Political Food Fights!
===
Apparently the Washington Post, now owned by Jeff Bezos, is assigning a large number (allegedly 20
reporters) to dig up dirt on Trump.
When Obama first ran for the presidency, the paper had different ownership - Katherine Graham- and if Graham had assembled some 20 reporters and dug into Obama's background voters might not have elected him. Why? Because we still know very little about his youth, background and past history or how he came to be radicalized.
Trump and Bezos are antagonists. Bezos is a political progressive from Seattle and founded Amazon. Perhaps Bezos is concerned the growth of Amazon, which is having a significant impact upon box retailers, might receive some of the political heat currently used against Walmart should Trump get elected.
Also, one might inquire whether Bezos has assigned the same number of 'gum shoes' to investigate Hillary for balance?
We know most news and media folks are liberals, vote predominantly for Democrats and their organizations are also controlled by liberal owners. Objectivity is no longer a news and media primal pursuit. (See 1 below.)
--
It's transgender wedge time. (See 2 below.)
===
This was sent to me by a very intelligent and well read family member and fellow memo reader and pertains to a look back at what Samuel Huntington got right and wrong in his predictive thesis entitled: "Clash of Civilizations."
https://www.foreignaffairs.
===
The Clintons' fit the profile of Arkansas hillbilly's and their conniving ways. In fact, one of them is even named Bill! (See 3 and 3a below.)
===
Will Congress impeach the head of The IRS? Stay tuned. (See 4 below.)
In truth, they should have impeached Obama but they never had the votes or guts.
===
A very dear memo reader suddenly died while I was away. He seemed to enjoy my memos, wrote me often with observations and was a brilliant patent attorney both in private practice as well as during his tenure with Samsung. His name was Charles 'Chuck" Donahue and I had the distinct pleasure of meeting him this past Thanksgiving. He became a memo reader many years ago by virtue of a request by his sister and brother in law.
May his soul rest in peace.
===
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1)
Donald Trump's war on
Jeff Bezos, Amazon and
the Washington Post
Donald Trump isn't giving up on his months-long tirade against Amazon, Jeff Bezos and the Washington Post.
Trump went on Fox News Thursday night to tell Sean Hannity the same theory he's been spouting since he went on an epic Twitter tirade against Bezos in December.
Trump's contention can basically be boiled down to this: Bezos bought the Washington Post in 2013 in order to persuade Washington politicians to keep Amazon's taxes low and help the company avoid antitrust scrutiny. And Trump says that since he would be tougher on Amazon than Hillary Clinton, Bezos is also using the Post to write nasty articles about Trump to keep him out of the White House.
Or, in Trump's own words....
"This is owned as a toy by Jeff Bezos who controls Amazon," Trump told Hannity. "Amazon is getting away with murder tax-wise. He's using the Washington Post for power so that the politicians in Washington don't tax Amazon like they should be taxed."
Trump said Bezos is "worried about me," because "he thinks I would go after him for antitrust because he's got a huge antitrust problem. Amazon is controlling so much of what they're doing ... What he's got is a monopoly and he wants to make sure I don't get in."
In a statement, Washington Post editor Marty Baron denied Trump's charges.
"As the individual who oversees The Washington Post's news staff, I can say categorically that I have received no instructions from Jeff Bezos regarding our coverage of the presidential campaign -- or, for that matter, any other subject," Baron said. "The Post has a long tradition of publishing thorough examinations of the major party nominees for president."
Conspiracy theory not based in reality
The problem with Trump's argument is that it's a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory that isn't backed up by the facts.
It's clear that the Washington Post has written many negative articles about Trump, and the newspaper's dislike for Trump is well known.
But connecting the dots to Amazon, which the billionaire Bezos also owns, doesn't make sense.
Amazon paid $273 million cash in income taxes last year, up from $177 million the year before and $169 million in 2013, according to its latest annual report.
