Incompetence, Dishonesty, Lavish Living on the Taxpayer Dime.
Donald Trump … liar, con man, pussy grabber …
President of the United States!
Shame!
And I type this, Trump is at his golf resort in New Jersey … where his security detail has to rent his resort's golf carts in order to stay close to and protect him!
And I type this, Trump is at his golf resort in New Jersey … where his security detail has to rent his resort's golf carts in order to stay close to and protect him!
I wonder...Were you this outraged with all the taxpayer funded golf outings of the previous tenant of the White House? How about all the taxpayer funded vacations for him and his family?
No other POTUS ever took vacations and conducted official business at his own resort … where he billed the taxpayer for his and his entourages lodging, meals, golf, golf carts for his security personnel, meeting rooms, guest towels, amenities … payment for which went directly in to TRUMP'S pockets!
A testicle-challenged Republican majority Congress should call him for conflict-of-interests …
Bill aims to make Trump pay government back for taxpayer-funded trips to Mar-a-Lago
Rep. Ted Lieu, D-California, authored the Stop Waste and Misuse by the President Act, aptly named the SWAMP Act of 2017. The Democratic lawmaker writes in the bill that the goal of House Bill 2414 is to "limit the amount of expenditure on Presidential travel, and for other purposes."
Trump has taken six trips to the Palm Beach club since being inaugurated in January.
He writes in the proposal that Congress has found that "Every time the President travels to Mar-a-Lago, he necessarily promotes his private business interests via free press at the Government's expense." Lieu also criticized the State Department's "recent promotion" of Mar-a-Lago as being the summer White House on its social media channels and website.
The bill estimates that the total cost of security to Mar-a-Lago for each trip is $3.7 million, roundtrip flights from Joint Base Andrews to West Palm, Florida at $700,000, overtime pay for local police at $60,000 a day and Secret Service golf cart rentals at $35,185 for each visit, among others.
In mid-April, it was widely reported that Trump was on pace to spend more money on vacations through his first year in office than former President Barack Obama did in all eight years in office. As of April 11, Trump had spent an estimated $21.6 million on travel to his private Mar-A-Lago Palm Beach resort. The president has taken six trips to the club since his inauguration, which amounted to 21 days and more than 25 percent of his time of office at the time.
How much did the trips to Martha's Vineyard cost the taxpayer? Have to ask since the Obama's seemed to actually own nothing.
A rather specious argument; whatever they own, they never billed the taxpayer for staying at their own resort, etc. and putting the money in their own pockets as Trump has been doing.
I can just imagine him sitting at his desk in the White House building invoices on his computer, and directing him to bring the money directly to him. Not. His business interests are being managed elsewhere. I doubt he is even involved in that issue at that level.
To the person that is complaining about 4 bankruptcies. I believe it was 19 actually, from what I've read. Out of more than 500 business ventures. Not a bad rate considering the average business failure rate in the United States. And if you don't like the way Bankruptcy works, I'd urge you to contact your Congress critters and Senators and get the laws changed. I wonder why the Dems didn't fix that during the years they held all the controls?
Incompetence, Dishonesty, Lavish Living on the Taxpayer Dime.
Just like every other politician. And yet, you don't say a word about them.
Not quite!
No other POTUS ever took vacations and conducted official business at his own resort … where he billed the taxpayer for his and his entourages lodging, meals, golf, golf carts for his security personnel, meeting rooms, guest towels, amenities … payment for which went directly in to TRUMP'S pockets!
A testicle-challenged Republican majority Congress should call him for conflict-of-interests …
Bill aims to make Trump pay government back for taxpayer-funded trips to Mar-a-Lago
Rep. Ted Lieu, D-California, authored the Stop Waste and Misuse by the President Act, aptly named the SWAMP Act of 2017. The Democratic lawmaker writes in the bill that the goal of House Bill 2414 is to "limit the amount of expenditure on Presidential travel, and for other purposes."
Trump has taken six trips to the Palm Beach club since being inaugurated in January.
He writes in the proposal that Congress has found that "Every time the President travels to Mar-a-Lago, he necessarily promotes his private business interests via free press at the Government's expense." Lieu also criticized the State Department's "recent promotion" of Mar-a-Lago as being the summer White House on its social media channels and website.
The bill estimates that the total cost of security to Mar-a-Lago for each trip is $3.7 million, roundtrip flights from Joint Base Andrews to West Palm, Florida at $700,000, overtime pay for local police at $60,000 a day and Secret Service golf cart rentals at $35,185 for each visit, among others.
In mid-April, it was widely reported that Trump was on pace to spend more money on vacations through his first year in office than former President Barack Obama did in all eight years in office. As of April 11, Trump had spent an estimated $21.6 million on travel to his private Mar-A-Lago Palm Beach resort. The president has taken six trips to the club since his inauguration, which amounted to 21 days and more than 25 percent of his time of office at the time.
San Juan Mayor PRAISES FEMA and wants red tap removed. Trump Eliminates Red Tape (Jones act), Sends approx. 6,000 People to the island to help, Mayor says Trump Sucks.
Gee, I wonder if she was fed Our Democrats talking points shit too !
What a friggin loser of a politician she is. Typical of Puerto Rico. We send 17 billion or so in welfare to Puerto Rico every year. What are they doing with that money. In fact, what are they doing with the money they collect from their own citizens. Their infrastructure SUCKS a big one. Even Geraldo notes that in his reporting.
Oh, by the way, where are the Puerto Rican government national gaurd peons anyway. Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
San Juan Mayor PRAISES FEMA and wants red tap removed. Trump Eliminates Red Tape (Jones act), Sends approx. 6,000 People to the island to help, Mayor says Trump Sucks.
Gee, I wonder if she was fed Our Democrats talking points shit too !
What a friggin loser of a politician she is. Typical of Puerto Rico. We send 17 billion or so in welfare to Puerto Rico every year. What are they doing with that money. In fact, what are they doing with the money they collect from their own citizens. Their infrastructure SUCKS a big one. Even Geraldo notes that in his reporting.
Oh, by the way, where are the Puerto Rican government national gaurd peons anyway. Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
Let's hear it for this Compassionate Conservative as he reaches out to those who suffer!
Otherwise …
World War I
In July 1917, about 236,000 Puerto Ricans registered for the draft for World War I, and close to 20,000 served, said retired Marine Corps 1st Sgt. Ildelfonso “Pancho” Colon Jr. “Those that had to serve in combat had to leave Puerto Rico and enlist in New York,” he added.
During the Vietnam War, an estimated 48,000 Puerto Ricans served in the four branches of the armed forces. Of a total of 345 Puerto Ricans who died in combat, 18 were listed as MIA's.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 14, 2016 —As citizens of the United States, Puerto Ricans have participated in every major United States military engagement from World War I onward, with the soldiers of Puerto Rico’s 65th Infantry Regiment distinguishing themselves in combat during the Korean War.
While under Spanish rule, Puerto Rico fought alongside the American colonists in the Revolutionary War. Bernardo de Galvez, the governor of Louisiana in 1779, was named general of the Spanish colonial army and led his troop -- consisting primarily of Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics -- to capture the cities of Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Mobile, Alabama; Pensacola, Florida; and St. Louis, Missouri, from the British.
What the hell does that have to do with the HERE and NOW !
Unbelievable, the regurgitation of unrelated arguments I see here.
Please continue to post so that we can be continuously reminded of who you are and how you "think" and "feel"
YOU are the one who wrote …
Oh, by the way, where are the Puerto Rican government national gaurd peons anyway. Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
… implying in the most Trumpian fashion that Puerto Ricans have not served America!
That was YOU!
The comparatively small number of Guard troops on duty in Puerto Rico appears to underscore a disconnect between pleas made on the ground by civilians on the ground since the storm, and the federal government’s relatively modest response at first. It also may have slowed awareness of how bad the destruction was, with fewer personnel responding early and cataloguing needs.
