Sen. Tim Scott Reads His Hate Mail On The Senate Floor — ‘I Left Out All The Ones That Used The N-Word’ [VIDEO]
5:20 PM 02/08/2017
TOPSouth Carolina Sen. Tim Scott read the hate mail he has received for supporting President Trump’s attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions on the Senate floor Wednesday evening.
“If you sign up to be a black conservative, the chances are very high you will be attacked,” the South Carolina Republican stated. “It comes with the territory, and I’ve had it for 20 years, two decades, but my friends and my staff, they’re not used to the level of animus that comes in from the liberal left that suggests that I somehow are not helpful to the cause of liberal America and therefore I am not helpful to black America.”
“I left out all the ones that used the n-word,” Scott told his peers. “I just felt like that would not be appropriate.”
“What I’m surprised by just a smidgen,” he continued, “is that the liberal left that speaks and desires for all of us to be tolerant do not want to be tolerant of anyone that disagrees with where they are coming from.”
Ignore the attacks on Neil Gorsuch. He's an intellectual giant - and a good man
Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court will be smeared. But those who know him know better.By Professor Robert P. George
Robert P. George is the founder of the American Principles Project, as well as McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University.
Although there were notable exceptions, Donald Trump famously lost the conservative intelligentsia — and went on to do quite well electorally without us. But conservative scholars will, I predict, be virtually unanimous in their praise of the president’s choice of Judge Neil Gorsuch of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit to succeed Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. I know firsthand why: Gorsuch’s combination of outstanding intellectual and personal qualities places him in the top rank of American jurists. If confirmed, as I expect him easily to be, he will certainly be a good justice and has the potential to be a great one.
Gorsuch and I have worked together on academic projects, most notably when I was the editor of the Princeton University Press book series for which he wrote “The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia” — an impressive, deeply scholarly book that was praised by bioethicists (including the liberal Daniel Callahan and the conservative John Keown) as well as academic lawyers — in 2006. The book critically engages the work of scholars (including myself) across a range of disciplines and representing a spectrum of viewpoints. Gorsuch went the extra mile in ensuring that his treatment of the work of other writers — especially those with whom he disagrees — was sympathetic and impeccably accurate. His sheer fair-mindedness was the thing I found most striking about working with him.
When it comes to fitness for judicial office, the first criterion usually considered is intellect and education, and here Gorsuch is off the charts. Even people who do not share his political outlook or judicial philosophy, but have read his judicial opinions, recognize him as an intellectual superstar. Anyone who has heard him speak, and especially anyone who has spoken with him, probably has had that impression strongly reinforced. His opinions are marked by analytical depth and precision and remarkably lucid writing.
In selecting Gorsuch, President Trump has without question fulfilled his pledge to appoint a justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia — a conservative intellectual leader. Even those of us who refused to get on the Trump train after his nomination have to acknowledge that. But one respect in which Gorsuch is unlike Scalia is that he is not fiery or pugnacious. Rather, his demeanor is scholarly — one might even say bookish. He is not a fierce debater. I recall being with him at an academic conference at which a graduate student contradicted and challenged a comment he had made. Far from bristling or even returning fire, he encouraged the student to develop her argument further, graciously acknowledging merit in the point she had made.
Likewise in the courtroom, he does not interrogate, much less intimidate, the lawyers who appear before him. It is truer to say that he engages them in conversations that enable him to explore the strengths and weaknesses of arguments advanced in their written briefs or address issues he thinks are important but that did not receive sufficient attention in those submissions.
Of course, most people are interested above all in how he is likely to vote on hot-button issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, gun control, campaign finance reform and religious freedom. In the confirmation hearings, he will no doubt do what another friend of mine, Justice Elena Kagan, did and basically refuse to discuss these issues on the ground that they are likely to come before him. I expect what just about everyone else expects: Gorsuch, who greatly admired Scalia, thinks about the constitutional issues in these areas pretty much the same way Scalia did.
Orthodox conservatives believe that the Constitution should be interpreted in a way that is faithful to the text and guided, where the text is less than perfectly clear in its application to a question, by the original understanding of its framers and ratifiers. Gorsuch, like Scalia — and like every other judge who was on Trump’s list of 21 — is a textualist and an originalist. But he is not dogmatic, and his credentials help explain why.
After studying at Columbia University and Harvard Law School, Gorsuch earned a doctorate from Oxford University, where he was supervised by John Finnis, an internationally acclaimed philosopher of law and a theorist of natural law and natural rights. He won both a Truman Scholarship and a Marshall Scholarship, two of the most prestigious scholarships in American higher education. After completing his education, Gorsuch clerked for Appeals Court Judge David Sentelle, and then for Supreme Court Justices Byron White and Anthony M. Kennedy. He spent a year in the Justice Department and then a decade in the private practice of law with a distinguished firm. He has served on the 10th Circuit since 2006. His record bespeaks intellect and perseverance — although Gorsuch is, nonetheless, remarkably approachable.
If Democrats are looking for a point of vulnerability in either Gorsuch’s integrity or impartiality, they won’t find it. He is basically a Boy Scout. He’s a faithful husband, a good father, a caring neighbor, a generous friend, a man of probity who holds himself to the highest ethical standards. Oh, and he will bring religious diversity to a Court that is entirely Catholic and Jewish: He’s an Episcopalian.
Gorsuch will be a hard man to depict as a ferocious partisan or an ideological judge, which isn’t to say he won’t be described this way by ideologically partisan critics for whom the prospect of a conservative intellectual giant on the Supreme Court is anything but welcome. As Gorsuch himself has frequently observed, including in a widely noted tribute to Scalia, good judges sometimes have to vote or rule in ways they do not like — because that is what the law requires. Indeed, he noted, if a judge does not sometimes find himself voting or ruling against his own personal beliefs about politics or morality, as Scalia himself famously did in holding that the desecration of the American flag is political expression protected by the First Amendment, that is a sure sign that he is failing to do justice according to law. In a democracy, the law never lines up perfectly with anyone’s political and moral beliefs. And it is to the law that judges have sworn a sacred oath of fidelity.
