The French GAFA tax in an acronym for Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon which the French government has just passed. They are imposing a 3% tax on all business in France. The US has promised retaliation. This is part of the entire problem the world faces with trade. A lot of people talk about trade wars, but they live in the past. There is something far more serious at stake and that is the digital world and how governments are hungry for taxes to the point that they are threatening the viability of the world economy going forward.
Why is no one in the D.C. political class and media bubble really talking about the Jeffrey Epstein affair? They will mention it casually, but they prefer to allow the Squad to call, Trump, a racist than address an issue which could lead to high levels of the political class. The media also seems to be avoiding asking the right questions like: Exactly how tight is the friendship between former President Bill Clinton and Mr. Epstein? who owns a private island in Florida and is now accused of having sex with girls as young as 12 and procuring young girls for sex with other friends of his? What was Bill Clinton doing on the island with Mr. Epstein on multiple occasions? Bill Clinton claims he only traveled with Epstein four times and he knew nothing about his crimes. Then the Washington Examiner reported that Clinton traveled with Epstein 6 times – not four. Yet verified and widely reported evidence from pilot logs reveal that Clinton took six trips involving 27 different flights with Epstein.
After Epstein was indicted, the government raided Epstein’s townhouse uncovering a virtual treasure trove of evidence, including reams of photos and videos. Many of the photo discs have been argued include names of young women as well as dates. Most of the young women allegedly appear to be underage. This story has been talked about behind the curtain a very long time. Some hoped it could be used as a tactic in Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Nevertheless, the Left-Wing Media Machine has been pretending that anyone who asks questions about the Epstein-Clinton connection is a paid political operative of the Right-Wing Media Machine. The Right-Wing Media Machine, which would normally be jumping for joy about this or any sordid affair involving the Clintons, has remained very reserved in hyping the case. The silence from both sides has been deafening. This raises the question of why are both sides trying to avoid this topic? Is there just a fear that this could expose a lot of political leaders? How did our political and media elites ever become so hopelessly corrupt?
The Jeffrey Epstein story erupted after Virginia Roberts gave a sworn statement in a federal court filing that claimed that that under Mr. Epstein’s tutelage she “was a teen sex slave forced to have sex with Prince Andrew” and that she also saw Bill Clinton on Mr. Epstein’s “orgy island.” Bill Clinton’s conduct with Monica Lewinsky suggests that he too may be what some call a sexual predator, but not that he was previously engaged with minors. Bill Clinton reportedly interrupted one sexual encounter with Monica Lewinsky to take a call from a Cuban-American sugar baron from the crucial battleground state of Florida.
Media coverage about the Epstein case has been sadly predictable. None of the media has pointedly and persistently asked important questions about the case. Bill Clinton has already been implicated in the Epstein scandal. The media will run photos of Trump with Epstein to divert the fact that he was not one of the regulars with Epstein. Showing pictures of Trump and Epstein is clearly a way to try to paint him with the same brush of Clinton. Obviously, this Epstein affair is a national disgrace and shines a bright light on the current sad state of American politics. There are rumors that the Trump Administration allowed Epstein to be indicted knowing that this could unnerve the Democrats for 2020.
Clearly, Bill Clinton took repeated trips on the “Lolita Express” with an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Epstein’s address book under an entry for “massages.” According to flight logbooks reported by Gawker, they show that Clinton shared more than a dozen flights with a woman who federal prosecutors believe procured underage girls to sexually service Epstein and his friends. That would place her as a co-conspirator who they could use to flip on Epstein. It has been rumored that 35 female minors have been identified by federal prosecutors who they allege were sexually abused by Epstein. He has reportedly settled lawsuits from more than 30 “Jane Doe” victims since 2008 alone and the youngest alleged victim was 12 years old at the time of her abuse.
The question that will be answered only with time has been is this retribution for the Democrats Russia Gate
QUESTION: Do you think the neo-cons who pushed the Iraq War and are pushing to annihilate Iran now, are covertly in league with Israel?
