Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Hillary Is Fighting for ... Banks, Wall Street, Bill & Hillary ... not Us
In a recent Democratic debate, Bernie Sanders challenged Hillary Clinton to join him in promising to apply the Social Security payroll tax to income over $250,000 a year. Clinton said, “I think it's fair to say we don't have a disagreement. We both believe there has to be more money going into the Social Security system....but [I am] also trying to expand the existing tax to passive income that wealthy people have so that we do get more revenue into the Social Security Trust Fund.” When Sanders pushed her, Clinton replied, “I'm going to come up with the best way forward. We're going to end up in the same place. We're going to get more revenue.” ~~~~~ Clinton has been running for president forever, while taking huge speaker fees from bankers, Wall Street and foreign governments. Her July 2015 plan to increase the capital gains tax to 47.4% doesn't hit the Democrat Party base. But she avoided being honest with voters about a Social Security tax increase until Sanders pushed her. Still, Hillary avoided telling the truth -- saying she’s “looking at” it, she’s “going to come up with” something. ~~~~~ The current Social Security payroll tax is 12.4% on wages up to $118,500. Half is paid by the employee and half by the employer, but economists say the half paid by employers is actually borne by employees. Clinton also proposed a 4% surcharge on high-income taxpayers, taking the top marginal income tax rate to 43.6%. A 12.4% Social Security payroll tax would raise the top marginal federal income tax rate to 56%. State and local income taxes -- 13.3% in California and 12.7% in New York City -- would take personal income taxation to a confiscatory 69%. As a comparison, French Socialist President Hollande two years ago raised the tax on all income over 1 million Euros to 100% -- causing wealthy French to flee to other EU countries and even Russia to avoid confiscation. ~~~~~ As for Hillary being 'owned' by Wall Street and big banks, Newsmax reports that Rupert Murdoch is paying $2,700 to attend a London fundraiser for Hillary hosted by one of the world's wealthiest and most successful women. The "ultimate power party" of Natalie Massenet, a source told Breitbart, is "aiming for a million dollars" for Clinton. Daughter Chelsea will attend, along with actor George Clooney and his wife, Amal. The event gives Hillary access to a network of wealthy American bankers living in London, "London for Hillary." Stephanie Stewart, the event organizer, told Breitbart she supports Clinton because she's "a strong Progressive who can move America forward." ~~~~~ Hillary’s Priorities USA super-PAC has spent just $6 million of its $50+ million. Its spend-later strategy means Clinton mega-donors have avoided the spotlight. But new reports filed with the Federal Election Commission name Hillary's major donors and their contributions to Priorities USA since March 2015 : (1) George Soros, $7 million. Soros leads the giant Open Society Foundation and Center for American Progress, headed by John Podesta before he left to head Hillary's campaign. Soros also gave $1 million to the American Bridge 21st Century super-PAC, led by top Clinton ally David Brock. (2) Saban family, $5 million. LA entertainment mogul Saban and his wife have given more money to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s political and philanthropic ventures than any other individuals, according to the Washington Post. (3) Pritzker family, $3.8 million. Heir to the Hyatt Hotel fortune, J. R. Pritzker runs The Pritzker Group, a private equity and venture capital firm. (4) James Simons, $3.5 million. Simons is a New York-based hedge fund billionaire. (5) Herbert Sandler, $2.5 million. Sandler founded the California savings and loan Golden West Financial Corporation. (6) Donald Sussman, $2.5 million. Sussman, a billionaire hedge fund manager, has given $8.5 million to Democratic super-PACs and leftist groups since 2010. ~~~~~ Dear readers, the next time you read a Hillary poster saying "Fighting for Us," you might ask if "Us" is banks, Wall Street, or Bill and Hillary -- it certainly isn't you or America.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hillary Clinton has never been asked whether she verbally intimidated alleged rape survivor Juanita Broaddrick. Nor has Clinton been asked whether she spearheaded the so-called “nuts and sluts” strategy to silence and intimidate women who alleged affairs with or sexual abuse by Bill Clinton.
ReplyDeleteAnd the question you may be asking is WHY has no one ever confronted Hillary? I don’t think anybody’s had the guts to do it.
Hillary Clinton started what was called the ‘war room’ during the campaign of 1992, which elected her husband. George Stephanopoulos was part of that. James Carville was part of it. And the purpose of the war room — and Stephanopoulos … of course … doesn’t want to discuss this — was to destroy any woman that would challenge Bill Clinton, because she knew, undoubtedly, that if her husband didn’t make it to the White House, that someday she wouldn’t make it to the White House, either. … She wanted to protect her own interests, and to do that she had to destroy the women who she knew were going to come forward and reveal the alleged sexual harassment and rape, and the intimidation that was about ready to be leveled against these women to keep them quiet.
There’s a lot of different evidence here, direct and circumstantial, that places Hillary at the center of these acts against the women.
There is a pattern in Hillary’s life where she’s capable of almost anything.” Hillary Clinton once said that when women allege sexual assault, they “have the right to be believed” – really Hillary you believe that, maybe for all women except Bill’s accusers of “forced sex.”
Just focusing on Hillary’ e-mail nightmare and on how many classified emails were on Clinton's illegal server misses a fundamental point: MOST of Secretary Clinton's emails would have been sensitive because she was the Secretary of State. For a foreign intelligence agency, being able to follow a virtual conversation between her and, say, President Obama, would have been worth it's weight in gold. Foreign intelligence services would not have been watching her email just to capture classified memos. They would have wanted to tap into her thinking and decision-making. Running her own, private system outside of the U.S. government made it easy for them to do so.
ReplyDeleteIt is virtually certain that foreign intelligence services have had better luck accessing Secretary Clinton's official business e-mails than has the U.S. Congress, despite the outstanding subpoenas and investigations. They and Mrs. Clinton are the only ones that will ever know the content of the 30,000 emails that her staff deleted. Think about that for a second. Vladimir Putin knows more about the Clinton Global Initiative, Teneo and State Department shakedown operation lining the Clintons' pockets than do the American people--by design! I'm sure Russian intelligence officers are gleefully mulling over the uses of that kompromat should Hillary become president.
Only one segment of why Hillary Clinton should in no way be considered for the Presidency.
Hillary Clinton us an individual that is without any moral or ethical stability. Her compass ( ie. her conscience) points not at right or wrong but at herself.
ReplyDeleteHer adult and professional life is a blueprint for hedonism, destructiveness, and pure evil.
She is without remorse. She measures right and wrong by if it's advantages for Hillary it's good, everything else is unimportant. There isn't one ounce defends running in her veins.
I don't understand how ANYONE could consider voting for her and assigning the welfare of thus country and ALL its inhabitants to her destructiveness.