Bet Cruz regrets his "New York values " comment

So he'll probably be putting this to good use.

-------------------------------------------

Fresh document trove sheds light on Clinton-Trump ties

The release Tuesday by the National Archives of a fresh trove of documents detailing the Clinton administration's dealings with billionaire Donald Trump could become the latest fuel for flame-throwing in an already incendiary 2016 presidential race.

The documents include: a signed copy of Trump's "The Art of the Deal," delivered to a top aide to then-President Clinton; logs of Trump's invitations to the Clinton White House; and an entry about a Trump Towers photo-op with the president. 

The files come at a sensitive time in the Republican presidential race, and could be used by Trump's top rival Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to paint the billionaire businessman as too closely tied to the Clinton family – as Hillary Clinton leads the 2016 primary race on the Democratic side. Trump previously has brushed off the criticism, saying he had contact with Bill and Hillary Clinton, and countless other powerful people, because as a businessman he had to get along with everybody.

The newly released files shed light on that relationship.

One document is a photocopy of his best-selling book, "The Art of the Deal," sent to Bill Clinton aide Mark Middleton. An autographed page says "To Mark – Best Wishes," and adds, "Your Mom Is The Best."

Another is a 1993 invitation to President Clinton, though not from Trump himself, to join a charity event in Atlantic City where Trump was slated to attend.

A 2000 entry reflects that the president participated in a photo op with Trump at Trump Towers in New York. And another set of database entries appears to reflect a handful of White House events attended by Trump in 1995. 

The documents were among nearly 500 pages of files -- pertaining to the Clinton White House's communications regarding Trump and the Trump Organization – that were released by the National Archives and published by the Clinton library, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

The Clintons and the Obama White House were notified back in January by the National Archives that the files would be released in April, unless President Obama or former President Bill Clinton requested a one-time extension or tried to assert a "privilege" to keep some documents private. While the Clinton library houses the records, the National Archives and Records Administration reviews and rules on requests to release such presidential documents.

The National Archives said they had reviewed a batch of several FOIA requests, for which they planned to release more than 9,000 pages. Regarding the Trump files request, the record-keepers said just three pages would be restricted.

The FOIA request itself came from BuzzFeed, an archivist told FoxNews.com. 

The documents released Tuesday also reflect the Clinton White House's interest in Trump's flirtation back in 1999 and 2000 with a third-party presidential run.

One internal White House email in early 2000 among staff notes that Trump "has his eye on the big JOB." Another from November 1999 forwards an Associated Press article detailing then-potential candidate Trump's proposal for a one-time 14.25 percent tax on the net worth of wealthy Americans.

"We may need guidance on this," says the subject line in the email.

Fast-forward to 2016, and Trump is the leading candidate for the GOP presidential nomination. The document dump comes ahead of next Tuesday's New York primary, where Trump leads by double-digits in most polls.

Cruz, though, has racked up a string of wins, including in the Wisconsin primary -- though his recent success out-maneuvering Trump in the more esoteric battle for delegates at conventions like the one last weekend in Colorado has prompted complaints from Trump that the system is "rigged." Cruz counters that he's just "whining." 

Bet Cruz regrets his "New York values " comment

The Panama Papers Are Exactly Why Hillary Clinton Can’t Be President

(Click to enlarge)

The revelations from the Panama Papers—leaked documents from a secretive Panamanian law firm that helps political elites hide their money—have been hitting home across the world, exposing the widespread corruption of world leaders and their hangers-on.

It ought to hit here, too, because it reminds us of everything that should give us the heebie-jeebies about Hillary Clinton.

The Panama Papers have simply confirmed everything we already pretty much knew. This is just the way things work in much of the world. Clawing your way into high political office means that you have a lot special of favors to give out, contracts to distribute, land and timber and shipping deals to approve, and so on. So you dole them out to friends, relatives, and backers—and they naturally show their gratitude by kicking some of it back to you. And if you don’t officially get rich—well, mi casa es su casa, what’s a little sharing between friends? This has long been Vladimir Putin’s method. “In 2010, US diplomatic cables suggested Putin held his wealth via proxies. The president formally owned nothing, they added, but was able to draw on the wealth of his friends, who now control practically all of Russia’s oil and gas production and industrial resources.” The Panama Papers shed light on the fortune of Putin’s old friend Sergei Roldugin, who has somehow amassed billions as an obscure classical musician. Putin knows how easy it is for corrupt officials to live like kings without officially owning anything because that’s the way things worked in the good old days of the Soviet Union.