Anonymous
ANSWER: There is an agenda among the neo-cons who WRONGLY believe that overturning various Arab governments and installing democratic systems will protect Israel. I disagree with that philosophy and I believe that they have manipulated the US government into a dangerous agenda. This is why they have been against Trump because he does not want to send American soldiers to the Middle East for an agenda that offers no benefit to the United States whatsoever.
Yes, people speculate that the Israel government is covertly behind the neo-cons, whereas many Israeli people just want peace. I have not seen any direct evidence of that. I do know some of these neo-cons and have had face to face discussions with them over the years. I believe they are seriously wrong and have placed the world into a state of high risk. Their policies have polarized the relationships between the USA and Russia, which is not in the interest of world peace. I have stated many times, my view is simply that war no longer remains valid from a historical perspective. It used to be about conquest and empire-building. Today, nobody wants to occupy their opponent. I see no purpose to war economically. but it has come down to nothing more than a schoolyard brawl where people fight simply because they do not like the other person. There is nothing to gain from this nonsense.
Yes, you are correct in both cases but the underlying issue is the ethics (or morality if you believe we are under the thrall of a higher power) of the institutional maltreatment of any human in the name of a political belief system. The US political Right-wing (as opposed to the Conservative right) conflated the term “concentration camp” with the Nazi death camps to serve their own agenda. In reality, a concentration camp is just a place where people are concentrated.
Now, I have no problem with having a tough border policy. With the upcoming socio-political meltdown coupled with the effects of climate change (whether due to extra-historical factors or natural causes, or both) the global refugee crisis is only going to get worse. What I do have a problem with is the disingenuous spin put on the issues by both the Left and the Right in the furtherance of their own short-sighted goals.
Many thanks for your opinions on all these matters. Hopefully one of these years I’ll be able to make it to a WEC.
Best,
James
REPLY: Both extreme sides will take words and spin them to their own advantage. The actual legal distinction was that reference to Nazi concentration camps or the US internment camps for the Japanese, involved their own citizens. The issue here is illegal immigrants who are really pouring into the USA and Europe for free handouts and are really economic migrants. Just try to say you have decided that there are better job opportunities in Germany than in the USA. Sorry to say, but you will not get a free pass to just move. Both sides are using this concentration camp theme out of context.
The question of how these people are being treated is a human rights issue. But that is exasperated by the attempt of the left to instill rights upon these people which then delays their detention. If they were truly seeking refugee status, you apply for that. You do not show up at the border and expect fast track.
I have stated before that employees from overseas flying into the USA for a conference or a meeting has always presented problems. One employee coming in from Germany was asked if they were taking cash back and forth for me to Europe. Another was held up and searched by three people three separate times asking why do they come back and forth a few times a year. When I commented I thought you were concerned about people who did not leave, the angry response what I was trying question how to do their job.
We have to have immigration lawyers on call because of the international problems with these people. The lawyers will tell you NEVER fly into Chicago – it is the worst place to ever land for that office sends people back on the next plane more than any airport in the country. The Department of Homeland Security defines removals as “the compulsory and confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable alien out of the United States based on an order of removal.”Returnsare defined as “the confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable alien out of the United States not based on an order of removal.”
In other words, in 2000, at airports, the number of people who had documentation to get on a plane and were denied entry reached about 1.7 million that year. In 2017, that is down to about 150,000. Obama deported more people than any President. The deportations they call “removals” reached about 425,000 in 2013 which is down to about 300,000 in 2017.
The House approved a second resolution last week condemning “anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism and other forms of bigotry” in a move that Democrats hope will quell the latest uproar over Rep. Ilhan Omar’s criticism of Israel. Omar made comments at a Washington, D.C., coffee shop where she again questioned the pro-Israel lobby’s influence in American politics. “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” she said. “I want to ask why is it OK for me to talk about the influence of the NRA, of fossil fuel industries or Big Pharma and not talk about a powerful lobbying group that is influencing policies?” She did not specifically name Israel, but this has been a sore topic on the Hill for a very long time accusing such supporters of “Dual Loyalty.” I do not think she is expressly anti-semitic, but more of the power plays that do imply support for a political agenda rather than a wholesale ethnic bias (Jewish is also not a race – it is a religion). By the way, they were saying the same thing when JFK was elected back in the ’60s that because he was Catholic the Pope would rule the United States – the same “Dual Loyalty” argument.