I am so, so, so, sooooooo glad I am NOT in your league.
Since comprehension is hard for some.....MY comments were based on the "Here and Now". Not some Past accomplishment.
Does YOUR article not speak of the "Here and Now" ?
OR
Is your article about past accomplishments.
Let me know please, so I know how and which way to comment to meet YOUR satisfaction.
The comparatively small number of Guard troops on duty in Puerto Rico appears to underscore a disconnect between pleas made on the ground by civilians on the ground since the storm, and the federal government’s relatively modest response at first. It also may have slowed awareness of how bad the destruction was, with fewer personnel responding early and cataloguing needs.
Your contributions here are routinely contemptible.
I don't know what you said in the part that was CoC-deleted, but I can say without hesitation that I agree with it whole-heartedly, especially if it included the words 'party-pharm impaired upstart shitbag with a refusal to use any and all things spell-check'.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm putting myself in the bad corner because I've shamed us all.
Sounds good to me. But let's not forget 2 very important and influential entities: John Oliver (a pox upon you for the omittance), and of course NT's original bad-boy, BadFish, who has inspired many of my own Turret's Syndrome-like outbursts.
Overall, according to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch in January 2011, Pelosi used the Air Force aircraft for a total of 43 trips, covering 90,155 miles, from January 1 through October 1, 2010.
Judicial Watch, through FOIA, continues to pursue other records related to Pelosi’s use of Air Force aircraft.Previous documents obtained by Judicial Watch show the former Speaker’s military travel cost the USAF $2,100,744.59 over one two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol.
For example, purchases for one Pelosi-led congressional delegation traveling from Washington, DC, through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq May 15-20, 2008 included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine.
Judicial Watch also previously uncovered internal Department of Defense (DOD) documents email correspondence detailing attempts by DOD staff to accommodate Pelosi’s numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker’s last minute cancellations and changes.
For example, in response to a series of requests for military aircraft, one DOD official wrote, “Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi’s team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?…[T]here’s no need to block every weekend ‘just in case’
Q: Did Nancy Pelosi order up a 200-seat jet for her personal use?
A: The Democratic House speaker normally flies in a 12-seat Air Force jet, just as her Republican predecessor did. This rumor stems from a request by the House sergeant at arms, not Pelosi, for a jet large enough to reach California without refueling.
FULL QUESTION
Is it true that Nancy Pelosi travels from California three times a week on a private jet (200-seat size) at a cost to the taxpayers of $60K per flight? If so, this would total $480K per month or $5.7M per year. This comes from taxpayer money? If true, how can we criticize others? Is this a good use of taxpayers’ hard-earned money and what about the carbon footprint?
FULL ANSWER
Reports like this one, saying Pelosi routinely flies about in her own 757-size jet, have been floating around for almost two years. The claims were revived when Democrats complained that CEOs of the Big Three U.S. automakers had used their corporate jets to come to Washington to seek billions in federal aid. But the rumors are incorrect. Spokespeople for Pelosi and Andrews Air Force Base say that the speaker has used the big Air Force jet once, but she normally uses a much smaller plane, the same one used by the previous speaker of the House, Republican Dennis Hastert.
The spread of this rumor – and its first debunking – dates back to February 2007. At that time, the speaker of the House had had access to an Air Force craft for about five and a half years. Hastert had been issued a plane after Sept. 11, 2001, for security reasons (the speaker of the House is next in line after the vice president for presidential succession). Hastert used an Air Force C-20B, a small 12-seater based on the Gulfstream III, to travel to his home district in Illinois. (Ford and GM auto executives, incidentally, travel in the slightly larger Gulfstream IV.)
When Pelosi became speaker, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood, according to his own account , worried that the small craft would be unable to travel to her home district of San Francisco without stopping to refuel. Livingood, who was first elected by a Newt Gingrich-led House in 1995 , asked the Air Force and the Department of Defense about getting a bigger plane. He also requested clarifications of other rules regarding the aircraft – for instance, whether family members would be allowed to accompany Pelosi on her flights.
According to ABC News’ Jake Tapper, Capt. Herb McConnell of the Air Force said that the C-20B is sometimes able to make cross-country flights without refueling, but that it depends on headwinds. The much larger C-32, a military version of a Boeing 757 that’s usually used by the vice president and the first lady, is easily able to make a nonstop flight across the country. But it’s also on the lavish side. It’s not quite a 200-seater, but it does include 50 business-class seats and a full stateroom with a private lavatory and entertainment system.
We’ve seen no evidence, however, that Livingood specifically requested for Pelosi to have access to the C-32, which is the largest plane available at the 89th Airlift wing at Andrews Air Force Base. According to his statement, he requested a plane that was able to fly cross-country. Pelosi spokespeople at the time said that the speaker would be happy to use a smaller plane that could make a nonstop cross-country flight.
The Pentagon responded to this request by saying that it would make "every effort … to provide non-stop shuttle support," but that Pelosi’s aircraft access would depend on availability. Officials also clarified that Pelosi’s family members and other members of Congress could fly with her, but they would have to reimburse the government for their flights and food, paying the price of a coach ticket on a commercial airline. Pelosi would have to submit a written request for her family or other Congress members to accompany her on flights.
The Pentagon response stoked rumors that Pelosi had requested access to a posh personal craft for herself and anyone she wanted to bring along. Tapper traces the rumor back to House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, who called the C-32 "a flying Lincoln bedroom." That’s not a wholly inaccurate assessment of the plane (there’s even a pull-out bed!), but Blunt implied that Pelosi had expressly requested such extravagance. White House spokesman Tony Snow called this a "silly story," breaking with congressional Republicans who objected to Pelosi’s supposedly over-the-top request. At a press briefing, Snow reiterated that the conversations about plane travel were perfectly routine:
Snow, Feb. 7, 2007: After September 11th, the Department of Defense – with the consent of the White House – agreed that the Speaker of the House should have military transport. And so what is going on is that the Department of Defense is going through its rules and regulations and having conversations with the Speaker about it. So Speaker Hastert had access to military aircraft and Speaker Pelosi will, too.
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly told FactCheck.org that the speaker does have access to military air travel. When she flies to her home district, she uses whatever Air Force craft is available. Daly told us that "they try to do a nonstop flight." But the plane Pelosi uses most often is the C-20B, and she has occasionally used even smaller planes. According to Daly, Pelosi once used the C-32 when no other planes were available, but she also has had to stop for refueling on at least one trip on a smaller aircraft. Pelosi’s family has traveled with her a few times, but they had to reimburse the government for the cost of their tickets, as stipulated in the Pentagon’s letter. Congress members who are traveling to California sometimes do the same. Pelosi only uses the jet to travel between Washington, D.C., and San Francisco on official business. For any other trip, she and her family use commercial airlines.
Update, December 22: After this story was posted, we received word from Eric Sharman, deputy chief of public affairs at Andrews Air Force Base, confirming what Pelosi’s spokesman told us about her aircraft use. Sharman said that Pelosi has in the past used the C-20B and the slightly larger C-37A, depending on availability, and that these may or may not be able to make a nonstop cross-country flight depending on conditions. He confirms that Pelosi has used the C-32 once and only once, when no other planes were available.
Update, March 23: The Web site Judicial Watch has made public e-mails to and from the Department of Defense regarding Pelosi’s travel requests. The conservative organization claims the e-mails show that Pelosi has made “unreasonable requests for military travel.” These e-mails, however, back up what we were told by Pelosi’s staff and by the Air Force, i.e., that Pelosi did not usually travel on the C-32 and that any family members or other members of Congress she brought with her on flights to her home district were asked to reimburse the cost of a coach ticket. The messages are about smaller planes, not the 757-size jet. Also, most of the e-mails are not about shuttles to and from Pelosi’s home district at all, but are about congressional delegations to other states and countries. Pelosi’s office oversees transportation for these trips for all members of the House, not just the speaker. For a little more detail on the Judicial Watch-released e-mails, see our post on the FactCheck Wire, "Plane False."
