HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » beedle » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Mon Feb 15, 2016, 04:26 PM
Number of posts: 1,235

Journal Archives

Elites are on notice from IRS: Panama Papers

IRS Urges Americans: Come Clean Now, Before We Read Panama Papers


The IRS also encouraged any U.S. citizens and companies that may have money in offshore accounts to contact the agency now before any possible illegal activity on their part is identified. According to media reports, the documents contain information on potentially thousands of U.S. citizens and firms that have at least an indirect connection to offshore accounts affiliated with Mossack Fonseca. Many other firms provide similar services, and the Treasury Department estimated last year that more than $300 billion dollars of illicit proceeds are generated in the United States annually, with criminals using such companies here and abroad to launder funds.

MSNBC: Joy Reid is spinning the throwing money at Clinton

Motorcade was sexist??? She claims it was like throwing dollar bills at a stripper.

Jesus Christ, they're not even trying to hide their over the tip bias.

Not to disparage strippers, but if anyone is having money thrown at them for selling their "product", it's Reid.

Release of Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President


The problem with the quotes above is not merely their content — which suggests a presidential candidate not only “gushingly” fond of Wall Street speculators but unwilling to admonish them even to the smallest degree — but also that they reveal Clinton to have been dishonest about that content with American voters.

Last night in Brooklyn Mrs. Clinton said, “I did stand up to the banks. I did make it clear that their behavior would not be excused.”

Yet not a single attendee at any of Mrs. Clinton’s quarter-of-a-million-dollar speeches can recall her doing anything of the sort.

Release of the transcripts would therefore, it appears, have three immediate — and possibly fatal — consequences for Clinton’s presidential campaign:

It would reveal that Clinton lied about the content of the speeches at a time when she suspected she would never have to release them, nor that their content would ever be known to voters.

It would reveal that the massive campaign and super-PAC contributions Clinton has received from Wall Street did indeed, as Sanders has alleged, influence her ability to get tough on Wall Street malfeasance either in Congress or behind closed doors.

t would reveal that Clinton’s policy positions on — for instance — breaking up “too-big-to-fail” banks are almost certainly insincere, as they have been trotted out merely for the purposes of a presidential campaign.

The details of the quotes mentioned above are in the article, but basically eye witness accounts of what was talked about (and what was noticeably NOT talked about) in those speeches.

Washington post Pinocchios?

Sanders: Canada, it's not some communist authoritarian country.

Pants on fire, they have free health care, and gun laws.

FiveThirtyEight seems a "liitle bit" neutral


I guess we don't need to guess why his results always seem to underestimate Bernie all the time.

Sam Seder live: will be explaining Bernie Interview

and how NYDN took good policy and did a hatchet job.

On Live now: 12pm EST Wed Apr 6

Hillary supporters are recommended to stick fingers in their ears and yell "la-la-la-la"

Did Bernie blow the Interview, or NYDN Editors simply not understand the issue?


A notion is rapidly crystallizing among the national media that Bernie Sanders majorly bungled an interview with the editorial board of the New York Daily News. His rival, Hillary Clinton, has even sent a transcript of the interview to supporters as part of a fundraising push. A close look at that transcript, though, suggests the media may be getting worked up over nothing.

In fact, in several instances, it’s the Daily News editors who are bungling the facts in an interview designed to show that Sanders doesn’t understand the fine points of policy. In questions about breaking up big banks, the powers of the Treasury Department and drone strikes, the editors were simply wrong on details.

There seems to be a lot of Americans that have no clue that there are laws designed to address the situation Bernie is trying to fix. And of course, the dumbest people in America (MSM 'journalists') are more than happy to spread their personal ignorance to the public.

Hillary: no longer a progressive?

Remember when the primaries were about fighting for the souther vote, Hillary was insisting she was a real progressive, Sanders agreed, Hillary is a progressive "on some days".

Seems now that she is out of reasons to claim her progressive credentials she is back to conceding, progressive? Not so much.

All the interviews today with Hillary surrogates explaining why they might not do so well in WI today .... Answer: it's a 'progressive' state'!

When they are asked about NY, they say 'yes, there are some 'progressive' areas of NY were Sanders is going to do well, but ... blah, blah blah". (Fallon was just on MSNBC making this argument.)

Sanders was right, Hillary is a progressive on some days ... just not these days since it's no longer useful to her campaign ... anyone want to bet what she'll be come General Election? Will Hillary be a Democrat "on some days"?

Washington Post Gets Three Pinocchios--Should Apologize to Bernie Sanders


So? Who’s right? Well, there’s a beautiful thing—Greenpeace’s source for their claim is easy to check. Greenpeace’s claim listed several dozen lobbyists, which is a lot, but not too much to check. They got their information that these are fossil fuel industry lobbyists from the Senate’s own website, which lists lobbyists. So, take the first nine lobbyists, the in-house lobbyists, listed in Greenpeace’s list of bundler lobbyists. They are NOT PART OF VIVECA NOVAK’S “BIG CAVEAT.” Here are results for the first few of them, from the Senate website:

Susan Carter: Exxon/Mobil ONLY

Theresa Fariello: Exxon/Mobil ONLY

Ben Norris: American Petroleum Institute AND Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling, Inc.

Kevin Avery: Conoco Phillips AND Marathon Oil Corporation/Marathon Petroleum Corporation

It’s ALL fossil fuel money and clients, then, for those first nine people Greenpeace mentions.

Checking facts too hard for "fact" checkers?

Hillary was totally against an

"exciting, innovative, ambitious, ground breaking, cutting edge, high quality, and high standard" trade deal.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 Next »