*This article first appeared in the Washington Post.
High risk for Florida doctors who order medical marijuana
By Erin Clark
January 26, 2017
LEGAL WEED?: State regulations on medical marijuana continue to make it risky for Florida physicians to embrace the drug.
Regardless of how much discretion they get once new regulations shake out, Florida physicians will be the gatekeepers between patients and medical marijuana.
It’s a role that very few physicians have embraced.
According to the Health Department’s Office of Compassionate Use — the new three-person state agency tasked with administering Florida’s medical marijuana program — 494 Florida doctors are licensed to order medical marijuana as of Jan. 18.
As of Monday, 554 physicians and 127 osteopathic physicians have taken the Florida Medical Association’s continuing education course on Compassionate Medical Cannabis, according to the FMA.
If estimates on the size of the patient pool are correct, the state may need more qualified doctors.
The Office of Economic and Demographic Research estimates that Florida can expect about 450,000 medical marijuana patients per year under Amendment 2 expansion. That number could increase, depending on the qualifying conditions.
In Oregon, high demand for medical marijuana led to so-called prescription mills, with individual doctors making thousands of recommendations for patients each year. Statistics on Oregon’s Medical Marijuana Program show that 24 Oregon physicians were responsible for 75 percent of all medical marijuana prescriptions in 2016. The 24 physicians accounted for 51, 597 medical marijuana applications.
One doctor’s take
Despite the program’s growth, many doctors hesitate to add medical marijuana to their practices.
“I would have to think long and hard before I did this as a sideline if I were in a traditional medical practice,” Dr. Joseph Dorn, founder of Medical Marijuana Treatment Center of Florida, told Watchdog.
Dorn worked in hospice care before becoming medical director of Surterra Therapeutics, one of Florida’s seven licensed dispensaries. He estimates that he was one of the first few dozen doctors in Florida to get licensed back in 2015, when he left his medical director post.
“It was frustrating because we had good products and there were many patients who needed it, but they couldn’t find doctors who were doing it at the time,” Dorn said.
Given his experience both in palliative care and in the medical marijuana industry, it was an easy transition for Dorn, but he understands why others in the medical community are reluctant to jump on the medical marijuana train.
“One of the biggest obstacles, I think, [is] their fear, because it is federally illegal and most doctors still use their [Drug Enforcement Administration] licenses to order controlled substances on their regular patient populations,” he said.
He added that doctors might be concerned about putting their DEA licenses at risk, and they also are unsure of what changes at the federal level could mean for issuing recommendations.
“I think right now with the changing administration at the federal level, there’s a concern, because we don’t really know what the new attorney general is going to do. So people are moving a little more cautiously, and probably understandably so.”
Lawyers weigh in
Kate Bell, legislative counsel for the Marijuana Policy Project, agrees.
“The requirement that a physician specify the quantity of medical marijuana that a patient may possess is a serious flaw that is not addressed in either the proposed regulations from the Department of Health or the bill proposed by Senator [Rob] Bradley,” Bell told Watchdog in an email.
Bell said another problem is that the proposed regulations would continue to require doctors to “order” medical cannabis, which is close to the same thing as “prescribing” cannabis — a prohibited act.
“While recommending medical marijuana is protected by the doctor’s First Amendment rights, to order a quantity of cannabis is not, because it would show a specific intent that the patient obtain cannabis under the controlling legal precedent (Conant v. Walters, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals),” Bell said. “Thus, current Florida rules put doctors at risk under federal law.”
Guidelines put forth by the Office of Compassionate Use call for doctors that “order” medical marijuana for their patients to submit information, including dosage information, to the state registry. They must also file a treatment plan with the University of Florida.
Matthew Ginder, senior counsel for the Florida branch of Greenspoon Marder’s Cannabis Law group, told Watchdog in an email that “the current law undoubtedly places burdens on physicians that do not exist in many other states.”
He added that the requirements for physicians under Amendment 2 were “less onerous,” and that hopefully the Legislature would address the semantics of recommending versus prescribing medical marijuana. As it stands, Ginder questioned if “ordering” a prescription would be protected under free speech precedent.
“In short, it is understandable why physicians are hesitant to register under the current medical marijuana program,” Ginder said.
Sunai Edwards, an attorney with the Tampa-based firm Gray-Robinson, says the lack of clarity in the rules should make doctors cautious about how to remain compliant with state law, federal concerns aside.
Edwards, whose husband is a physician licensed to order medical marijuana, added that she thought it would be interesting to see what input physicians would have in the rule-making process, whether they would seek more discretion or more dictates for the ordering process.
Better things to do
“I think what I would say is both,” said Dr. Stephen Mamus, medical director of the Cancer Center of Sarasota. Mamus said he would like to see a list of conditions for which physicians were allowed to order marijuana while also allowing discretion for doctors when patients fall outside of a narrow diagnosis.
He added that fears of federal repercussions — along with the $1,000 course fee — certainly discouraged more doctors from joining the registry. However, he felt that quibbling over the state’s legal language was ultimately irrelevant.
“It doesn’t matter what the state of Florida says, if they said nothing or they said everything, because ultimately it’s a federal issue,” Mamus said. “Even if you had the state of Florida do everything that every single doctor in the state of Florida wanted, that still does not protect you from the federal law.”