Also, we originally said the C-32 seats 50. But an Air Force fact sheet, while showing that it has 50 seats, says that it seats 45. We are resolving this contradiction in favor of the lower number.
Amac, that is an entirely different subject you have responded to my comment with there. My comment doesn't even refer to what you have posted as a response in any way at all. Maybe you can do better if you stop grabbing everything close, throwing it on the wall and hoping it sticks.
I am aware of the contents of the comment you made as a reply to mine and the two are entirely different subjects.
Check yourself … the "cartoon" was yours … I mere quoted your comment in full.
Blah, Blah, Blah. You quoted history....quite a few times....which has NOTHING to do with what YOU originally started this artilce about, from the Fucking very beginning.
Now tell us....how prepared was the puerto Rican government for this storm, and why would the Mayor of San Juan....love F(FEDERAL)EMA before she didn't.
Talking points handed to her ?
John Kerry had a crap load of explaing to do with that same ...did before didn't....concept.
Blah, Blah, Blah. You quoted history....quite a few times....which has NOTHING to do with what YOU originally started this artilce about, from the Fucking very beginning.
YOU made the first reference and criticism to the Puerto Rico National Guard and punctuated it with the implication that Puerto Rico seems obtuse with regard to serving America.
YOUR quote …
Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
The history I quoted directly addressed that comment.
YOU made the first reference and criticism to the Puerto Rico National Guard and punctuated it with the implication that Puerto Rico seems obtuse with regard to serving America.
Never !
You just made that up.
Faux news ?
As this latest comment of YOURS sends numerous messages about your overall hate, so does your Histronic rant, that has/had nothing to do with the subject YOU provided !
Oh, by the way, where are the Puerto Rican government national gaurd peons anyway. Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
And …
You just made that up.
Faux news ?
As this latest comment of YOURS sends numerous messages about your overall hate, so does your Histronic rant, that has/had nothing to do with the subject YOU provided !
Although I don't see any direct CoC violation, there is a very indirect comment by It is Me, that Mac isn't telling the truth, which in fact, does not seem to be the case. Please avoid making these kind of comments in the future.
Of course, deviating to make some kind of other worldly point, on a specifically posted subject as above, could be concidered to be lying about the subject at hand......as it has NOTHING to do with the subject......couldn't it be ?
Amac, I don't have to take it up with Judicial Watch. Boy did you straw man me on this one, neglecting to put your "Factcheck.org" link in your reply, talking about something I wasn't even referring to in the first place. Your reply started with "Q:Did Nancy Pelosi order up a 200-seat jet for her personal use?", something I never even brought up.
Judicial Watch got their information from "Freedom of Information" and you don't even have to use them for my argument. All you have to do is read the PDF files you neglected to put in your own comment. Sorry, but that's just the way it is.
No, where's you link to your comment, Jake Tapper? Why don't I just put the comment you didn't completely put up as a response to yours? No, I'll just put the link instead.
Read the PDF files from my comment and see what a problem Pelosi was. Couldn't make up her mind if she needed the jets and other such things. She wanted a jet that didn't stop to refuel, but that's all about your comment which wasn't even what I was talking about in my comment.
The link to your comment:
Plus I'll put up the FOIA PDF files from my link. If you want to read them they are very revealing, but it takes a lot of time to get to the meat.
Amac, I don't have to take it up with Judicial Watch. Boy did you straw man me on this one, neglecting to put your "Factcheck.org" link in your reply, talking about something I wasn't even referring to in the first place. Your reply started with "
You attempted to equate what Pelosi did with what Price did … or … to make Pelosi RE:plane use, possibly the worst of the two.
Never did Pelosi book a private jet at $25,000 per pop to go from D.C. to Philly … D.C. to Phiily!!!
Nor did Pelosi attempt to bullshit her way to a mea culpa by offering to reimburse the taxpayer at 11% of what her travel cost … as Price did by saying he'd reimburse that taxpayer for "his seat" on the plane trips. One doesn't charter a single seat … one charters the entire plane at the cost of the entire plane!
Price racked up what has been estimated at anywhere from $400 thousand to $1 million on the private jets … took trips to an island where he owns property, visited his son and went out to lunch …
And all this after lecturing others about doing what he did after his holier-than-thou spiel. And as long as we're having this pissing contest, Price is guilty of insider trading while a member of Congress, writing legislation that directly benefitted a medical device company, the stock of which he owned, which caused him to make big bucks! Martha Stewart wen to prison for less.
So, whatever your reason for bringing Pelosi's airplane travel into a discussion in which Tom Price's indiscretions came up, here we are.
But, if you will, briefly tell me for what reason you broached Pelosi, and, if I owe you an apology, you shall receive it immediately in large type!
As for straw men/women, IMO, Pelosi is yours.
I invite you to prove me wrong.
FYI:
Republicans also sought to make hay out of then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi's alleged use of a 757 to jet her across the country to her San Francisco district. Those charges were largely debunked .
What I question is the point your post tries to make other than to equivocate regarding what Tom Price has done.
You brought in Pelosi … I added to your content and tossed in how the source of your content was the source of earlier misinformation regarding Pelosi.
And again, I am willing to apologize should you succinctly tell me why Pelosi in any way has to do with this discussion … assuming it has relevance to Price and Trump's other cabinet members doing essentially what Price did.
Just explain it to me and if it makes sense, I'll back off.
You brought in Pelosi … I added to your content and tossed in how the source of your content was the source of earlier misinformation regarding Pelosi.
That's the problem Amac. My post didn't have anything to do with what Price did, nor did it have anything to do with your reply to me about it. My source was from Judicial Watch, which didn't say anything about any of the information you had in your reply to me.
Your whole article had been bouncing off the wall every which way. I was the only one who kind of brought it back close to the subject of the article.
Trump and His Administration Live High on American Taxpayers while Others Suffer!
Who's living high? You started with the title and then ranted for I don't know how many comments about stuff that had nothing to do with the title of the article. It went all over the place, sorry to say it, but you were the lead contender in making that so.
Your reply to my first comment of information obtained by the FOIA with PDF files to back it up, was answered by Pelosi had to have the luxury jet to travel back and forth from Washington being false. I never said anything about that and my comment didn't imply that either.
The article by Politico is a left wing site. They are the ones who said we paid the salaries and benefits of the Clinton Foundation. Take it up with them. They have a link in the article, I suppose provides that information. I never said the Clinton Foundation had folded or any of those other things and neither did any links in my comment.
I think you and I better stop it right now because I'm reading your comments by looking them up a little before you do and then you're posting them. LOL
Yes but..but.. but Obama was just a poor black man who went to Washington to help the poor.
But he never associated with anyone other than millionaires and now billionaires and the poor are poorer than they were before he became President, not to mention the country is more divided than it has been in my life time.
But he never associated with anyone other than millionaires and now billionaires and the poor are poorer than they were before he became President, not to mention the country is more divided than it has been in my life time.
I am not going to dignify this with any response other than to say it is inaccurate and ugly.
If I am challenged for this, I will specifically rip it to pieces and …
… begin by citing racist vitriol and their origins/sources … all of which began before Obama's inauguration.
One exception …
Poverty was already on the upswing when Obama took office as the economy hurtled toward recession. Before George W. Bush took office, the poverty rate was 11.3 percent. When he left, it was 14.3 percent. So it's not as if Obama interrupted a rapidly improving poverty rate. In fact, as stated above, the trajectory of poverty has turned around under Obama, and it now appears to be falling.
But still. P overty did grow under Obama. So what did he do about it? He expanded a lot of programs that most directly affect the poorest Americans' lives, and, according to one expert, he did an admirable job.