The Squad is in fact enjoying some support among the younger, radical Democrats who are for the first time willing to criticize Israel and U.S. foreign policy in a way that older, long-serving Democrats generally oppose. There is a major shift underfoot and many try to ignore it, but this is percolating for the 2020 election which our computer warns will be the most violent perhaps since the 1960s. The refusal to specifically name Omar has been a huge mistake on the part of the Democrats. Since they added anti-Muslim, Omar was able to praise it as historic while dogging responsibility for inspiring the resolution, to begin with.
Naturally, they did not specifically name Omar. Yet there is an undercurrent among the younger Democrats that are becoming very anti-semitic I believe because of the neo-cons who have an agenda (some of whom I personally know and disagree with).
Meanwhile, Joe Biden claims that ‘radicalization’ among young Democrats a myth: “This is not a generation of socialists” he has stated. The talk behind the curtain is exactly the opposite. There is a rising radicalization which is very much against capitalism, climate, and Israel thanks to the like of the neo-cons.
Then there is a debate whether the Squad’s reference to concentration camps was the Nazi camps or the US internment camps for the Japanese. Any reference to either is not really accurate since in both cases the Jews and the Japanese were citizens and not illegal immigrants
Well, there it is…. Right there in a poll [full pdf below] of eleven southern states conducted by NBC over two weeks we see the reason why the DNC, political leadership and media are whipping up false accusations of racial anxiety against President Trump.
The majority of those polled see improvements in race relationships,… and their approval of President Trump is higher…. and their view of the economy is more optimistic…. and the number one issue is immigration.
All empirical points that help President Trump and simultaneously destroy the Democrat narrative. That recently released NBC polling result is exactly behind why Trump’s political opposition had to make a fast move against his administration.
All of those data-points are toxic to Nancy Pelosi and the DNC candidates; especially in a week where they will be attempting to frame the impeachment narrative around Robert Mueller.
Oh, those well schemed plans…
The survey was conducted by NBC between July 2nd and July 16th. No doubt the phone lines were ringing at the DNC with the early results. The survey measures ten solid months of media effort to attack and frame President trump… yet the public can see right through it.
(Via NBC) – President Donald Trump’s approval ratings in the South have ticked upward, with 54 percent of voters giving a thumbs-up to the way he’s handling his job, according to a new NBC News|SurveyMonkey online poll.
The survey of voters in 11 southern states found 38 percent said they “strongly approve” of the way Trump’s handling his job, and 16 percent who said they “somewhat approve.” That’s up slightly from a poll in September of last year, which put his total approval at 52 percent.
[…] More Southerners also said they think race relations in their states are improving. Twenty percent said they’re getting better, compared to 14 percent in September. The number of people who said relations are getting worse dropped significantly, from 44 percent in September to 34 percent in the current poll. A plurality of respondents, 44 percent, said they’re “about the same.” (read more)
Rep. Doug Collins appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the upcoming testimony of Robert Mueller and the status of multiple inquires into the DOJ and FBI activity in 2016.
On the Horowitz report, remember to ignore all claims of upcoming release until we hear of the ‘Principal Notification’ for the final draft. We’ll know when the IG submits the draft review to principals because while they are bound by non-disclosure over content, they will be advocating their defense positions in the media on their overall interests.
A lawsuit filed a week ago by Businessman Ed Butowsky, alleged that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange told Fox News analyst Ellen Ratner the DNC leaked emails were received from Seth Rich and his brother Aaron. [Full Backstory Here]
Due to the scale of ramification, there was some valid skepticism about the Butowsky assertion. However, recently unearthed footage from Ellen Ratner talking about her visit with Assange in November of 2016 seems to validate what the Butowsky’s lawsuit alleges.
In the video [Full Video Here] taken during a November 9th, 2016, Embry Riddle University symposium, Fox News analyst Ellen Ratner, representing the left, and former Congressman now Fox political analyst John Leboutillier, from the right, discussed the aftermath of the 2016 presidential election. WATCH EXCERPT:
[h/t Michael Sheridan for the excerpt] The date of the Ratner symposium November 9, 2016, aligns with the time-frame of Ratner’s travel and meeting with Assange as outlined by Butowsky in his lawsuit. As noted Mrs. Ratner confirms that she did meet with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, and that he did in fact tell her the leaked DNC emails came from inside the DNC. It was not a Russian hack.