Mamus added that he was very conservative in choosing how he recommended medical marijuana and only ordered it for cancer patients with life expectancies of less than a year.
“I really can’t see that the federal government is going try to prosecute doctors who are trying to help patients dying from cancer. They’ve got better things to do with their time,” he said.
WATCH – Cowboy’s EPIC Takedown of Anti-Trump Protesters Is Incredible, 20 MILLION Watching!
Chad Prather nailed it when describing why thousands of college students are frantically marching in the streets to protest President-Elect Donald Trump.
“Let’s talk about these protesting college kids. Good for you, great job exercising your First Amendment rights,” cowboy internet phenom, Chad Prather, begins. And then he lets them have it…
A heavy dose of Prather’s no-nonsense folksy wisdom is just what these liberal petulant children need—and deserve. Their parents didn’t raise them right. Their schools coddled them and did not educate them or prepare them for the harsh realities of life, and it shows.
“What are you protesting? The American political process? The Electoral College? The Constitution?” the cowboy philosopher asks in the now viral video.
“Noooo, you just didn’t get your way,” he says answering the posed question. “Get back into Starbucks and complain about your latte order.”
Chad Prather became an online celebrity after a video he posted to Facebook went viral last October. It turns out, Americans really like what a good ole’ southern boy has to say! The Texas cowboy’s video entitled, “Unapologetically Southern” quickly went viral.
Prather was sick and tired of southerners and the southern heritage being relentlessly mocked. “It’s pretty easy to stereotype folks from the South. They hear a dialect and they hear a slang, and they want to make fun of it,” he said when describing the motivation behind the video.
The Texas cowboy also said he created his YouTube channel to have a way to explain what the South is truly all about. Prather said folks in the South learn the value of self-respect, discipline, and respect for other people.
“With the world being as small as it is, I think it’s necessary that we learn to embrace other cultures,” Chad Prather continued. “You see the differences and you don’t hate them, you don’t stereotype them.”
Who does Prather blame for the whiny millennials now taking over the streets of major cities around the country? He puts the blame right where it belongs—on their parents. Their toddler like self-absorption wouldn’t have survived long enough for them to go looking for a safe space on a college campus if they hadn’t been told by their parents that the world owes them something.
It is time for America to get back to doing what it does best, working hard for success rather than waiting by the mailbox to find out what Uncle Sam is going to send them for sitting on their tail all day and doing nothing!
Click here to get my DAILY Trump email newsletter free!!
Please share this story on Facebook and tell us what you think because we want to hear YOUR voice!
BREAKING – Melania Makes HUGE First Lady Announcement, MILLIONS Are Cheering
Melania Trump is showing the American people that she is going to be a great First Lady, despite the liberal hate agenda against her and her family.
Melania Trump has officially announced that she will be fighting against cyberbullying as our First Lady. This is very fitting, considering she and her son have received a lot of condemnation over the internet recently, via Inquistr.
Barron Trump has been subject to ridicule all because he is in the public eye as our First Son. He has been falsely accused of being autistic and called a future “homeschool shooter” and “date rapist to be.” All of these insults were thrown by adults! This is inexcusable, and clearly our culture has a problem.
For her part, Melania has received a lot of hateful comments because of her career as a former super model. She has posed nude before. Some claim this makes her unfit to be the First Lady. I don’t know why the public, especially liberals, are so scandalized about this!
It’s not like the rest of the people on the cover of magazines are dressed in wimples and high collar dresses — all the covers of magazines have women scantily dressed and men without shirts on. Plenty of models have posed nude — it’s part of their job.
Liberals claims they should be able to dress (or not dress) however they want, but then they fire off at Melania for posing nude for a magazine? These people are nothing but hypocrites.
I think her past actually makes her relatable to American women in this country. She’s a legal immigrant who worked hard to achieve her goals. She had her ups and downs, and she didn’t grow up with an easy life.
She worked for what she got, and she was successful before she ever met Donald Trump. Then, she married a man every bit as intelligent and successful as her. Of course, I doubt she cares if people can’t see that, but she does care about any children who are subject to cyberbullying.
Children today are at higher risk for suicide and depression because the ruthless teasing of kids has become rampant on the internet. Even after school, there is nowhere to hide from the hate, and most cyberbullying is made publicly searchable.
This greatly affects children. Not everyone realizes this, but bullying and teasing can affect children all the way into adulthood. They grow up with no self-esteem and never amount to anything because they don’t think they’re worth anything. We need to counter this by helping our children grow self-confidence!
I think it is great that Melania will be an advocate for these children. Melania is trying to raise her son with the best things she can teach him, such as kindness, honesty, and compassion.
I’m glad that Melania Trump will be showing the youth of today that they are beautiful on the inside as well as the outside, and that they don’t have to listen to the horrible words of other people. She is, without a doubt, going to be an excellent First Lady.
Chilling Video of Huma Abedin that Every American Needs to See !!!
President Trump has tapped Neil Gorsuch to fill the late Antonin Scalia's seat on the Supreme Court. The Post's Robert Barnes tells you what you need to know. (Peter Stevenson, Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)
Apocalypse island: Tech billionaires are building boltholes in New Zealand because they now fear social collapse or nuclear war. So what do they know that we don't? By Tom Leonard In New York For The Daily Mail
PUBLISHED: 20:04 EST, 3 February 2017 | UPDATED: 08:22 EST, 4 February 2017
You’re all set — your bags were packed long ago, there’s a dozen solid gold coins stashed inside your belt and a pistol strapped round your waist.
There’s no need to say goodbye to the wife and children as they’re already waiting for you 6,000 miles away in New Zealand, having slipped off quietly at the first whiff of global catastrophe.
