|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: April 23, 2015, 04:42:36 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 4-23-2015
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Daily Digest
Apr. 23, 2015
THE FOUNDATION
“Resolve to perform what you ought. Perform without fail what you resolve.” —Benjamin Franklin, Autobiography, 1772
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
Clinton Foundation Profited While Russia Seized U.S. Uranium1
Today, Russia controls a fifth of the uranium production in the United States, according to The New York Times. Needless to say, this is the bitter fruit of the Obama administration’s foolish “Russian reset.” Thanks, Hillary Clinton. While a Russian company was taking over energy company Uranium One from 2009 to 2013, millions of dollars tied to the company’s previous owners ended up in the Clinton Foundation’s coffers. When the deal was made public, Bill Clinton was invited to speak to a Kremlin-linked bank that was promoting the stock of Uranium One. He was paid $500,000. So not only did the Clintons profit off of Russia, but Hillary did so while damaging national security in her critical position at the State Department.
Obama spokesman Josh Earnest2 wouldn’t deny that Clinton Foundation activity influenced the former secretary of state’s actions, saying, “I’m not going to be in a position here where every time someone raises a spurious claim that I’m going to be the one to sit down here and say it’s not true.” But the Clinton Foundation is refilling its tax returns3 because there were “errors.” Apparently, the nonprofit didn’t properly disclose donations from U.S. and foreign governments from 2010 to 2012 — y'know, when Clinton was secretary of state. That’s a tacit admission there’s much more here than a vast right-wing conspiracy, and the nonprofit may be the thing that finally brings Clinton’s career to a close. More…4
Don’t miss Will the Clinton Foundation Be Hillary’s Downfall?5
VA Helped ATF Seize Veterans' Guns6
By now, most everyone knows about the Veterans Affairs wait-time scandal7. But health care isn’t the only thing for which the VA is making our veterans wait. The Daily Caller reports8, “The Department of Veterans Affairs is disarming America’s veterans by getting them placed on the FBI’s criminal background-check list. The VA sends veterans' personal medical and financial information directly to the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, which can seize their guns in home raids.” Sen. Chuck Grassley sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder demanding to know why “99.3% of all names reported to the NICS list’s ‘mental defective’ category were provided by the Veterans Administration (VA) even though reporting requirements apply to all federal agencies.” That’s a great question, and one that we’re not holding our breath for Holder to answer. Disarming the public — even veterans specifically trained to use weapons — is a key objective for the Obama administration, and they’ll use whatever means necessary. More…9
Cleveland Recreates Gun Offender Registry10
Thumbing its collective nose at Ohio state law, the city of Cleveland passed a battery of gun control laws April 20. Among the changes, the city plans on running a gun-offender registry, requiring residents to notify police when they sell firearms and jailing anyone for six months who doesn’t secure guns to the extent the city deems they should. The measures overreach the state’s gun laws. The editorial board11 of The Plain Dealer and Northeast Ohio Media Group supported the gun control ordinances. “The legislation also is a direct challenge to state lawmakers who have sought at every turn, abetted by misguided Supreme Court rulings, to deny Ohio cities their constitutionally guaranteed home-rule rights when it comes to gun laws,” the board wrote. “In 2010, the state high court overturned a Cleveland ban on assault weapons as well as city handgun registration requirements. This legislation could be challenged on similar grounds. But until then, it is law.” On April 21, Ohioans For Concealed Carry sued the city12 over the ordinances. “Shall not be infringed” doesn’t leave a lot of wiggle room for anti-gun cities to create a patchwork of laws that make a constitutionally sanctioned act criminal in one zip code but not the next. More…13
Don’t Miss Alexander’s Column
Read Earth Day, the EPA and Regulatory Tyranny14, on how this leftist celebration is about economic centralization, not environmental protection.
If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email, update your subscription here15.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Democrats Trade Blows Over Trade16
By Allyne Caan
When Republicans disagree with Barack Obama, it’s par for the course; when Democrats revolt against their dear leader, it’s downright entertaining. Obama, who once could do no wrong, now has congressional liberals bucking his bid to push forward a free-trade agreement with 12 Pacific Rim nations via fast-track legislation.
At issue is bipartisan, bicameral trade-promotion authority (TPA) legislation, introduced last week by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI). It would give the president authority, within the parameters of certain rules, to negotiate the Asian trade agreement and present it to Congress for an up-or-down vote, no amendments allowed. Obama claims such authority is necessary to close negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a 12-nation free-trade deal that some say would be jeopardized if the participating nations think Congress may amend the deal after terms are finalized.
But while Republicans generally favor free trade, many high-powered liberals oppose Obama and are saying “not so fast,” despite the fact that almost every president since FDR has had similar authority. One reason for the opposition could be that the powerful AFL-CIO, which, according to OpenSecrets.org17, spent $1 million supporting Democrat candidates in the 2014 election cycle and an equal amount opposing Republicans, has not only come out strongly against TPA but also announced18 it is suspending campaign contributions to federal candidates in order to fight the White House trade plans.
Obama promised19 he will sign his name only “to an agreement that helps ordinary Americans get ahead.” But Democrats opposing him aren’t buying it. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), for example, said, “All evidence I’ve seen is that this hurts middle-class incomes,” and as a result he “can’t be for it.”
Former Maryland governor and potential Democrat presidential candidate Martin O'Malley also declared his opposition20 to TPP, writing in an email to supporters, “To me, opposing bad trade deals like TPP is just common sense.”
Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who championed an Asian trade pact while secretary of state, hasn’t yet taken a public position on TPP. After all, any AFL-CIO contributions may have to outweigh whatever the Clinton Foundation brought in5. Hillary’s positions go to the highest bidder.
Meanwhile, Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) believes only a quarter of Senate Democrats are with the White House. In Durbin’s words, “A fourth, hell no; a fourth, lean yes; and a big group undecided.” At least one of those “hell no’s” comes from Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, who said21 of supporting the TPA, “You couldn’t find a person to ask this question who feels more negatively about it than I do. … So the answer is not only no, but hell no.”
Also in Reid’s camp is Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who wrote a scathing opposition22 to the TPP and fast-track legislation, claiming the government doesn’t want Americans to see what’s in the deal. For Democrats, that’s usually a plus (think ObamaCare), but how the arguments change when Warren tries to fight a trade deal. |