That's actually pretty impressive, considering it made just under $600 million in profit in 2015. It had a $241 million loss in 2014 and a $274 million profit in 2013. There are companies with far bigger profits, like GM (GM) and United (UAL), that pay zero U.S. income taxes.
Amazon has come under attack for not collecting sales tax in the past. But the federal government doesn't collect sales taxes. There are 28 states that have passed laws requiring Amazon to collect sales tax, but Washington politicians supposedly influenced by the Post have nothing to do with those laws.
The company has also faced scrutiny in Europe for underpaying its taxes. Its U.K. business paid just under £12 million last year, and the European Commission continues to investigate Amazon for its tax deals with Luxembourg, which may have helped Amazon underpay its taxes there for a decade.
It's also unclear that the government would have a solid antitrust case against Amazon. According to the Sherman Antitrust Act, a judge would need to find that Amazon is a monopoly that abuses its power and harms consumers as a result.
That's a high bar. Amazon is hardly the largest retailer. Its sales are about a fifth of Walmart's(WMT). It's true that Amazon has had a huge, sometimes disastrous impact on brick and mortar retailers. But even if federal prosecutors could convince a judge that Amazon were a monopoly, it could be tough to argue that consumers haven't benefited from Amazon's lower prices.
Trump vs. Bezos
Still, if Bezos thinks Trump would be bad for Amazon, there's good reason for that.
In February, when Chris Christie gave Trump his endorsement at a campaign rally in Fort Worth, Texas, Trump made a stump speech in which he threatened Bezos and Amazon.
"I have respect for Jeff Bezos, but he bought the Washington Post to have political influence," Trump said. "He owns Amazon. He wants political influence so Amazon will benefit from it. That's not right. And believe me, if I become president, oh do they have problems. They're going to have such problems."
Trump's accusations began six months ago.
Two days after the editorial board of the Post called Trump a "poison pill" for the Republican party, Trump lashed out in a tweetstorm. He called Amazon a "big tax shelter," and Bezos' ownership of the Washington Post a "scam."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) Justice, Education Depts. Release Title IX Guidelines on Transgender Students
President Obama greets Attorney General Loretta Lynch in the Oval Office on May 11, 2016. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General Loretta Lynch declared "there is no room in our schools for discrimination of any kind, including discrimination against transgender students on the basis of their sex" as the Justice Department jointly released accommodation guidelines with the Department of Education today.
According to a DOJ release, the guidance "explains schools’ obligations" under Title IX, under which schools can lose federal funding for discrimination, to:
- "Respond promptly and effectively to sex-based harassment of all students, including harassment based on a student’s actual or perceived gender identity, transgender status or gender transition;"
- "Treat students consistent with their gender identity even if their school records or identification documents indicate a different sex;"
- "Allow students to participate in sex-segregated activities and access sex-segregated facilities consistent with their gender identity; and"
- "Protect students’ privacy related to their transgender status under Title IX and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act."
The guidance states that schools can use private areas designated for transgender students to change or go to the bathroom. It "does not require any student to use shared bathrooms or changing spaces, when, for example, there are other appropriate options available; and schools can also take steps to increase privacy within shared facilities," according to DOJ.
"Using transgender students’ birth names or pronouns that do not match their gender identity risks disclosing a student’s transgender status," the guide states. "...Some schools have adopted policies to prepare all school staff and students to use a student’s newly adopted name, if any, and pronouns that are consistent with a student’s gender identity."
"...Dress codes that apply the same requirements regardless of gender are the most inclusive for all students and avoid unnecessarily reinforcing sex stereotypes."
Education Secretary John King said in a statement that “no student should ever have to go through the experience of feeling unwelcome at school or on a college campus."
“This guidance further clarifies what we’ve said repeatedly – that gender identity is protected under Title IX. Educators want to do the right thing for students, and many have reached out to us for guidance on how to follow the law," King said. "We must ensure that our young people know that whoever they are or wherever they come from, they have the opportunity to get a great education in an environment free from discrimination, harassment and violence.”