Hopefully this will spur the DOJ under Attorney General Bill Barr to launch an inquiry which must obviously start with the questioning of Ratner.
Accepting some enhanced credibility now exists, the details contained within the lawsuit filing (full pdf below) are stunning.
If this information is true and accurate, now bolstered by the video of Ratner, the DOJ claim of a Russian hack –based on assertions by DNC contractor, Crowdstrike– would be entirely false. Additionally the DC murder of Seth Rich would hold a far more alarming motive.
The ramifications here are almost too large to describe.
If this information turns out to be true and accurate, the entire narrative around the DNC “hack” will have been proven to be intentionally manufactured.
Despite the FBI’s prior admissions about never reviewing the DNC servers; and despite their recent admissions about never actually seeing the forensic computer analysis, the U.S. Department of Justice, specifically Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and former DAG Rod Rosenstein, cannot blame a simple investigative ‘mistake‘ for the wrong attribution of who gave the DNC emails to Wikileaks.
The FBI, the DOJ and the Mueller special counsel have each purposefully claimed specific Russian actors were responsible for hacking the DNC in 2016. If it turns out those claims were based on falsehood, the integrity of the DOJ and Special Counsel collapses.
Mr. Butowsky is making a very serious allegation in this court filing.
Additionally, the previously discussed motive to arrest Julian Assange would now be further enhanced. Heck, the reason for Assange’ arrest would be brutally obvious.
♦Dana Boente was head of DOJ-NSD from May 11th, 2017 through end of October 2017 when he officially announced his intent to retire. However, the timeline gets cloudy here because Boente said he was staying on until an official replacement was announced. There’s no indication of when Boente actually left the DOJ-NSD or the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) role.
On January 23rd, 2018, FBI Director Christopher Wray announced Dana Boente had shifted over to the FBI to be Chief Legal Counsel (replacing James Baker) where Boente remains today. As Mueller was using 19 lawyers, and 50 FBI investigators, Boente was/is the legal counsel to FBI Director Christopher Wray while the Mueller probe was ongoing.
[Remember, Robert Mueller never interviewed Julian Assange. Additionally, it is worth noting for the U.S. side of the legal framework, the charges against Assange are not related to Russian efforts in a hack of the DNC; nor is Assange charged with anything related to the 2016 U.S. election interference activities, the Podesta email release or anything therein as previously described by the DOJ.]
The April 11th, 2019, Julian Assange indictment stemmed from the Eastern District of Virginia. From a review of the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018: (The DOJ sat on the indictment for 13 months, until Mueller finished)
However, on Tuesday April 15th, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to December ’17..
The investigation of Assange took place prior to December 2017, it is coming from the EDVA where Dana Boente was still, presumably, U.S. Attorney. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until April of 2019.
Why was there a delay?
Why did the DOJ wait until the Mueller report was complete?
Here’s where it gets interesting….
The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”
(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.
Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.
“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”
Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)
If you overlay the timing, it would appear the FBI took a keen interest in Assange after this August 2017 meeting and gathered specific evidence for a grand jury by December 2017. Then the DOJ sat on the indictment (sealed in March 2018) while the Mueller probe was ongoing; until April 11th, 2019, when a coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was launched. Assange was arrested, and the indictment was unsealed (link).
To me, as a person who has researched this three year fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, JAR report(needed for Obama – December 29th, ’16), and political ICA (January ’17); this looked like a Deep State move to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes…. AND that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story.
The Weissmann/Mueller/Rosenstein report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview.
Right there is the FBI motive to shut Assange down when the Mueller report was released.
The DNC hack claim is contingent upon analysis by Crowdstrike computer forensics who were paid by the DNC to look into the issue. The FBI was never allowed to review the servers independently, and now we know the FBI never even looked at a full forensics report from Crowdstrike.
Almost all independent research into this DNC hack narrative challenges the claims of a Russia hack of the DNC servers; and now this bombshell court filing, again if accurate, makes the DOJ claim completely collapse.