Now, they’re making themselves comfortable in that fortress home you’ve spent years preparing. They’ve got store-loads of food and enough guns and ammunition to start World War III – which might, anyway, have begun by the time you arrive.
New Zealand - thousands of miles away from North Korea, ISIS and all the social tensions in Europe and the United States - is seen as the ideal 'safe' place for billionaires
The high-powered motorbike you’ve never used is waiting outside to whisk you to the private airport where your plane sits waiting.
A helicopter-ride at the other end, pull up the drawbridge — yes, you have one — and you’re ready to wait, for years if necessary, for civilisation to return.
Never mind the warnings about stocking up on vegetables after awful weather has ravaged the Mediterranean farming belt. Some of America’s richest people are spending billions quietly preparing for a global Apocalypse.
The world of Doomsday survivalists or ‘Preppers’ — those preparing themselves for total social collapse — is usually associated with wild-eyed eco-beardies hiding in the woods.
Nuclear war is just one of the fears driving the billionaire 'refugees'
But the existence of a very different group of Preppers was laid bare by a political row in New Zealand this week.
Attracted by a remote First World country that has the potential to be self-sufficient and is on no one’s list of nuclear targets, the super-rich kings of Silicon Valley and Wall Street are buying up vast tracts of its land — in anticipation of the day when they may need to live there.
The controversy has revealed the extraordinary precautions being taken by the mega- rich to ensure that WTSHTF — a crude survivalist acronym for ‘when the **** hits the fan’ — they and their loved ones will be safe and comfortable.
What the catastrophe will precisely be remains unclear, but possibilities include a devastating asteroid impact, giant earthquake, nuclear war, civil war, pandemic, zombie invasion and the Second Coming.
Tellingly, the geeks of Silicon Valley appear to be most worried that it will be a struggle between rich and poor in a world economy turned upside down by new technology — with them as the main targets.
The row in New Zealand involves scores of mega-rich Americans but has specifically centred on Peter Thiel, the billionaire founder of the internet payment system PayPal and an early investor in Facebook.
Thiel, a libertarian supporter of Donald Trump, paid $10million for a 477-acre lakeside estate in the country’s beautiful but isolated Southern Alps, which provided much of the staggering landscape in the Lord Of the Rings and Hobbit films.
Amid a public outcry over the invasion of U.S. internet and finance billionaires, the New Zealand government has released papers detailing the ‘exceptional circumstances’ under which the American tycoon was quietly given a New Zealand passport.
Peter Thiel (pictured, centre) is a big supporter of Donald Trump but he has an insurance plan if it all goes pear-shaped, having bought a 477-acre estate in New Zealand
It is difficult to understand how this complied with the rules, including one that insists foreigners must live there for three years beforehand.
Mr Thiel has gushed about his ‘great pride’ in his new citizenship and how he has ‘found no other country that aligns more with my view of the future’.
Perhaps what he really meant was exposed, after one of his Silicon Valley chums, the venture capitalist Sam Altman, revealed that, at the first sign of global disaster, he and Thiel would fly to New Zealand.
Other uber-rich Americans who have recently bought homes there include the billionaire hedge-fund pioneer Julian Robertson and the Hollywood film director James Cameron.
Local estate agents say their U.S. clients rarely intend to live in New Zealand, but cite reasons for their purchases such as the toxic presidential election and the spate of mass shootings in America.
In the first ten months of last year, foreigners — mainly Australians and Americans — bought nearly 1,400 square miles of land there, more than four times what they bought in the same period the previous year.
When they’re not buying up land abroad (Chile is also popular as it has low taxes, a good climate and good air links), rich survivalists like to swap tips on private Facebook groups or at regular dinners.
Popular subjects range from buying internet currencies such as Bitcoin, as protection against a central banking meltdown, to which foreign countries are most likely to hand them a passport and so the chance to relocate there in a crisis.
Some have planned for every eventuality. Steve Huffman, the 33-year-old co-founder of the internet discussion forum Reddit, which is valued at $600 million, is one of several Silicon Valley barons who has had laser surgery to correct poor eyesight.
If society collapses, he reasons perversely, getting hold of new spectacles might be a challenge. Ammunition could run out, too.
Steve Huffman (left), co-founder of Reddit, has had laser surgery because he does not want to rely on post-apocalyptic opticians, while Oracle founder Larry Ellison (right) is readying an escape hatch in Hawaii
Marvin Liao, a former senior executive at web giant Yahoo, has taken classes in archery and has amassed a small arsenal of other non-firearm weapons to protect his wife and daughter.
Survivalists have their own set of acronyms, including WROL (Without Rule Of Law) and LIA (Little Ice Age). (Some of them worry that the latter has just started).
They also have secret buzzphrases. ‘Saying you’re “buying a house in New Zealand” is kind of a wink, wink — say no more,’ Reid Hoffman, a venture capitalist told the New Yorker magazine.
‘Once you’ve done the Masonic handshake, they’ll be, like: “Oh, you know, I have a broker who sells old ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile] silos, and they’re nuclear-hardened, and they kind of look like they would be interesting to live in.” ’
These brothers in paranoia don’t necessarily agree on how to survive the approaching cataclysm. Antonio Garcia Martinez, a former Facebook product manager, bought five wooded acres on an island off America’s north Pacific coast.
For this refuge, he brought in solar panels, power generators and thousands of rounds of ammunition.
He chose the spot because it’s far from cities — but not completely remote, as ‘one guy alone’ couldn’t hope to stand up to a ‘roving mob’. One would need to set up a ‘local militia’ with others, he says. And when you have your hundred or so acres of land, what do you put there?
Post-apocalypse design for the money-no-object brigade tends to involve creating a home with a huge bomb-proof basement. The home must be self-contained, not only ‘off the grid’ (with its own power and water supplies), but with tanks for raising tilapia — a hardy, fast-growing fish — to eat, and facilities in which to grow vegetables hydroponically without soil.