The guidance comes the same week that the DOJ filed a lawsuit against North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, the North Carolina Department of Public Safety, and the University of North Carolina, alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA).
“This guidance gives administrators, teachers and parents the tools they need to protect transgender students from peer harassment and to identify and address unjust school policies," Lynch said today. "I look forward to continuing our work with the Department of Education – and with schools across the country – to create classroom environments that are safe, nurturing, and inclusive for all of our young people.”
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said the guidance "sends a clear message to transgender students across the country: here in America, you are safe, you are protected and you belong – just as you are."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)
Remember the Clinton Cash Scandals?
Does anyone remember the Clinton Cash scandal? Thursday's Wall Street Journal report
about the way the Clinton Global Initiative set up a deal that benefitted a company with ties to
the former First Family should ring a bell. A year ago, the political world was focused on a wide
-ranging scandal involving conflicts of interest, possible corruption, and sweetheart deal
involving the former president and secretary of state. The publication of Peter Schweizer’s
Clinton Cash not only caused a furor because of the serious questions it raised about the Clinton Global Initiative and the private foundation that is run now by Bill and Chelsea Clinton, but also because it encouraged the New York Times, the Washington
Post, and the Journal to conduct their own investigations. Those efforts uncovered even more
questionable conduct about the doings of Hillary Clinton, who was then and still is today the
likely presidential nominee of the Democratic Party.
Post, and the Journal to conduct their own investigations. Those efforts uncovered even more
questionable conduct about the doings of Hillary Clinton, who was then and still is today the
likely presidential nominee of the Democratic Party.
But then, as is often the case in our 24/7 news cycle world, the press got diverted. Those on the
Clinton beat understandably began to devote more attention to the story about her private
email server. The discussion about the deleted emails and the slow-motion drip, drip, drip of
evidence that she had sent communications involving classified and even top secret information
on an unprotected system had the effect of making many of us forget why it was that she may
have had something to hide in all of those messages.
Clinton beat understandably began to devote more attention to the story about her private
email server. The discussion about the deleted emails and the slow-motion drip, drip, drip of
evidence that she had sent communications involving classified and even top secret information
on an unprotected system had the effect of making many of us forget why it was that she may
have had something to hide in all of those messages.
But more than anything else, the start of the presidential race had the effect of pushing the
Clinton Cash story to the back burner. The three-ring circus that was the Republican
presidential race made it difficult for anyone in media to turn their attention away from
Donald Trump or from the baffled reactions of his opponents as he blustered, slandered, and
lied his way into the hearts of GOP voters. Though Clinton found herself in an unexpectedly
tough Democratic race of her own with Bernie Sanders, the Vermont socialist’s unwillingness
to talk about Clinton’s ethical issues seemed to validate her campaign’s ongoing effort to
convince the world that any questions about the foundation or the emails was part of the “vast,
right-wing conspiracy” that she always blames for all of her self-inflicted troubles.
Donald Trump or from the baffled reactions of his opponents as he blustered, slandered, and
lied his way into the hearts of GOP voters. Though Clinton found herself in an unexpectedly
tough Democratic race of her own with Bernie Sanders, the Vermont socialist’s unwillingness
to talk about Clinton’s ethical issues seemed to validate her campaign’s ongoing effort to
convince the world that any questions about the foundation or the emails was part of the “vast,
right-wing conspiracy” that she always blames for all of her self-inflicted troubles.
The general election campaign is about to begin with Democrats seeking to make the
campaign a referendum on Trump’s character issues, policy ignorance, flip-flops, and record
of bizarre and abusive statements. But their problem remains the same as it was a year ago: a
presumptive nominee with serious flaws and problems of her own.
presumptive nominee with serious flaws and problems of her own.
That’s why today’s story is a bigger problem for the Clintons than she, her apologists, or
Democrats in general understand.