Lastly, if we are to believe everything that is factually visible; including the admissions by the FBI and DOJ itself; and it is proven that Seth Rich was indeed the source of the DNC emails and there was no hack; well,… what does that say about Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein, who would have had to know they were pushing abject lies in their dubious Russian indictments.
The status of the Eastern District of Virginia case against former partner of Michael Flynn, Bijan Rafiekian is bizarre.
Apparently U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr has not engaged into this case, and the current status is a mess.
The head-scratching FARA case was tenuous from the outset as the prosecution was arguing a rather odd legal interpretation of FARA statutes; and now the DOJ could be handed a dismissal, even if the jury returns a guilty verdict.
Yes, when you stretch legal interpretation beyond evidence, it’s a mess.
The current arguments surround jury instructions where the DOJ is requesting their earlier claims of Rafiekian as an “agent of a foreign government” be dropped (because there is no evidence); and simultaneously arguing that Rafiekian didn’t have to break the law surrounding FARA in order to be found guilty of breaking the DOJ interpretation of the law surrounding FARA. Confused? You should be. The judge is too:…
Despite an earlier filing, the DOJ prosecutor never did call Michael Flynn Jr as a witness, nor Michael Flynn himself. Additionally, after the prosecution finished their presentation, the defense informed Judge Anthony Trenga (in oral arguments) they also have no intention of calling Michael Flynn.
While the case is ongoing, in oral arguments about how to instruct the jury, the entire sketchy construct is being debated by the judge, prosecution and defense. Like I said, it’s a hot mess; and unfortunately while I have read the oral argument transcript, I can’t share the information (it’s embargoed).
Suffice to say the DOJ is arguing the Flynn Intel Group (FIG) is guilty of doing something even though the DOJ can’t prove the FIG intended to do something unlawful.
The argument around “mens rea” is intent. “Mens rea” is the mental element of a person’s intention to commit a crime; or knowledge that one’s action or lack of action would cause a crime to be committed.
In oral arguments (about jury instructions) the DOJ says they don’t need to prove the Flynn Intel Group was guilty of intent.
Indeed, the DOJ position is that Rafiekian did something wrong, without intending to do something wrong, in filing information about their Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) compliance forms.
The DOJ also admits the government took no action as an outcome of the accidentally wrong information; simply that the information itself was accidentally false – and therefore unlawful.
So the judge (“The Court”) is asking questions:
The government’s position is is tenable at best.
Here’s how Techno Fog sees it:
The DOJ’s position on Section 951(d)(4) is that the “legal commercial transaction” exception does not include (1) illegal activities; and (2) activities that are prohibited but technically not illegal.
Under this theory there is potential 951 criminal culpability for a minor FARA violation, such as late registration or the omission of facts.
Now consider the 2016 OIG report on the NSD’s enforcement of FARA, and how many lobbyists would have been exposed to Section 951 due to their sloppy registrations. (For example, 57% of the new registered agent contracts reviewed by OIG were not registered timely.)
My biggest takeaway is the DOJ’s position that the conduct need only be “prohibited.”
I’m assuming this is consistent with how they’ve applied Section 951 in the past. (If the 951/FARA/FISA theory is correct.) That would have included all the lobbyists doing work on behalf of foreign countries, foreign individuals, or foreign corporations who didn’t have airtight FARA paperwork. Not just the material omissions/lies alleged in the Rafiekian case.
The DOJ prosecutor basically admits this: “any conduct that was in violation of the FARA statute, whether or not prosecuted or prosecutable, renders that conduct not a legal commercial transaction.” [Key point being “whether or not… prosecutable”]
In my opinion the government’s DOJ-NSD position is specific and purposeful because they are trying to avoid later scrutiny about their use of FARA violations to gain FISA surveillance warrants.
That is to say…. the DOJ National Security Division, intentionally never prosecuted for FARA violations because they used the appearance of FARA violations to get FISA electronic surveillance warrants against any DC entity they wanted to watch. To get a FISA they have to assert evidence of “working as an agent of a foreign power.”