Naturally, property developers are eagerly capitalising on such concerns. The Survival Condo Project, a former underground nuclear missile silo in Kansas, has been converted into a 15- storey luxury apartment complex with a pool, gym, classroom and a miniature hospital.
It also has ground-level security cameras, electric fences, an on-site armoury, a sniper post and even a prison cell in which to put unwanted visitors. Instead of windows, giant LED screens show live pictures of the prairie above.
Its creators, who’ve sold all 14 of the $3m homes and are developing a string of new sites, say it can sustain 70 people indefinitely. That is, as long as they can put up with living in what a visitor compared to a well-furnished submarine — silent and rather oppressive.
Project boss Larry Hall says he gets more phone inquiries every time North Korea tests a bomb.
His team promise to send a Pit-Bull VX armoured truck to collect a resident from within a 400-mile radius of the silo.
Others prefer to put their own plans in place. Reddit founder Huffman says he realised a motorbike would be a necessity after watching the disaster film Deep Impact, in which people try to flee a tsunami caused by a comet-strike, clogging the streets so cars are brought to a standstill.
All this panic among the super-rich begs an obvious question: what do they know that the rest of us don’t?
Certainly, preparing for the Apocalypse has been a multi-billion dollar business for many years.
Polls have shown around 22 per cent of Americans believe the world will ‘end’ in their lifetime. Many right-wingers were convinced that Barack Obama would start a civil war by trying to seize citizens’ guns.
Now, there’s the unpredictable Donald Trump to disturb their dreams. More than 13,000 Americans registered to buy a home in New Zealand — 17 times the usual rate — in the week after he was elected president.
There are TV shows about so-called preppers, a survivalist radio network and disaster readiness conventions. There are estate agents dedicated to the task, scouting out easily defendable properties, and even ‘Doomsday dating’ sites such as Survivalist Singles (motto: ‘You don’t have to face the future alone’).
But why are the country’s most privileged people, protected by immense wealth, quite so in fear?
For it is believed that at least 50 per cent of Silicon Valley billionaires have taken out so-called ‘apocalypse insurance’ by finding a refuge at home or abroad. Reluctant to admit the truth, they often describe it as a holiday home, so it’s difficult to know whether or not Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg bought a 750-acre estate in Hawaii ‘just in case’.
Similarly, his fellow tech billionaire Larry Ellison, founder of Oracle, who has not only bought 98 per cent of Hawaii’s sixth largest island, Lanai, but — handily — its own airline.
Of course there is the possibility that these fretting tech wizards’ prescience is justified. For many have made their fortunes out of predicting mankind’s dependence on digital gadgets and so we should respect their Doomsday hunches. Survivalists say the first signs of crisis often appear on internet chat forums, as they reportedly did before the 2008 financial crash.
Yishan Wong, another Silicon Valley multi-millionaire who has had eye surgery in readiness for a world without opticians, argues that techie types see risk in a clear-headed way. An apocalypse may be a remote possibility but, if you have money to burn, it’s ‘logical’ to take out insurance, he says.
A less flattering theory is that they’re simply bored nerds who long for adventure and fantasise about a future in which they’ll be a woman-magnet cross between apocalyptic hero Mad Max and environmentally friendly chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall.
Romanian riot police detain a man after clashes erupted during a protest in Bucharest this week. But many fears the world is going to Hell in a handcart
A New York architect told me he was hired by a senior partner at the bank Goldman Sachs to build a post-Apocalypse house far outside the city. His client wanted it to be a rallying point for local people, gathering — of course — to fall into line under his leadership.
Certainly, Reddit founder Mr Huffman claims he’s ‘a pretty good leader’ who ‘will probably be in charge, or at least not a slave’ if civilisation falls to pieces.
For these great Silicon Valley egalitarians fear that if society collapses, vengeful mobs will look for the super-rich. And, in particular, for the tech wizards whose robots and artificial intelligence systems are taking humans’ jobs.
A critic might ask why, if they’re so alarmed by a battle between rich and poor, they don’t stop wasting their billions on stockpiling armouries and islands and spend it helping the less fortunate?
But then what sort of red-blooded tech king wants to sign a cheque to charity when they could splash out on helicopters, Ducati motorbikes and an assault rifle for every family member?
It’s easy to laugh at the obscenely rich finding grotesque new ways to waste their money. But it’s undeniably disconcerting when it’s the lords of our digital age.
After all, everyone in Silicon Valley claims they want to save the world, not run away from it.
Not that there’s any inflation, but . . .Simon Black
January 31, 2017
The numbers are pretty startling.
Nearly 7 in 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in savings.
1 out of every 3 Americans has nothing set aside for retirement.
And, according to Federal Reserve data, the median working-age couple has saved just $5,000 for retirement.
How is this even possible?
How could it be that the citizens of the wealthiest country to have ever existed in the history of the world barely have any savings?
Simple. The cost of living has skyrocketed over time. It’s become terribly difficult for tens of millions of people to keep up. Just look at the data--
Housing prices, once again, are at all-time highs. And for those who choose to rent instead of buy, rents in many cities have also reached all-time highs.
This is especially difficult for the Millennial generation, which finds itself spending over of 40% of disposable income on housing costs.
If you add in student debt (which continues to plague millennials), that takes even more money out of their pockets each month.
And God help you if you decide to have children, the cost of which is now at a record level.
According to a study published last year by the US Department of Agriculture (not sure why they’re the ones looking into this…), the overall cost of raising a child from birth to age 21 is now a whopping $233,610.
Private studies have pegged that amount even higher, in excess of $300,000.