In most of the world, this is known and more or less accepted as the way things work. But not traditionally in the US and in the developed countries of the West, where our governments have been structured, either from the beginning or over many years of civil service reforms, to prevent corruption and conflicts of interest. So when they are exposed, it’s a major scandal. That’s why they’re pretty much ignoring the Panama Papers in Moscow, but in Iceland, crowds swarmed Reykjavik and forced the resignation of the prime minister.

And that confronts us with a question: do we want Panama here?

Because a couple of other names pop up in the Panama Papers, including those of a few well-known associates of Hillary Clinton: longtime Democratic Party fixers John and Tony Podesta and Clinton sycophant Sydney Blumenthal. And why not? Hillary Clinton has been up to her neck in crony deals from the very beginning. All the way back in 1978, for example, she indulged a sudden mania for trading cattle futures, from which she made just shy of $100,000 in less than a year—a lot more money back then than it is now, and a whole lot for a young couple like the Clintons. She has shown no interest in commodities trading since, which is surprising considering how successful she was at it. But maybe not so surprising when you consider that her trades back then were made under the guidance of an attorney who worked for a large company that just happened to be regulated by her husband. Gee, that almost looks like a bribe.

That’s the kind of thing that’s all over the Panama Papers, and it’s what Hillary Clinton has been doing forever. It’s how the Clintons suddenly made $100 million in the first few years after leaving the White House, with nothing to offer the business world but their political connections. It’s why the Clinton Foundation got massive donations from Russian businessmen with deals that required State Department approval.

The problem is wider than Hillary Clinton, of course. Donald Trump has openly bragged about his role in this system from the other end, as the businessman who buys the influence of politicians. Even Bernie Sanders, who has been making hay from the Panama Papers, advocates a much bigger role for government, particularly in regulating international trade—which is precisely the kind of playground for corruption revealed by the Panama Papers. Only Ted Cruz, despite playing footsie with protectionism during the South Carolina primary, advocates a smaller role for government in picking winners and losers in the economy.

The fact is that the reason official corruption is rampant across much of the world is not just that they have insufficient civil service reforms. It’s because their governments have vast, arbitrary powers. Hillary Clinton is one of the most visible reminders of this kind of wheeling and dealing among the global elites—and she presents us with the prospect of bringing the whole sordid system back from Panama and straight into the Oval Office.

The Panama Papers Are Exactly Why Hillary Clinton Can’t Be President

Obama: Not going to help Hillary get out of FBI investigation

What did you expect him to say?

This coming from the same guy who guaranteed you could keep your insurance.

----------------------------------------

(Click)

via:
https://earloftaint.com

President Obama said on Sunday that he is not going to help Hillary Clinton escape the FBI investigation into her server, or a potential indictment by the Justice Department.

"I can guarantee that," Obama said, rejecting claims by some Republicans that the Justice Department will face pressure to avoid finding fault by Clinton over her use of a private email account.

Obama offered cautious criticism of Clinton's management of her email.

"She's acknowledged that there's a carelessness in terms of managing e-mails that she has owned," he said. "And she recognizes that."

Obama said he can guaranttee there will be no interference with the Justice Department because "I do not talk to the attorney general about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line, and always have maintained it," Obama said in an interview with "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace.

"I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department or the FBI, not just in this case, but in any case. Full stop. Period. Guaranteed. Full stop. No one gets treated differently when it comes to the Justice Department, because nobody is above the law," Obama reiterated.

Asked if that would remain the case if she receives the Democratic presidential nomination, Obama was clear: "How many times do I have to say it, Chris? Guaranteed."

Obama said that Clinton had done an "excellent" job as secretary of state.

"I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America's national security," he said.

"It also is important to recognize and to keep it in perspective this is someone who served her country for four years as secretary of state and did an outstanding job, and no one has suggested that in some way as a consequence of how she's handled emails, that that detracted from her excellent ability to carry out her duties," he added.

(You know, like the great job she did with Benghazi)

Charles Krauthammer put it best:

"When people talk about Hillary being a superb secretary of state, I just ask one question. Name me one thing, just one, not three, give me one thing she achieved in her four years as secretary of state. I have yet to hear an answer. ... She traveled a lot. So did Marco Polo. And you want him to be president?"

Obama: Not going to help Hillary get out of FBI investigation

Boston Globe prints fake front page on 'President' Trump

These fuckers are so warped they're out of their minds. They can't get enough of illegals… tripling of ICE force to facilitate deportation is unthinkable. And God forbid if an ISIS family member should die at the hands of our military. 

On 911 they flew into the wrong fucking buildings!

BOSTON (AP) - The Boston Globe printed a satirical front page complete with fake stories that show how "troubling" its editorial board says a Donald Trump presidency would be for America.

The newspaper's front page is dated April 9, 2017, and its lead story is about Trump calling for deportations. Another article mentions work being halted on a wall at the Mexico border.