The Obama-era DOJ, applying the Lawfare ideology, used any/all technical FARA violations as the predicate to make claims to the FISA court. This allowed them to get surveillance authority over any target they identified. This is how the Obama DOJ and FBI assembled the files on their political opponents. This prior activity is what the collective “small group”, with the assistance of the Lawfare team, are now trying to justify.
In the event that any internal investigation calls their activity into question, the DOJ is positioning their justification strategy within this Rafiekian case. Does that make sense?
Now…. You might remember the promoted Special Counsel announcement that started the case against Flynn’s former Flynn Intel Group (FIG) partner Bijan Rafiekian, see below:
Well, on Friday, the day after the prosecution finished delivering all their evidence, the prosecution began arguing to remove that predicate claim.
The DOJ no longer wants any language in the jury instructions that mentions being an “agent of the government of Turkey”?
The reason the DOJ wants to strike the “agent of a foreign power” language is because they presented no evidence to prove it. Nor did the DOJ present any evidence to prove a conspiracy.
Nothing.
Zippo.
Zilch.
The prosecution is left arguing that any foreign engagement by the Flynn Intel Group, specifically Bijan Rafiekian, would constitute a FARA violation under their interpretation of law.
….”any conduct that was in violation of the FARA statute, whether or not prosecuted or prosecutable, renders that conduct not a legal commercial transaction.”
The action need not be prosecutable in order to define that action as not legal. Rafiekian didn’t have to break the law surrounding FARA in order to be found guilty of breaking the DOJ interpretation of the law surrounding FARA 951 statute.
Techno Fog@Techno_Fog
·
We have the transcript from the US v Rafiekian (Flynn Intel Group/FARA case) hearing on jury instructions.
What does the DOJ say about instructing the jury on a FARA violation?
“We really haven’t figured out the best way to go about doing that.”
Techno Fog@Techno_Fog
Counsel for Defendant Rafiekian makes an excellent point in response:
“If the gov’t can’t articulate [the illegal commercial transaction] now, how is the defendant supposed to figure that out on his own back in 2016?”
Hopefully the Che’ T-shirt crowd will see the logical outcome to the proposed wage/benefit schemes of the socialist ideologues by watching how Bernie Sanders plans to increase campaign workers pay to $15/hr, by cutting their hours – not actually increasing wages.
After coming under fire for not delivering on his promise to pay campaign workers $15/hr, communist Bernie has a solution: Cut their hours. Then workers will be forced to get another job.
Perhaps, just perhaps, democrat voters will notice this was/is the outcome of the Obama economic wage/labor scheme that led to people having to get two and three jobs. An outcome those same democrat candidates openly rail against in talking points.
WASHINGTON – Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sandersannounced this weekend he will cut staffers’ hours so that they can effectively be paid a $15-an-hour minimum wage, prompting mockery from critics who say the move is more evidence that Sanders’ plan to raise the national minimum wage is hypocritical and would only lead to less work and more unemployment.
The Washington Post first reported last Thursday that Sanders’ field staffers were upset that Sanders championed a $15 minimum wage on the campaign trail, and made headlines for railing against major corporations who pay “starvation wages” — even as his own employees made “poverty wages.” (read more)
Ironically this approach hearkens back to the historic outcome of socialist policy. Capitalist Bernie is rebuking Communist Bernies’ labor talking points.
Additionally, Bernie is including non-compensatory benefits (healthcare etc.) as part of the overall $15/hr compensation package…. Yes, more natural outcomes.
[Bernie] went on to say that the union contract “not only provides pay of at least $15 an hour, it also provides, I think, the best health care benefits that any employer can provide for our field organizers.”
Those healthcare benefits are included in the $36k/yr pay package that belays the $15/hr wage point. 2,000 hrs (40 per week x 50 weeks) worked at $15/hr is $30k, with $6k in benefits. If benefit costs increase to $8k worked hours need to be reduced to keep the $15 standard. A capitalist outcome Communist Bernie has railed against, yet now applies.
Bernie Sanders defends staff compensation after complaints his campaign isn’t paying $15 an hour
“It does bother me that people are going outside of the process and going to the media,” Bernie Sanders told the Des Moines Register. “That is really not acceptable.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 