And, not that there’s any inflation, but childcare costs have risen so rapidly that it has become impossible for many families to keep both spouses in their careers.
Then there’s the costs of insurance and medical care, which continue to soar to record levels.
Healthcare costs in the United States are now at the highest levels EVER.
But even more importantly, the RATE at which costs are rising reached their highest level in 32 years.
It’s no wonder that people aren’t able to put any money away… or that, despite a brief dip after the Great Recession, consumer credit is once again exploding.
Just like their federal government, Americans are once again heavily indebting themselves.
And it’s easy to understand why: they just can’t make ends meet.
The tiny silver lining is that wages have finally started to grow, albeit slightly.
But wage growth has been vastly outpaced by the rising costs of major expenses– like housing, childcare, insurance, and healthcare.
If you find yourself in this situation… struggling without any real sense of security… I’d encourage you to at least consider one out-of-the-box solution:
Think about going overseas.
It’s 2017. Your ability to generate income no longer depends on geography.
I have friends who run a small CPA practice preparing tax forms from their beach home in Bali.
Others who do construction work here in Chile.
Software developers, agriculture consultants, insurance salesmen, paralegals, real estate brokers… they’ve all moved abroad and are thriving.
The biggest thing you’ll notice in terms of your personal finances, though, is that living costs are often remarkably cheaper.
Sure, if you move to Tokyo, Geneva, or Oslo you’re going to be forking over even more money to live.
But the vast majority of the planet is likely MUCH cheaper than where you’re currently living.
I purchased my apartment here in Chile, in one of the nicest neighborhoods in the entire country, for less than what a down payment would be in most metropolitan areas in the US.
And I wouldn’t even regard Chile’s housing market as being particularly cheap compared to other places around the world.
Your medical costs will also drop. Seriously, it’s a joke.
Medical treatment overseas can be incredibly high quality and just a tiny fraction of the cost.
Insurance will cost a tenth of what you’re currently paying, if you decide to have insurance at all.
You might just choose to pay cash whenever you need treatment, and it won’t cost more than a nice lunch.
Childcare? Forget about it. In a lot of places overseas (especially in Latin America or Asia), labor costs are so cheap that you won’t even think about daycare.
Instead, you’ll easily be able to afford your own round-the-clock, live-in help… for far less than what you’re probably currently paying for daycare.
Oh yeah. And your tax bill will likely go to ZERO.
This goes for just about all nationalities, including US citizens.
American expats have some special guidelines that they need to follow, but as long as you have what’s known as “bona fide” residency, i.e. you are really truly living abroad, and not just on paper, you can exclude more than $100,000 each year in “earned” income.
(Note, this does not apply to investment income… but there are ways to eliminate that as well. More on that another time.)
Most households spend tens of thousands of dollars each year on taxes, most of which has gone to fund more wars and more debt.
Just imagine what you could do for your family’s future with all that extra savings.
There are all sorts of other benefits as well.
You may have the opportunity to learn another language, and for your children to learn another language.
You and your family may be able to obtain another citizenship.
You’ll have unique international experience that certainly looks good on a resume and differentiates you from your peers back home.
And you’ll have the chance to develop a deep, close network of friends… fellow expats who share your beliefs and values.
I understand that as human beings, we are naturally afraid of the unknown.
And moving abroad is a big, big unknown.
Our ancestors braved that uncertainty once as well. They too were searching for a better life. It’s in our DNA.
So if you find yourself in a similar situation– barely able to stay afloat financially, and insecure about the future– it may at least be worth considering the possibility.
THOUSANDS SIGN NEW WHITE HOUSE PETITION TO ARREST GEORGE SOROS.
February 10, 2017
by Jim Hoft - Gateway Pundit
White House Petition Created To Arrest George SorosA White House Petition has been created to Issue an International Arrest Warrant for George Soros. The Petition was created a couple of weeks ago and has already received over 5,500 signatures. While this is a lot of signatures it is still well short of the 100,000 needed to get a response from the White House.
The petition states:
George Soros is a menace to the free world and stands in the way of making America great again. He is guilty of the following crimes:
1) Financially supports open sedition in major American cities resulting in millions of dollars of property damage as well as loss of life.
2) Attempts to manipulate democratic elections by donating millions of dollars to his preferred candidates.
3) Seeks to curtail American sovereignty. In his own words: “The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States … Changing [the] attitude and policies of the United States remains my top priority.”
4) Is a currency manipulator. Soros initiated a British financial crisis by dumping 10 billion sterling, forcing the devaluation of the currency and gaining a billion-dollar profit.
You can sign the petition here.
Trump pledges to end political limits on churches
By CATHERINE LUCEY
Feb. 2, 2017 9:56 PM EST
WASHINGTON (AP) — Declaring that religious freedom is "under threat," President Donald Trump vowed Thursday to repeal a rarely enforced IRS rule that says pastors who endorse candidates from the pulpit risk losing their tax-exempt status.
"I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution," Trump said at the National Prayer Breakfast, a high-profile event bringing together faith leaders, politicians and dignitaries.
Trump's pledge was a nod to his evangelical Christian supporters, who helped power his White House win. So far he has not detailed his plans for doing away with the rule, which he has previously promised to rescind. Named after then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson, the regulation has been in place since 1954 for tax-exempt charities, including churches, though it is very rare for a church to actually be penalized.
Abolishing the amendment would require action by Congress, though Trump could direct the IRS to disregard the rule. The tax code does allow a wide range of political activity by houses of worship, including speaking out on social issues and organizing congregants to vote. But churches cannot endorse a candidate or engage in partisan advocacy.
Lloyd Mayer, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, said an IRS move could prompt lawsuits, if the rule was repealed for churches but not other charities.