In and of itself, this latest item in the list of Clinton scandals may not seem like much. It
involves a $2 million — including an $812,000 Energy Department grant — for insulating
homes that found its way into the pockets of a company owned by friends of the Clintons' as a
result of their family foundation’s influence and the personal intervention of the former
president. That doesn’t sound like much when put in the context of trillion dollar government
expenditures or even the billions raised by the Clinton foundation. But nevertheless, it’s a
expenditures or even the billions raised by the Clinton foundation. But nevertheless, it’s a
problem.
Why?
The first reason is that on the face of it, the manner in which the Clinton's managed to divert
money to their cronies seems to be illegal. As the Journal notes: Under federal law, tax-exempt charitable organizations aren’t supposed to act in anyone’s
private interest but instead in the public interest, on broad issues such as education or poverty.
“The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests,"
the Internal Revenue Service says on its website.
In this case, it appears the Clintons were not strictly following the law. Their efforts directly
aided a company — Engineer Pioneer Solutions — that was owned by a group of people with
various ties to the Clinton's and the Democratic Party.
Is this enough to merit government action? Perhaps but surely not in an Obama administration
that has slow-walked the email investigation and which has already appeared to ignore the
leads that Schweizer’s book and other press investigations into conflicts of interest involving
the Clinton family foundation and the State Department when Hillary was running it. If the
feds haven’t done anything about the State Department granting approval for the sale of a rare
and strategic uranium mine to a foreign company owned by a massive contributor to the
Clintons, they aren’t going to trouble themselves about a Nebraska insulation company
profiting from federal and charitable initiatives.
feds haven’t done anything about the State Department granting approval for the sale of a rare
and strategic uranium mine to a foreign company owned by a massive contributor to the
Clintons, they aren’t going to trouble themselves about a Nebraska insulation company
profiting from federal and charitable initiatives.
But the real problem here is not so much the details, damning as they may be. This story
illustrates also how the Clinton charitable empire works and it’s not a pretty picture.
Though the Clintons have raised many billions from wealthy contributors as well as foreign
governments and proclaim themselves the avatars of philanthropies, very little of that money
governments and proclaim themselves the avatars of philanthropies, very little of that money
finds its way into the hands of the needy. The Clinton Global Initiative and the family
foundation that runs it is a middleman in the business of charity. It neither feeds the hungry
nor clothes the poor. It digs no wells to provide clean water for the thirsty or helps others find
ways to grow or otherwise acquire food or better housing. What it does is to match up
companies to causes and donors.
That can be presented as a way of promoting efficiency and helping to get the charitable dollars
to the people and the places where it can do the most good. But in practice, it has meant
something else. For all of the vast sums the Clintons have collected from celebrities, foreign
despots and other wealthy people (including the enormous sums paid to Bill and Hillary for
speaking appearances), all this money really does is to pay for conferences and other shindigs
where such people can get their pictures taken with the Clintons and/or bask in the charm of
the 42nd president. Those who give them money have a curious way of having good things
happen to them whether in the form of contracts, philanthropic windfalls or other government
favors as in the case of that uranium mine.
something else. For all of the vast sums the Clintons have collected from celebrities, foreign
despots and other wealthy people (including the enormous sums paid to Bill and Hillary for
speaking appearances), all this money really does is to pay for conferences and other shindigs
where such people can get their pictures taken with the Clintons and/or bask in the charm of
the 42nd president. Those who give them money have a curious way of having good things
happen to them whether in the form of contracts, philanthropic windfalls or other government
favors as in the case of that uranium mine.