"Obama did a good job in a really tough situation. Poverty would have increased a lot more without what he did," says Timothy Smeeding, professor of public affairs at the University of Wisconsin, Madison and former director of that school's Institute for Research on Poverty. "The American Recovery and Relief Act [more commonly known as the 2009 stimulus] did a great job helping our bottom end [of earners]."
The recession caused the big upswing in poverty under Obama, and the $830 billion stimulus package was his biggest effort to stop the economy's freefall. That's maybe the best place to examine his anti-poverty efforts.
For one thing, the stimulus package created millions of jobs. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has repeatedly found that the package created millions of jobs, saving people from unemployment — even today, there's still a small boost from the 2009 stimulus package. Not only that, but top economists agreed in a 2014 survey that the benefits of the stimulus outweighed the costs.
That law didn't make up for all of the jobs lost in the recession, but it did soften the blow and keep people from going without work ... which would have easily put them into poverty.
Moreover, the stimulus package also expanded lots of programs that disproportionately help lower earners: the earned income tax credit, unemployment insurance, SNAP (also known as food stamps).
Bill Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president.
By Election Day 2016, taxpayers will have paid out more than $16 million to fund Bill Clinton’s pension, travel, office expenses and even the salaries and benefits of staff at his family’s foundation, federal records show.
Since he left the White House in 2001, Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president, according to a POLITICO analysis of budget documents.
And this is from the left wing source, Politco.
You mean we were paying for salaries and benefits of staff at his corrupt family's foundation. No wonder Hillary was so confident of winning even in the states she didn't campaign in.
You mean we were paying for salaries and benefits of staff at his corrupt family's foundation.
No … we were not.
You report, I provide the reality.
For those who run with the same debunked stories, since you clearly accept what you wish to accept without bothering to do your homework, each run will get you a copied and pasted factoid.
FULL QUESTION
Has the Clinton Foundation been found to have committed fraud?
FULL ANSWER
The Clinton Foundation — the sprawling non-profit charity founded by Bill Clinton — has not been shut down, and Chelsea Clinton has not been charged with fraud. Those bogus charges were made in a May story about the foundation’s “newest scandal” on Clear Politics , which Facebook users flagged as potentially fake.
“They have been ordered to cease their operations,” the article says. “Their CEO, Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of former president Bill Clinton and Hillary is now charged with fraud and there is a warrant for her arrest.”
The article claims those details were “reported by InfoWars and then continued to get reported by bigger news sources like Fox, Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.” That’s false.
InfoWars is notorious for propagating conspiracy theories and publishing thinly sourced stories, but a search for “Clinton Foundation” on the website doesn’t return any results about it being shut down. Nor does a search for “Chelsea Clinton” produce results about a fraud charge or an arrest warrant. There were no such results on FoxNews.com, either.
The only seemingly related story on either website was about the Clinton Global Initiative, a Clinton Foundation offshoot, voluntarily downsizing operations in January 2017. Bill Clinton had previously announced in an August 2016 letter that CGI would no longer hold its annual conferences, whether Hillary Clinton was elected president or not.
Rush Limbaugh did falsely say “it is disbanded” when talking about the Clinton Foundation with a caller on his conservative radio show in March, but that isn’t where Clear Politics got its claims. Instead, the first half of its story originated at a prolific “satirical” website, America’s Last Line of Defense, last year.
America’s Last Line of Defense, Dec. 20, 2016: The Clinton Foundation, which has been given an A+ rating as a charitable organization, making it slightly more reputable than the Red Cross, has been ordered to cease operations. The CEO, Chelsea Clinton, daughter of Bill and Hillary Clinton, has been charged with fraud and a warrant issued for her arrest.
Following the news, which was first reported on InfoWars and then passed to other reputable news sources like Fox, Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, the Clintons were nowhere to be found for an interview.
The reason for the shutdown is the alleged “pay for play” donations that saw rich and powerful terrorists gain access to Washington DC in exchange for cash. During Clinton’s time as Secretary of State, it’s been rumored that the 9/11 attack mastermind along with the creator of ISIS and Osama Bin Laden were all invited to the White House residence for ice cream sundaes and an evening of Scattergories.
Bin Laden, who trained the 9/11 terrorists, was then sent to Cheyenne Mountain to be sent off-world and kept safe from prosecution while Obama and Clinton staged his death. Documents linking the Clinton Foundation directly to General George Hammond of SG Command were the final piece of the puzzle.
A disclaimer on thelastlineofdefense.org says: “America’s Last Line of Defense is a satirical publication that may sometimes appear to be telling the truth. We assure you that’s not the case. We present fiction as fact and our sources don’t actually exist. Names that represent actual people and places are purely coincidental and all images should be considered altered and do not in any way depict reality.”
Readers may have suspected as much when the story says Hillary Clinton was rumored to have had ice cream and played board games at the White House with terrorists.
In reality, the Clinton Foundation is still very active , though it has seen a drop in fundraising . Hillary Clinton left the organization before launching her bid for president, and the Hill reported in April that she may not return . Bill Clinton is still very involved. He released a statement in February with the foundation’s annual report that detailed the foundation’s plans for 2017.
The second half of the Clear Politics story alleges that “Chelsea used the Foundation’s money to pay for her wedding expenses and other life luxuries.” That section comes from the New York Post — a tabloid owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Fox News and the Wall Street Journal .
New York Post, Nov. 6, 2016: Chelsea Clinton used her family foundation’s cash to pay for her wedding, living expenses and taxes on gifts of cash from her parents, according to a bombshell email made public Sunday.
Doug Band, formerly a top aide to President Bill Clinton, griped about the former first daughter’s spending in a Jan. 4, 2012, email released by WikiLeaks.
“The investigation into her getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade, taxes on money from her parents…,” Band wrote to John Podesta, now Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman.
“I hope that you will speak to her and end this. Once we go down this road…”
Band’s message is contained in a chain of emails that were hacked from Podesta’s Gmail account. WikiLeaks has released more than 50,000 of the stolen emails over the past 32 days.
Earlier in his correspondence with Podesta, Band said he had “just received a call from a close friend” of Bill Clinton’s.
The Washington Post Fact Checker found that the allegation that “Chelsea Clinton used her family foundation’s cash to pay for her wedding” lacks evidence.
“Despite the breathless reporting, it’s hard to tell exactly what is going on in the email exchange, which is dated Jan. 4, 2012. There is no mention of actual Foundation monies being used for the wedding,” the Fact Checker wrote.
Other than the New York Post , no other U.S. newspaper ran the story about foundation payments for Clinton’s wedding, which was only picked up by “British tabloids, Fox News, Russian news agencies and various right-leaning websites,” the Fact Checker reported.
Both sections of this Clear Politics story are bogus — the first half is satire, and the second lacks evidence.
Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to help identify and label viral fake news stories flagged by readers on the social media network.
The original act provided for lifetime Secret Service protection for former presidents. In 1997, it was reduced to 10 years for presidents taking office after 1997. The 1997 amendment was reverted by the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012 ( Pub.L. 112–257 ). [2] All living former presidents and their spouses are now entitled to receive lifetime Secret Service protection. [3]
So let's see … Clinton was elected when …
Former President George W. Bush cost the government $1.098 million in pension money and other perks in fiscal 2015, racking up the highest tab of the four living ex-commanders-in-chief, according to a new report .
Former President Bill Clinton was not far behind George W. Bush, with a total GSA allowance of $924,000 in fiscal 2015, which included an annual federal pension and related benefits of $218,000 and an office space price tag of $429,000. The pensions of former presidents are equal to Executive Level I pay, which in 2015 was $203,700, and is $205,700 in 2016. GSA told CRS that it was “uncertain” why the pension benefits for Bush and Clinton exceeded the statutory caps, according to the report. CRS pointed out that the pension category includes “related benefits,” and that the figure could include health care costs for Bush and Clinton.