Mayer also noted that a full repeal of the rule could open up churches to the possibility of spending their resources to openly try to influence elections — and for donors to get tax breaks for political contributions.
While some conservative Christians would like to see the rule abolished, others, especially the younger generation, support a clear separation of church and political endorsements. Many liberal churches are also active on policy issues, and could potentially get more involved in partisan politics.
Mayer noted that for some religious leaders, the IRS rule has given them a way to avoid political pressure for an endorsement.
"Now a church that wants to say no has an easy answer, it's illegal," Mayer said.
Repeal does not appear to have widespread public support. Eight in 10 Americans said it was inappropriate for pastors to endorse a candidate in church in a poll released last September by Lifeway Research, a religious survey firm based in Nashville.
For many religious conservatives, a more pressing issue they hope he will address is protection for faith-based charities, schools and ministries who object to same-sex marriage and abortion.
The president made no mention at the prayer breakfast of other steps he may take, saying only that religious freedom is a "sacred right."
Kelly Shackelford, head of First Liberty Institute, a non-profit legal group that specializes in religious freedom cases said that "there's a number of things he laid out that we expect we'll eventually see action on."
Trump also defended his recent executive order on immigration, decrying "generous" immigration policies and arguing that there are people who seek to enter the country "for the purpose of spreading violence or oppressing other people based upon their faith." He also pledged to take more immigration action in the name of religious liberty.
"In the coming days we will develop a system to help ensure that those admitted into our country fully embrace our values of religious and personal liberty and that they reject any form of oppression and discrimination," Trump said.
LGBTQ groups have been anxious that the president could use his executive powers to curb legal advances they have made. Emily Hecht-McGowan, chief policy officer for the Family Equality Council, said that she was "anticipating more to come," noting that some draft documents have been circulating, suggesting plans for a more sweeping order.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Thursday that "there's nothing new on that front."
Earlier this week, the Trump administration announced that the president would leave intact a 2014 executive order that protects workers for federal contractors from anti-LGBTQ discrimination, saying in a statement that Trump "continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election."
Religious conservatives, who saw a series of defeats on same-sex marriage, abortion and other issues under former President Barack Obama, have been bolstered by Trump's win. In a letter last year to Roman Catholics, Trump pledged, "I will defend your religious liberties and the right to fully and freely practice your religion, as individuals, business owners and academic institutions."
Trump's Supreme Court pick this week was also considered a positive sign for conservatives.
A favorite of conservatives, Neil Gorsuch serves on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where he sided with Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor when they mounted religious objections to the Obama administration's requirement that employers provide health insurance that includes contraceptives.
During his remarks, Trump also took a dig at Arnold Schwarzenegger, the new host of "The Apprentice," the reality TV show Trump previously headlined. Trump said that since Schwarzenegger took over, the show's ratings have been down, and he asked the audience to "pray for Arnold." Schwarzenegger tweeted in response that he and Trump should switch jobs and Americans would sleep better.
California campaign to secede gains momentum
Los Angeles (AFP) - A campaign for California to secede from the rest of the country over Donald Trump's election is gaining momentum, with supporters allowed to start collecting signatures for the measure to be put to a vote.
California's Secretary of State Alex Padilla gave the green light on Thursday for proponents of "California Nationhood" -- also known as Calexit -- to start collecting the nearly 600,000 signatures needed for the measure to qualify on the November 2018 ballot.
The 585,407 signatures required by July 25 represent eight percent of registered voters in California -- the most populous state in the country with nearly 40 million residents and the world's sixth-largest economy.
Should the initiative make it on the ballot, a "Yes" vote would repeal clauses in the California Constitution "stating California is an inseparable part of the United States and that the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land," a statement by Padilla's office said.
Voters would then need to decide in another referendum in 2019 whether California should become a separate country.
Padilla said the independence measure -- deemed highly unrealistic -- would have a deep impact on the state and would likely face legal challenges.
"Assuming that California actually became an independent nation, the state and its local governments would experience major, but unknown, budgetary impacts," he warned.
"This measure also would result in tens of millions of dollars of one-time state and local election costs."
Calexit enthusiasts, whose campaign is called Yes California, are pushing for independence on grounds the state is out of step with the rest of the US and could flourish on its own.
"In our view, the United States of America represents so many things that conflict with Californian values, and our continued statehood means California will continue subsidizing the other states to our own detriment, and to the detriment of our children," according to their website.
The idea of independence became very appealing to many Californians following Trump's shock election.
Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton easily beat Trump in the progressive state, winning by more than 4.2 million votes, almost double the number of ballots cast for Trump.
BREAKING – Just Before Leaving Office, Obama Caught In $2.6 BILLION Scandal
Barack Obama’s legacy just got another massive, and rather expensive, blemish. American taxpayers are livid over this betrayal, but the mainstream media have been silent!
Dead retailers somehow redeemed more than $2 billion worth of food stamps. Well, if dead people can vote for Democrats, why can’t they go on ahead and spend our money too?
An audit by the United Sates Department of Agriculture (USDA) inspector general’s office discovered billions of dollars in improper National Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), better known as food stamps, were claimed by stores alleging they were run by children or dead people.
“We found that 3,394 authorized SNAP retailers (retailers) used Social Security Numbers (SSN) that matched SSNs of deceased people,” the inspector general’s office said. “Additionally, 193 retailers listed owners who were not at least 18 years of age. While FNS did have some controls to edit or verify SNAP retail owner information, these controls were not adequate to ensure owner information accuracy.”
The massive food stamp fraud occurred between October 2013 and June 2015, according to a Free Beacon report. The USDA inspector general identified 3,394 stores approved to accept food stamps, which were reported as owned by 1,819 people who were listed as dead in the Social Security “Death Master File.”
