surrenders American sovereignty to an international union of 12 countries — and has clearly left the door wide open to enacting the pact if elected.
There is only one sure way to defeat the TPP, and that is to defeat Hillary Clinton.
Meanwhile, Clinton’s immigration platform is the most radical in our history. Freezing deportations. Ending detentions. Halting enforcement. She’d expand President Obama’s illegal amnesty decree, effectively creating open borders.
USA TODAY
The Trump train: Our view
Clinton’s extremist proposal economically targets our poor African-American and Hispanic communities whose wages and job prospects are being steadily eroded by the huge influx of new foreign workers.
Yet some Republicans persist in saying that they don’t know whether Mr. Trump is a “real conservative.” This charge misleads in two ways. First: Mr. Trump’s cautious approach to mass migration, transnational trade commissions and nation-building are, by definition, conservative.
Second, the divide between Trump and Clinton on the role of government could not be more stark. Consider just a few of the things President Trump would do after taking the oath: repeal Obamacare; nominate constitutionalist justices; replace Obama’s radical Cabinet appointments; reduce taxes and regulations; produce more American energy; rein in the out-of-control EPA; and cancel Obama’s illegal amnesties.
The choice is a simple one: Do we want a country that serves our people, or not?
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., was the first senator to endorse Donald Trump.
COMMENTS
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.dailymail.co.uk
'My main job is to keep my job, to get reelected. It takes precedence over everything,' an anonymous member of Congress writes in a new book'Voters are incredibly ignorant and know little about our form of government and how it works,' he writes'It's far easier than you think to manipulate a nation of naive, self-absorbed sheep who crave instant gratification'One liberal news blogger claims the author is a Democrat'The Confessions of Congressman X' will be released May 24 by a small Minnesota-based 'vanity press' publisher
GUESSING GAME: 'The Confessions of Congressman X' is due on bookshelves May 24 and Washington is abuzz with speculation about who wrote it
A new book threatens to blow the lid off of Congress as a legislator has penned a tell-all about the worst parts of serving in the House of Representatives – saying that his main job is to raise money for re-election and that leaves little time for reading the bills he votes on.
Mill City Press, a small Minnesota-based 'vanity press' publisher describes 'The Confessions of Congressman X' as 'a devastating inside look at the dark side of Congress as revealed by one of its own.'
'No wonder Congressman X wants to remain anonymous for fear of retribution. His admissions are deeply disturbing.'
The 84-page exposé is due in bookstores in two weeks, and Washington is abuzz with speculation about who may have written it.
Political Wire, a liberal news blog, disclosed on Thursday that the author is a 'Democratic congressman.'
Most of the excerpts that appear on the book jacket will come as little surprise to Americans who are cynical about the political process.
'Most of my colleagues are dishonest career politicians who revel in the power and special-interest money that's lavished upon them,' the author writes.
'My main job is to keep my job, to get reelected. It takes precedence over everything.'
'Fundraising is so time consuming I seldom read any bills I vote on. Like many of my colleagues, I don't know how the legislation will be implemented, or what it'll cost.'
The book also takes shots at voters as disconnected idiots who let Congress abuse its power through sheer incompetence.
CALM BEFORE THE STORM: The new congressional tell-all is likely to cause controversy on Capitol Hill
'Voters are incredibly ignorant and know little about our form of government and how it works,' the anonymous writer claims.
'It's far easier than you think to manipulate a nation of naive, self-absorbed sheep who crave instant gratification.'
And the take-away message is one of resigned depression about how Congress sacrifices America's future on the altar of its collective ego.
'We spend money we don't have and blithely mortgage the future with a wink and a nod. Screw the next generation,' the author writes.
'It's about getting credit now, lookin' good for the upcoming election.'
COMMENTS
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.latimes.com
A federal judge ruled for House Republicans on Thursday in their suit against President Obama and declared his administration is unconstitutionally spending money to reimburse health insurers without obtaining an appropriation fromCongress.
The judge's ruling, though a setback for the administration, was put on hold immediately and stands a good chance of being overturned on appeal.
But the 38-page opinion highlights the repeated complaint from Republicans that Obama and his administration have ignored constitutional limits on their authority.
The Constitution says "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law," said Judge Rosemary Collyer, yet the administration has continued to pay billions to insurers for their extra cost of providing coverage for low-income Americans.
"Paying out Sec. 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution," she wrote. "Congress is the only source for such an appropriation, and no public money can be spent without one."
House Republicans sued Obama under then-Speaker John Boehner and claimed the president had violated the law by delaying the enforcement of several provisions of the Affordable Care Act. But lawyers later focused on the reimbursements for health insurers that received little attention before. They said these payment would come to $175 billion over a decade.
In their defense, administration lawyers said the suit should be dismissed because the House had no legal standing to sue. And they argued the reimbursements were authorized by law.
The House argues that Congress never specifically appropriated that money and has denied an administration request for it, but that the administration is spending the money anyway.
Collyer issued an order stopping further reimbursements, but delayed its implementation while the case is appealed.
Collyer is a George W. Bush appointee nominated in 2002.
This post was updated with a staff-written account replacing wire service reporting.
This was first posted at 10:20 a.m.
COMMENTS
Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio
www.motherjones.com
If the nationalists get their way, this November might be the last time Texans vote for a US president.
On Wednesday, the Platform Committee of the Texas Republican Party voted to put a Texas independence resolution up for a vote at this week's GOP convention, according to a press release from the pro-secession Texas Nationalist Movement. The resolution calls for allowing voters to decide whether the Lone Star State should become an independent nation.
Texas was, in fact, its own country for nine years before joining the United States in 1845, and while the idea of returning to independence has never been taken seriously by most people, it remains popular as a romantic notion and marketing hook. Lone Star beer is the "national beer of Texas." Texas Monthly is the "national magazine of Texas." In a 2009 rally, then-Governor Rick Perry hinted that the state could secede if "Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people." He later backed off of the idea. (Representatives of the state GOP and Texas Nationalist Movement could not be reached for comment.)
The Texas Nationalist Movement, once considered a quixotic fringe group, has added hundreds of members in the years since the election of Barack Obama. According to the Houston Chronicle's Dylan Baddour, at least 10 county GOP chapters are coming to the convention supporting independence resolutions. But this will be the first time in the state's 171-year history that they will actually vote on one. It's very unlikely to win. Then again, that's what people said about Donald Trump.
COMMENTS