Thanks Amac, but I already knew that and it has nothing to do with my comment either.
Maybe you need to read my comment. Let me post it again here so you won't have to scroll for 20 minutes getting to it.
Taxpayer tab for Clinton Inc.: $16 million
3/12/2015
Bill Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president.
By Election Day 2016, taxpayers will have paid out more than $16 million to fund Bill Clinton’s pension, travel, office expenses and even the salaries and benefits of staff at his family’s foundation, federal records show.
Since he left the White House in 2001, Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president, according to a POLITICO analysis of budget documents.
And this is from the left wing source, Politco.
You mean we were paying for salaries and benefits of staff at his corrupt family's foundation. No wonder Hillary was so confident of winning even in the states she didn't campaign in.
Actually the presidents that played the most golf while in office were Woodrow Wilson and Dwight Eisenhower. Obama isn't even close to their totals. A thousand rounds in 8 years.
Actually the presidents that played the most golf while in office were Woodrow Wilson and Dwight Eisenhower. Obama isn't even close to their totals. A thousand rounds in 8 years.
If you're going to continue posting factual information …
Incompetence, Dishonesty, Lavish Living on the Taxpayer Dime.
Donald Trump … liar, con man, pussy grabber …
President of the United States!
Shame!
And I type this, Trump is at his golf resort in New Jersey … where his security detail has to rent his resort's golf carts in order to stay close to and protect him!
And WE have to pay for it!
I wonder...Were you this outraged with all the taxpayer funded golf outings of the previous tenant of the White House? How about all the taxpayer funded vacations for him and his family?
333 times in 8 years. At 52 weeks a year, that's just shy of every fucking weekend.
How much did the trips to Martha's Vineyard cost the taxpayer? Have to ask since the Obama's seemed to actually own nothing.
And someone up above extrapolating how many days he might gold if he is in office for 8 years and bitching about that? Really?
A rather specious argument; whatever they own, they never billed the taxpayer for staying at their own resort, etc. and putting the money in their own pockets as Trump has been doing.
I can just imagine him sitting at his desk in the White House building invoices on his computer, and directing him to bring the money directly to him. Not. His business interests are being managed elsewhere. I doubt he is even involved in that issue at that level.
To the person that is complaining about 4 bankruptcies. I believe it was 19 actually, from what I've read. Out of more than 500 business ventures. Not a bad rate considering the average business failure rate in the United States. And if you don't like the way Bankruptcy works, I'd urge you to contact your Congress critters and Senators and get the laws changed. I wonder why the Dems didn't fix that during the years they held all the controls?
Just like every other politician. And yet, you don't say a word about them.
Hiring multi-billionaires don't come cheap. WTF did American's expect, trump to change his spending habits ?
Well if so they were pretty short sighted I'd say.
Trump, the boss is used to the finer things in life, he's still the boss and still lives the life of luxury. Surprise !!
He hasn't changed, Now we just help pay for it.
billionaires don't come cheap
Holy shit!
Puerto Rico is an island …
… and it's fuckin' surrounded by …
… water!
Who knew?
Trump attacks San Juan mayor over hurricane response
WTF is wrong with this "person"?
Trump attacks hurricane-ravaged Puerto Ricans as lazy and ungrateful
From his long weekend at his New Jersey golf course, Trump has harsh words for victims of Hurricane Maria.
The Mayor of San Juan, who was very complimentary only a few days ago, has now been told by the Democrats that you must be nasty to Trump.
The POTUS is a dissembling child!
Then he shows up in PR and throws rolls of paper towels like he was at Marti Gras throwing glass beads.
The mayor is a liberal opportunist taking advantage of a tragedy to make a vile political statement.
The mayor is a liberal opportunist taking advantage of a tragedy to make a vile political statement.
I've explained this FOUR times and I'm not going to explain it again.
Heartless, partisan commentary in the face of human suffering requires a soul transplant.
Another compassionate conservative heard from … referring to the Mayor of San Juan …
Mike Cernovich 🇺🇸 Retweeted The Hill
She is garbage, she is a murderer, she failed her people and her duties and belongs in prison!
WTF did people expect when they installed a childlike, classless, authoritarian style, megalomaniac to be the most powerful human on the planet ?
Well now we see what we actually elected.
Good luck to the republicans, you own this lock, stock and barrel.
San Juan Mayor PRAISES FEMA and wants red tap removed. Trump Eliminates Red Tape (Jones act), Sends approx. 6,000 People to the island to help, Mayor says Trump Sucks.
Gee, I wonder if she was fed Our Democrats talking points shit too !
What a friggin loser of a politician she is. Typical of Puerto Rico. We send 17 billion or so in welfare to Puerto Rico every year. What are they doing with that money. In fact, what are they doing with the money they collect from their own citizens. Their infrastructure SUCKS a big one. Even Geraldo notes that in his reporting.
Oh, by the way, where are the Puerto Rican government national gaurd peons anyway. Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
Geee....they were so helpful.....IN THE FRIGGIN PAST ?
Now they AREN'T ?
What the hell does that have to do with the HERE and NOW !
Unbelievable, the regurgitation of unrelated arguments I see here.
I am so, so, so, sooooooo glad I am NOT in your league.
I am so, so, so, sooooooo glad I am NOT in your league.
Not as glad as I am!
If you were in my league …
… I'd secede.
It is SAD.....REALLY SAD....when one tries to dig into NOTHINGNESS as an argument !
Since comprehension is hard for some.....MY comments were based on the "Here and Now". Not some Past accomplishment.
Does YOUR article not speak of the "Here and Now" ?
OR
Is your article about past accomplishments.
Let me know please, so I know how and which way to comment to meet YOUR satisfaction.
Facefuckingpalm !
You STILL have nothing, and that's after reading what you regurgitated from some web page !
OUR government responded quick, compared to where this land location is !
Democrat types.....unbelievable what they think humans should be able to do when it suites their cause.
SUPERMAN.....WHERE THE FUCK ARE YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment removed for CoC violation [ph] Your contributions here are routinely contemptible.
Buddy protection is so CUTE these days.
i have said NOTHING that wasn't actually TRUE.
Funny thing is, the ones I respond to, "Know not what they type" !
I don't know what you said in the part that was CoC-deleted, but I can say without hesitation that I agree with it whole-heartedly, especially if it included the words 'party-pharm impaired upstart shitbag with a refusal to use any and all things spell-check'.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm putting myself in the bad corner because I've shamed us all.
LMAO !
Cudos Sister (Love the Name). That was funny. LOL !
"party-pharm impaired upstart shitbag with a refusal to use any and all things spell-check"
We should team up. We both come up with some good JonStewart/BillMaher/StephenColbert/JimmyFallon/JimmyKimmel-ish material. A group maybe?
Front row seats for you! Lol
Sounds good to me. But let's not forget 2 very important and influential entities: John Oliver (a pox upon you for the omittance), and of course NT's original bad-boy, BadFish, who has inspired many of my own Turret's Syndrome-like outbursts.
I'm buying you your beverage of choice.
Hal's too.
John Oliver..... a blast from the sordid, fondly (sometimes) remembered, past. Many thanks.
The first round is on me, but you have to bring your own lamp shade.
Judicial Watch Uncovers New Documents Detailing Pelosi’s Use of Air Force Aircraft for Her Family in 2010
Overall, according to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch in January 2011, Pelosi used the Air Force aircraft for a total of 43 trips, covering 90,155 miles, from January 1 through October 1, 2010.
Judicial Watch, through FOIA, continues to pursue other records related to Pelosi’s use of Air Force aircraft.Previous documents obtained by Judicial Watch show the former Speaker’s military travel cost the USAF $2,100,744.59 over one two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol.
For example, purchases for one Pelosi-led congressional delegation traveling from Washington, DC, through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq May 15-20, 2008 included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine.