While in some indirect fashion some good may be done as a result of all these machinations,
there are only three people that we know who have really benefited from this massive
philanthropic endeavor and their names are Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea. The Clintons', who the
former First Lady memorably described as just a family of down-on-their-luck broke former
Arkansans when they left the White House, have lived high on the proverbial hog for more
Arkansans when they left the White House, have lived high on the proverbial hog for more
than a decade as a result of their supposedly good deeds. With so little money going to actual
charity, they’ve had plenty left over for the creature comforts associated with running such a
big company. In effect, their foundation and initiative is nothing more than a thinly disguised
big company. In effect, their foundation and initiative is nothing more than a thinly disguised
political slush fund that has made them three very wealthy people.
With Clinton less than six months away from a date with the voters that could make her the
45th president, more scrutiny of their charitable scam is necessary. Trump would do well to
45th president, more scrutiny of their charitable scam is necessary. Trump would do well to
spend less time trolling the Clintons' about Bill’s affairs and other predatory behavior with
women and more trying to point the press toward the Clinton’s true ethical Achilles Heal.
There’s a lot we still have yet to know about what they’ve been up to and how it interconnected
with Hillary’s State Department. Whatever the press thinks about Trump and the skeletons
that may be lurking in his closets, after a year of relative silence about this topic, it’s time for
the media to start doing its job with regard to the Clinton's and their personal philanthropic
ATM.
3a)
the media to start doing its job with regard to the Clinton's and their personal philanthropic
ATM.
3a)
The Clinton Business Model . . .
A case study in what to expect from a Hillary Presidency.
Former President Bill Clinton on May 13 in Paterson, N.J. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
4) Congress Moves Forward
With Impeachment of IRS
4) 4)Congress Moves Forward With Impeachment of IRS 4)Commissioner Koskinen:
Congress Moves Forward With Impeachment of IRS
Commissioner
By Katie Pavlich
Hearings to determine whether IRS Commissioner John Koskinen
should be impeached for misconduct will soon be underway on Capitol
Hill.
Hill.
Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz over the stonewalling and
obstruction of ongoing congressional investigations into IRS targeting
of conservative groups. Now, the House Judiciary Committee will hold
two hearings on the resolution and will determine whether to proceed
with impeachment.
The Committee argues Koskinen "failed to comply with a congressional
subpoena which resulted in destruction of key evidence, made false
statements during his sworn congressional testimony, and did not notify
Congress that Lois Lerner’s emails were missing." The first hearing will
examine a lengthy Oversight Committee report detailing Koskinen's
conduct and a second hearing will bring in outside witnesses to
determine whether "further congressional action is warranted."
"The fact that officials at the IRS wielded their power to target certain
Americans for their political views is both outrageous and contrary to
our nation’s values. Our government is supposed to work for all
Americans, not for a particular partisan agenda. As a result of the IRS’
targeting, conservative groups were singled out across the nation,
resulting in lengthy paperwork requirements, overly burdensome
information requests, and lengthy, unwarranted delays in their
applications," Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte released in a
statement. “Despite repeated congressional efforts to get to the bottom
of this matter, Obama Administration officials, including the IRS
Commissioner, have consistently undermined the investigation. Over
the coming weeks, the House Judiciary Committee will closely examine
Commissioner Koskinen’s misconduct and the implications of his actions.”
The House Freedom Caucus is applauding the move.
“The House Freedom Caucus applauds Judiciary Chairman Goodlatte’s
decision to initiate hearings on the impeachment of the IRS
Commissioner. Commissioner Koskinen must be held accountable for
years of stonewalling Congress’ oversight efforts, obfuscating justice,
providing false testimony before Congress, and failing to hold agency
officials liable for unlawfully targeting groups based on their beliefs," The
House Freedom Caucus released in a statement. "Since the revelation
that the IRS systematically targeted conservatives for years, the IRS—
under Koskinen’s watch—has done little to reform internal protocol to
ensure that every American’s First Amendment rights are protected.
Federal officials must be accountable to the American people. It is long
past time that Commissioner Koskinen be removed from his post. The
House Freedom Caucus strongly supports these efforts to do so.”
The first hearing will take place on May 24 with the second following at
some point in June.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