“These 3,394 retailers redeemed about $2.6 billion in SNAP benefits,” the inspector general’s report also revealed. The 193 businesses that reported child owners redeemed $41 million in food stamps.
The government report went on to state the obvious—without accurate retail owner store data, there is “little assurance” the store owners are actually who they say they are.
Identity fraud is a federal crime. Illegal distribution of food stamps is also a federal crime. Why would a legit store owner risk this kind of fraud? He or she wouldn’t, but an illegal immigrant or criminal bilking the taxpayers might think it is a grand scheme.
“This could leave the program open to abuse by disqualified individuals and others wishing to hide their identity for possible fraudulent purposes,” the report droned on, once again stating the obvious. Liberals try to convince us the government assistance programs our hard-earned money is used to fund are not ripe with corruption and do not create a state of generational dependency. Neither claim is true, folks.
The food stamps processed by the dead retail owners came from either the recipients themselves or someone they illegally traded or stole their food stamps with, such as drug dealers. The end result is the same either way. We are being stolen from, and poor children are likely going hungry in the process.
When welfare recipients sell their food stamps, they do so for pennies on the dollar. By the end of the month, any children in the home are left with empty bellies, but their parents have plenty of cigarettes, beer, and illegal drugs of their choice.
“If indeed some of these retailers are wholly owned by deceased persons or persons under the age of 18, this situation could leave FNS with little recourse other than disqualification in the event that adverse action needs to be taken against a particular retailer,” the inspector general added.
The weirdest and most frustrating part of this food stamp theft report is how little the federal government has done to prevent it. The U.S. does not have a system in place to scan its database to make sure the owners of the food stamps retail locations are at least 18 years old, but they do have an “edit check” to make sure the guy who owns the local supermarket is “at least five years old.”
About 46 million Americans are now on food stamps. This is a new record. The programs costs American taxpayers approximately $70 million per year.
Click here to get my DAILY Trump email newsletter free!!
What do you think about the food stamp fraud unearthed by the inspector general? Share this story on Facebook and let us know what you think because we want to hear YOUR voice!
BREAKING – Senator Who Attacked Jeff Sessions Caught in BOMBSHELL Scandal
A liberal senator who is as we speak attacking Jeff Sessions during his U.S. attorney general confirmation hearings has a massive scandal of his own unfolding.
Senator Cory Booker is embroiled in a Newark Watershed Conservation and Development Corporation (NWCDC) scandal involving allegations of massive kickbacks, Politico reports. Yesterday, Donald Bernard Sr., who was the senior projects manager at the company that ran Newark’s water infrastructure under the direction of then-mayor of Newark, New Jersey Cory Booker, pled guilty in federal court to accepting nearly $1 million in bribes from contractors.
In December, Donald Bernard Sr.’s former boss at the Newark company, Linda Watkins Brashear, also pleaded guilty to similar corruption and kickback charges. Former contractor Giacomo “Jack” DeRosa pleaded guilty earlier this week to money laundering charges over kickbacks paid to Bernard.
Could all of this corruption at a massive and essential piece of infrastructure have happened without Mayor Cory Booker knowing about it? Allegations and complaints about the NWCDC were near constant during his tenure, but he failed to address them or push for an investigation into the corruption.
When Booker took office in 2008, the NWCDC, through its city contract, was running Newark’s entire water delivery apparatus — from the reservoirs to the purification plants. Its engineers and planners worked directly out of Newark City Hall.
Trustees appointed by a judge in 2013 to “wind down” the NWCDC and return water operations to the city are now suing Cory Booker in bankruptcy court. They maintain Booker’s failure to monitor the agency caused the extreme corruption which robbed the fiscally struggling city of its few resources and placed its antiquated water infrastructure at significant risk.
Cory Booker was forced to admit he never once attended a NWCDC board meeting his entire time in office even though he was the agency’s ex-officio trustee. Just last week, Booker’s attorneys argued that he is immune from financial liability because his role on the Newark water board was a “de facto responsibility of the office of mayor.” So, not doing a duty levied upon your office makes you immune from being responsible for not doing your duty?
Allegations of malfeasance at the Newark Watershed Conservation and Development Corporation (NWCDC) have been raised by local residents, reporters, and lawmakers for many years. The NWCDC is a non-profit agency created to protect the Newark watershed.
City Councilman Augusto Amador also led an investigation into corruption and kickbacks at the NWCDC. He was one of the most vocal and earliest critics of the excessive spending going on at the Newark agency. He said, “I’m surprised about the amount of money that was stolen…When I first looked into it and looked at the books that were submitted to the Council, the amount that was involved was nowhere near what we’re seeing now, but I’m not surprised by the indictments.”
The Newark watershed has grown substantially over the years and is now responsible for the entire water delivery infrastructure in the city. United States Attorney Paul Fishman unearthed the extensive corruption at the NWCDC that occurred on Cory Booker’s watch.
“This is bigger than I thought,” Dan O’Flaherty said after the guilty pleas of two more NWCDC suspects were uttered this week. O’Flaherty is an economics professor at Columbia University and a former Newark City Hall staffer.
Dan O’Flaherty and a group of concerned citizens formed The Newark Water Group to delve into the corruption allegations long swirling around operations at the NWCDC. He wrote a detailed report of the agency’s mismanagement entitled “Hog Wild” in 2011.
The NWCDC had a budget of about $11 million per year. According to O’Flaherty, $3 million of the budget was “pure pass-through,” which the non-profit infrastructure agency “never actually got their hands on.”
Please share this story on Facebook and tell us what you think because we want to hear YOUR voice! You can also reach out to me on Twitter at @AP_SgtFreefall to discuss this story.
UTT: Putting Freedom on the Offensive Where It Belongs