Judicial Watch also previously uncovered internal Department of Defense (DOD) documents email correspondence detailing attempts by DOD staff to accommodate Pelosi’s numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker’s last minute cancellations and changes.
For example, in response to a series of requests for military aircraft, one DOD official wrote, “Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi’s team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?…[T]here’s no need to block every weekend ‘just in case’
Q: Did Nancy Pelosi order up a 200-seat jet for her personal use?
A: The Democratic House speaker normally flies in a 12-seat Air Force jet, just as her Republican predecessor did. This rumor stems from a request by the House sergeant at arms, not Pelosi, for a jet large enough to reach California without refueling.
FULL QUESTION
Is it true that Nancy Pelosi travels from California three times a week on a private jet (200-seat size) at a cost to the taxpayers of $60K per flight? If so, this would total $480K per month or $5.7M per year. This comes from taxpayer money? If true, how can we criticize others? Is this a good use of taxpayers’ hard-earned money and what about the carbon footprint?
FULL ANSWER
Reports like this one, saying Pelosi routinely flies about in her own 757-size jet, have been floating around for almost two years. The claims were revived when Democrats complained that CEOs of the Big Three U.S. automakers had used their corporate jets to come to Washington to seek billions in federal aid. But the rumors are incorrect. Spokespeople for Pelosi and Andrews Air Force Base say that the speaker has used the big Air Force jet once, but she normally uses a much smaller plane, the same one used by the previous speaker of the House, Republican Dennis Hastert.
The spread of this rumor – and its first debunking – dates back to February 2007. At that time, the speaker of the House had had access to an Air Force craft for about five and a half years. Hastert had been issued a plane after Sept. 11, 2001, for security reasons (the speaker of the House is next in line after the vice president for presidential succession). Hastert used an Air Force C-20B, a small 12-seater based on the Gulfstream III, to travel to his home district in Illinois. (Ford and GM auto executives, incidentally, travel in the slightly larger Gulfstream IV.)
When Pelosi became speaker, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood, according to his own account , worried that the small craft would be unable to travel to her home district of San Francisco without stopping to refuel. Livingood, who was first elected by a Newt Gingrich-led House in 1995 , asked the Air Force and the Department of Defense about getting a bigger plane. He also requested clarifications of other rules regarding the aircraft – for instance, whether family members would be allowed to accompany Pelosi on her flights.
According to ABC News’ Jake Tapper, Capt. Herb McConnell of the Air Force said that the C-20B is sometimes able to make cross-country flights without refueling, but that it depends on headwinds. The much larger C-32, a military version of a Boeing 757 that’s usually used by the vice president and the first lady, is easily able to make a nonstop flight across the country. But it’s also on the lavish side. It’s not quite a 200-seater, but it does include 50 business-class seats and a full stateroom with a private lavatory and entertainment system.
We’ve seen no evidence, however, that Livingood specifically requested for Pelosi to have access to the C-32, which is the largest plane available at the 89th Airlift wing at Andrews Air Force Base. According to his statement, he requested a plane that was able to fly cross-country. Pelosi spokespeople at the time said that the speaker would be happy to use a smaller plane that could make a nonstop cross-country flight.
The Pentagon responded to this request by saying that it would make "every effort … to provide non-stop shuttle support," but that Pelosi’s aircraft access would depend on availability. Officials also clarified that Pelosi’s family members and other members of Congress could fly with her, but they would have to reimburse the government for their flights and food, paying the price of a coach ticket on a commercial airline. Pelosi would have to submit a written request for her family or other Congress members to accompany her on flights.
The Pentagon response stoked rumors that Pelosi had requested access to a posh personal craft for herself and anyone she wanted to bring along. Tapper traces the rumor back to House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, who called the C-32 "a flying Lincoln bedroom." That’s not a wholly inaccurate assessment of the plane (there’s even a pull-out bed!), but Blunt implied that Pelosi had expressly requested such extravagance. White House spokesman Tony Snow called this a "silly story," breaking with congressional Republicans who objected to Pelosi’s supposedly over-the-top request. At a press briefing, Snow reiterated that the conversations about plane travel were perfectly routine:
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly told FactCheck.org that the speaker does have access to military air travel. When she flies to her home district, she uses whatever Air Force craft is available. Daly told us that "they try to do a nonstop flight." But the plane Pelosi uses most often is the C-20B, and she has occasionally used even smaller planes. According to Daly, Pelosi once used the C-32 when no other planes were available, but she also has had to stop for refueling on at least one trip on a smaller aircraft. Pelosi’s family has traveled with her a few times, but they had to reimburse the government for the cost of their tickets, as stipulated in the Pentagon’s letter. Congress members who are traveling to California sometimes do the same. Pelosi only uses the jet to travel between Washington, D.C., and San Francisco on official business. For any other trip, she and her family use commercial airlines.
Update, December 22: After this story was posted, we received word from Eric Sharman, deputy chief of public affairs at Andrews Air Force Base, confirming what Pelosi’s spokesman told us about her aircraft use. Sharman said that Pelosi has in the past used the C-20B and the slightly larger C-37A, depending on availability, and that these may or may not be able to make a nonstop cross-country flight depending on conditions. He confirms that Pelosi has used the C-32 once and only once, when no other planes were available.
Update, March 23: The Web site Judicial Watch has made public e-mails to and from the Department of Defense regarding Pelosi’s travel requests. The conservative organization claims the e-mails show that Pelosi has made “unreasonable requests for military travel.” These e-mails, however, back up what we were told by Pelosi’s staff and by the Air Force, i.e., that Pelosi did not usually travel on the C-32 and that any family members or other members of Congress she brought with her on flights to her home district were asked to reimburse the cost of a coach ticket. The messages are about smaller planes, not the 757-size jet. Also, most of the e-mails are not about shuttles to and from Pelosi’s home district at all, but are about congressional delegations to other states and countries. Pelosi’s office oversees transportation for these trips for all members of the House, not just the speaker. For a little more detail on the Judicial Watch-released e-mails, see our post on the FactCheck Wire, "Plane False."
Also, we originally said the C-32 seats 50. But an Air Force fact sheet, while showing that it has 50 seats, says that it seats 45. We are resolving this contradiction in favor of the lower number.
– Jess Henig
Epstein, Edward. " Pelosi, Snow slam critics: ‘Silly story .’" San Francisco Chronicle. 8 Feb. 2007.
White House press briefings. " Press Briefing by Tony Snow ." 7 Feb. 2007.
CNN. " House security chief: Pelosi didn’t ask for plane; I did ." 9 Feb. 2007.
Amac, that is an entirely different subject you have responded to my comment with there. My comment doesn't even refer to what you have posted as a response in any way at all. Maybe you can do better if you stop grabbing everything close, throwing it on the wall and hoping it sticks.
I am aware of the contents of the comment you made as a reply to mine and the two are entirely different subjects.
Pretty much a TYPICAL thing for Liberal types
!
Pretty much a TYPICAL thing for Liberal types
!
Another example of your "league".
But I'll give you this …
… at least it amuses its players with cartoons.
As YOU use one too....Nonesensical history that has NOTHING to do with the subject at hand....as put out by YOU in the friggin FIRST place ?
liberals.....go figure.....chastise.... then do the SAME THING, only with WORDS !
Blah, Blah, Blah. You quoted history....quite a few times....which has NOTHING to do with what YOU originally started this artilce about, from the Fucking very beginning.
Now tell us....how prepared was the puerto Rican government for this storm, and why would the Mayor of San Juan....love F(FEDERAL)EMA before she didn't.
Talking points handed to her ?
John Kerry had a crap load of explaing to do with that same ...did before didn't....concept.
I'll let you know when your in MY LEAGUE.
Blah, Blah, Blah. You quoted history....quite a few times....which has NOTHING to do with what YOU originally started this artilce about, from the Fucking very beginning.