There's also a short item about backlash Trump received after tweeting a photo of his new dog he named "Madame Peng," after China's first lady Peng Liyuan.

In an editorial , the Globe calls the satire "an exercise in taking a man at his word."

(If they took Barry at his word the deficit would be $5.3 trillion instead of moving towards $20)

The board says Republicans need to put up every roadblock to Trump they can.

The Trump campaign hasn't responded to requests for comment.

------------------------------------

Maybe the NYP could run this.

Boston Globe prints fake front page on 'President' Trump

Chicago's grim murder trend blamed on light sentencing, misguided reforms

800 shootings so far this year and it’s only April!

Congratulations!

I suspect it finally dawned on them locking these dogs up and keeping them locked up, is the answer since more stringent gun controls laws have no effect on people who don't follow the law to begin with.

The key word in this whole article is propensity. If we could get them to seek a college degree with the same zeal as they seek violence the country would be a better place.


See the guns?

 (How much would you like to bet they didn't purchased them at a legitimate gun shop after a background check?)

---------------------------------

Lamar Harris had seven felony convictions and 43 arrests when he shot three Chicago police officers. The same week, Samuel Harviley, who had just been paroled after serving less than half of his sentence for armed carjacking, shot yet another of the Windy City’s finest.

Police officials, researchers and many elected leaders all agree that the pair were prime examples of the violent pool of criminals driving the city’s historically high crime rate. Ex-cons well-known to police and with a proven propensity for violence are being let out early from prison or let off lightly by judges, only to wreak havoc on the city, they say. 

“We are not incarcerating a bunch of harmless sad sacks who are merely caught with a joint.”

- Heather Mac Donald, Manhattan Institute

"The fact that a convicted felon and gun offender is yet again out on early release to torment communities is representative of the types of individuals who are overwhelmingly driving the recent spike in violence," then-interim police Superintendent John Escalante said at a news conference last month announcing charges against Harviley.

The cycle of violence has resulted in more than 800 shootings so far this year, including seven shootings and one murder on April 4 alone. Escalante’s successor, former Chicago Police Department Chief of Patrol Eddie Johnson, says the rate of murders and shootings can’t be reversed until the criminal justice system begins to hold offenders accountable.

“We have five districts that are driving the crime in the city,” Johnson said in a recent radio interview. “And within those districts, there is a small subset of individuals who are responsible for those crimes. They have multiple arrests for gun offenses and until we start holding these people accountable [the problem will persist].”

According to the CPD’s most recent CompStat figures, 133 people have been murdered in 2016, compared to 77 during the same period in 2015. Shootings are up 91 percent.

Johnson, unlike many of the city’s African-American elected officials, is seeking tougher sentencing laws. Over the coming weeks, he plans to be “asking our legislative partners in the near future to help us” pass new laws that will ensure judges throw the book at violent offenders.

It’s become easy for police to predict who will be on both ends of the explosion in gun violence. Some two-thirds of murder victims are already on the Police Department’s “strategic subject list,” a roster of residents identified as being at risk of being a victim or an offender of gun violence. The list is kept so police can carry out lifestyle intervention efforts.

In one weekend in late March, 76 percent of shooting victims were on the SSL and 95 percent had lengthy criminal histories.

Illinois is one of several states implementing recommendations from prison reform commissions to reduce or even eliminate mandatory minimum sentences. Those groups seek to reduce prison populations by as much as 25 percent. 

The movement to slash sentences and free inmates is given momentum by controversial, police-involved shootings that galvanize communities, as well as protests by Black Lives Matter and civil rights groups. But shortening sentences of violent offenders puts both police and law-abiding residents of the inner city at risk, say law enforcement officials.

“Every day our members risk life and limb to defend our constitution and the rights it affords our citizens,” wrote Dominick Stokes, vice president for legislative affairs for the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association in a December letter to Senate leadership. “Mandatory minimums are a vital tool utilized in dismantling criminal drug trafficking enterprises.”

Stokes’ group is opposed to the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015, one of several bills aimed at reducing or eliminating mandatory prison sentences on the Federal level. And researchers say laws that ensure robust prison terms for dangerous people keep everyone safe.

“We are not incarcerating a bunch of harmless sad sacks who are merely caught with a joint,” said Heather Mac Donald, of the Manhattan Institute, a non-partisan research institute. “Prisons today mostly house violent criminals. Prison populations have increased because violent crimes increased.”

Mac Donald acknowledges some validity to arguments against imprisoning non-violent drug offenders, but rejects claims that rising incarceration rates are a consequence of racism.

Chicago's grim murder trend blamed on light sentencing, misguided reforms