YOU made the first reference and criticism to the Puerto Rico National Guard and punctuated it with the implication that Puerto Rico seems obtuse with regard to serving America.
YOUR quote …
Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
The history I quoted directly addressed that comment.
Never !
You just made that up.
Faux news ?
As this latest comment of YOURS sends numerous messages about your overall hate, so does your Histronic rant, that has/had nothing to do with the subject YOU provided !
LAME !
YOUR quote.
Oh, by the way, where are the Puerto Rican government national gaurd peons anyway. Don't they "Serve and Protect" over there too ?
And …
You just made that up.
Faux news ?
As this latest comment of YOURS sends numerous messages about your overall hate, so does your Histronic rant, that has/had nothing to do with the subject YOU provided !
LAME !
And now you imply I'm a liar.
Going forward, please stay off of my articles.
That comment of mine had NOTHING to do with what YOU JUST Accused. Do you not read what you write ?
Do you not comprehend what your comment on ?
Comment removed for skirting the CoC [ph]
Although I don't see any direct CoC violation, there is a very indirect comment by It is Me, that Mac isn't telling the truth, which in fact, does not seem to be the case. Please avoid making these kind of comments in the future.
He Proposed the concept. NOT ME !
Where does a "Skirt" start and end ?
Ankels, Knees, Thighs...hips ?
Of course, deviating to make some kind of other worldly point, on a specifically posted subject as above, could be concidered to be lying about the subject at hand......as it has NOTHING to do with the subject......couldn't it be ?
Amac, I don't have to take it up with Judicial Watch. Boy did you straw man me on this one, neglecting to put your "Factcheck.org" link in your reply, talking about something I wasn't even referring to in the first place. Your reply started with "Q: Did Nancy Pelosi order up a 200-seat jet for her personal use?", something I never even brought up.
Judicial Watch got their information from "Freedom of Information" and you don't even have to use them for my argument. All you have to do is read the PDF files you neglected to put in your own comment. Sorry, but that's just the way it is.
No, where's you link to your comment, Jake Tapper? Why don't I just put the comment you didn't completely put up as a response to yours? No, I'll just put the link instead.
Read the PDF files from my comment and see what a problem Pelosi was. Couldn't make up her mind if she needed the jets and other such things. She wanted a jet that didn't stop to refuel, but that's all about your comment which wasn't even what I was talking about in my comment.
The link to your comment:
Plus I'll put up the FOIA PDF files from my link. If you want to read them they are very revealing, but it takes a lot of time to get to the meat.
Documents
You attempted to equate what Pelosi did with what Price did … or … to make Pelosi RE:plane use, possibly the worst of the two.
Never did Pelosi book a private jet at $25,000 per pop to go from D.C. to Philly … D.C. to Phiily!!!
Nor did Pelosi attempt to bullshit her way to a mea culpa by offering to reimburse the taxpayer at 11% of what her travel cost … as Price did by saying he'd reimburse that taxpayer for "his seat" on the plane trips. One doesn't charter a single seat … one charters the entire plane at the cost of the entire plane!
Price racked up what has been estimated at anywhere from $400 thousand to $1 million on the private jets … took trips to an island where he owns property, visited his son and went out to lunch …
And all this after lecturing others about doing what he did after his holier-than-thou spiel. And as long as we're having this pissing contest, Price is guilty of insider trading while a member of Congress, writing legislation that directly benefitted a medical device company, the stock of which he owned, which caused him to make big bucks! Martha Stewart wen to prison for less.
So, whatever your reason for bringing Pelosi's airplane travel into a discussion in which Tom Price's indiscretions came up, here we are.
But, if you will, briefly tell me for what reason you broached Pelosi, and, if I owe you an apology, you shall receive it immediately in large type!
As for straw men/women, IMO, Pelosi is yours.
I invite you to prove me wrong.
FYI:
Republicans also sought to make hay out of then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi's alleged use of a 757 to jet her across the country to her San Francisco district. Those charges were largely debunked .
impasse
I don't question any of what you posted, Six.
What I question is the point your post tries to make other than to equivocate regarding what Tom Price has done.
You brought in Pelosi … I added to your content and tossed in how the source of your content was the source of earlier misinformation regarding Pelosi.
And again, I am willing to apologize should you succinctly tell me why Pelosi in any way has to do with this discussion … assuming it has relevance to Price and Trump's other cabinet members doing essentially what Price did.
Just explain it to me and if it makes sense, I'll back off.
IMPASSE ACCEPTED.
Peace.
I like them at the thighs, with just a hint of morning dew peeking out.
Too long to read, and irrelevant anyway.
This is pathetic. When, where and how did politicians ever not live off the population? I would really like to know.
The beef with Pres. Trump is he is a millionaire....get over it!
Obama made his million by being President.....I say, go for it!
Yes but..but.. but Obama was just a poor black man who went to Washington to help the poor.
But he never associated with anyone other than millionaires and now billionaires and the poor are poorer than they were before he became President, not to mention the country is more divided than it has been in my life time.
I am not going to dignify this with any response other than to say it is inaccurate and ugly.
If I am challenged for this, I will specifically rip it to pieces and …
… begin by citing racist vitriol and their origins/sources … all of which began before Obama's inauguration.
One exception …
Poverty was already on the upswing when Obama took office as the economy hurtled toward recession. Before George W. Bush took office, the poverty rate was 11.3 percent. When he left, it was 14.3 percent. So it's not as if Obama interrupted a rapidly improving poverty rate. In fact, as stated above, the trajectory of poverty has turned around under Obama, and it now appears to be falling.
But still. P overty did grow under Obama. So what did he do about it? He expanded a lot of programs that most directly affect the poorest Americans' lives, and, according to one expert, he did an admirable job.
"Obama did a good job in a really tough situation. Poverty would have increased a lot more without what he did," says Timothy Smeeding, professor of public affairs at the University of Wisconsin, Madison and former director of that school's Institute for Research on Poverty. "The American Recovery and Relief Act [more commonly known as the 2009 stimulus] did a great job helping our bottom end [of earners]."
The recession caused the big upswing in poverty under Obama, and the $830 billion stimulus package was his biggest effort to stop the economy's freefall. That's maybe the best place to examine his anti-poverty efforts.
For one thing, the stimulus package created millions of jobs. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has repeatedly found that the package created millions of jobs, saving people from unemployment — even today, there's still a small boost from the 2009 stimulus package. Not only that, but top economists agreed in a 2014 survey that the benefits of the stimulus outweighed the costs.
That law didn't make up for all of the jobs lost in the recession, but it did soften the blow and keep people from going without work ... which would have easily put them into poverty.
Moreover, the stimulus package also expanded lots of programs that disproportionately help lower earners: the earned income tax credit, unemployment insurance, SNAP (also known as food stamps).
All I can say is....thank God Obama didn't own a golf course!
All I can say is what a shame trump does and is billing us for it.
Taxpayer tab for Clinton Inc.: $16 million
3/12/2015
Bill Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president.
By Election Day 2016, taxpayers will have paid out more than $16 million to fund Bill Clinton’s pension, travel, office expenses and even the salaries and benefits of staff at his family’s foundation, federal records show.
Since he left the White House in 2001, Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president, according to a POLITICO analysis of budget documents.
And this is from the left wing source, Politco.
You mean we were paying for salaries and benefits of staff at his corrupt family's foundation. No wonder Hillary was so confident of winning even in the states she didn't campaign in.
You mean we were paying for salaries and benefits of staff at his corrupt family's foundation.
No … we were not.
You report, I provide the reality.
For those who run with the same debunked stories, since you clearly accept what you wish to accept without bothering to do your homework, each run will get you a copied and pasted factoid.
FULL QUESTION
Has the Clinton Foundation been found to have committed fraud?
FULL ANSWER
The Clinton Foundation — the sprawling non-profit charity founded by Bill Clinton — has not been shut down, and Chelsea Clinton has not been charged with fraud. Those bogus charges were made in a May story about the foundation’s “newest scandal” on Clear Politics , which Facebook users flagged as potentially fake.
“They have been ordered to cease their operations,” the article says. “Their CEO, Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of former president Bill Clinton and Hillary is now charged with fraud and there is a warrant for her arrest.”
The article claims those details were “reported by InfoWars and then continued to get reported by bigger news sources like Fox, Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.” That’s false.
InfoWars is notorious for propagating conspiracy theories and publishing thinly sourced stories, but a search for “Clinton Foundation” on the website doesn’t return any results about it being shut down. Nor does a search for “Chelsea Clinton” produce results about a fraud charge or an arrest warrant. There were no such results on FoxNews.com, either.
The only seemingly related story on either website was about the Clinton Global Initiative, a Clinton Foundation offshoot, voluntarily downsizing operations in January 2017. Bill Clinton had previously announced in an August 2016 letter that CGI would no longer hold its annual conferences, whether Hillary Clinton was elected president or not.
Rush Limbaugh did falsely say “it is disbanded” when talking about the Clinton Foundation with a caller on his conservative radio show in March, but that isn’t where Clear Politics got its claims. Instead, the first half of its story originated at a prolific “satirical” website, America’s Last Line of Defense, last year.
A disclaimer on thelastlineofdefense.org says: “America’s Last Line of Defense is a satirical publication that may sometimes appear to be telling the truth. We assure you that’s not the case. We present fiction as fact and our sources don’t actually exist. Names that represent actual people and places are purely coincidental and all images should be considered altered and do not in any way depict reality.”
Readers may have suspected as much when the story says Hillary Clinton was rumored to have had ice cream and played board games at the White House with terrorists.
In reality, the Clinton Foundation is still very active , though it has seen a drop in fundraising . Hillary Clinton left the organization before launching her bid for president, and the Hill reported in April that she may not return . Bill Clinton is still very involved. He released a statement in February with the foundation’s annual report that detailed the foundation’s plans for 2017.
The second half of the Clear Politics story alleges that “Chelsea used the Foundation’s money to pay for her wedding expenses and other life luxuries.” That section comes from the New York Post — a tabloid owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Fox News and the Wall Street Journal .
The Washington Post Fact Checker found that the allegation that “Chelsea Clinton used her family foundation’s cash to pay for her wedding” lacks evidence.
“Despite the breathless reporting, it’s hard to tell exactly what is going on in the email exchange, which is dated Jan. 4, 2012. There is no mention of actual Foundation monies being used for the wedding,” the Fact Checker wrote.
Other than the New York Post , no other U.S. newspaper ran the story about foundation payments for Clinton’s wedding, which was only picked up by “British tabloids, Fox News, Russian news agencies and various right-leaning websites,” the Fact Checker reported.
Both sections of this Clear Politics story are bogus — the first half is satire, and the second lacks evidence.
Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to help identify and label viral fake news stories flagged by readers on the social media network.
Sources
Arrington, Jacob. “ Clinton Foundation Newest Scandal .” Clear Politics. Accessed 7 Jun 2017.
Derespina, Cody. “ Clinton Global Initiative to lay off employees, shut down amid dwindling donations .” FoxNews.com. 16 Jan 2017.
Vogel, Kenneth, and O’Donnell, Katy. “ Clinton Foundation to lay off dozens of staff .” Politico. 20 Sep 2016.
The Rush Limbaugh Show. “ What Happened to the Clinton Foundation? ” Transcript. 15 Mar 2017.
Clinton, Bill. “ Empowering People to Build Better Futures for Themselves, Their Families, and Their Communities .” Clinton Foundation. 22 Aug 2016.
Stryker. “ Breaking: Clinton Foundation Ordered To Cease Operations – Chelsea Charged With Fraud .” TheLastLineofDefense.org. 20 Dec 2016.
TheLastLineofDefense.org. “ About Us .” Accessed 7 June 2017.
Clinton Foundation. “ Press Releases and Statements .” Clintonfoundation.org. Accessed 13 June 2017.
Eder, Steve, Fink, Sheri and Chozick, Amy. “ Soul-Searching at Clinton Foundation in Trump Era .” Nytimes.com. 2 Feb 2017.
Parnes, Amie. “ Hillary Clinton unlikely to return to family foundation .” Thehill.com. 5 April 2017.
Bill Clinton. “ 2016 .” Clintonfoundation.org. Accessed 13 June 2017.
Schultz, Marisa, and Golding, Bruce. “ Chelsea Clinton used foundation to help pay for wedding: email .” New York Post. 6 Nov 2016.
Kessler, Glenn. “ Did the Clinton Foundation pay for Chelsea’s wedding ?” Washington Post Fact Checker. 4 Jan 2017.
“ Leaked Band Email: Chelsea Used Clinton Foundation Resources For Her Wedding .” Gop.com. 6 Nov 2016.
ConsNation.com. “ Disclaimer .” Accessed 7 Jun 2017.
Clear Politics. “ Disclaimer .” Accessed 7 Jun 2017.
Conservative Nation. “ Clinton Foundation Ordered To Cease Operations .” Consnation.com. 3 May 2017.
Conservative Army. “ Clinton Foundation Ordered To Cease Operations – Chelsea Charged With Fraud .” UsaPoliticsToday.com. 3 May 2017.
______________________________________________
And now you have the facts.
The original act provided for lifetime Secret Service protection for former presidents. In 1997, it was reduced to 10 years for presidents taking office after 1997. The 1997 amendment was reverted by the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012 ( Pub.L. 112–257 ). [2] All living former presidents and their spouses are now entitled to receive lifetime Secret Service protection. [3]
So let's see … Clinton was elected when …
Former President George W. Bush cost the government $1.098 million in pension money and other perks in fiscal 2015, racking up the highest tab of the four living ex-commanders-in-chief, according to a new report .
Former President Bill Clinton was not far behind George W. Bush, with a total GSA allowance of $924,000 in fiscal 2015, which included an annual federal pension and related benefits of $218,000 and an office space price tag of $429,000. The pensions of former presidents are equal to Executive Level I pay, which in 2015 was $203,700, and is $205,700 in 2016. GSA told CRS that it was “uncertain” why the pension benefits for Bush and Clinton exceeded the statutory caps, according to the report. CRS pointed out that the pension category includes “related benefits,” and that the figure could include health care costs for Bush and Clinton.
Free knowledge!
Thanks Amac, but I already knew that and it has nothing to do with my comment either.
Maybe you need to read my comment. Let me post it again here so you won't have to scroll for 20 minutes getting to it.
Taxpayer tab for Clinton Inc.: $16 million
3/12/2015
Bill Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president.
By Election Day 2016, taxpayers will have paid out more than $16 million to fund Bill Clinton’s pension, travel, office expenses and even the salaries and benefits of staff at his family’s foundation, federal records show.
Since he left the White House in 2001, Clinton and his office have received more money through the Former Presidents Act than any other ex-president, according to a POLITICO analysis of budget documents.
And this is from the left wing source, Politco.
You mean we were paying for salaries and benefits of staff at his corrupt family's foundation. No wonder Hillary was so confident of winning even in the states she didn't campaign in.
Just imagine if she had been elected. The Clinton's are established criminals. Trump is just an amateur.
All I can say is....thank God Obama didn't own a golf course!
I wish I knew what your point was there. I have ideas, but I'm too much of a gentleman to accuse you of such ignorance.
Again, allegations regarding the Foundation are false; and I posted both how the Act works and the numbers.
Actually the presidents that played the most golf while in office were Woodrow Wilson and Dwight Eisenhower. Obama isn't even close to their totals. A thousand rounds in 8 years.
If you're going to continue posting factual information …
… "reality" will still have a place on NT.*
* To the chagrin of some.
Thanks for the reality break, Kav.