Rob Reiner Explains Why Millions Of Americans Support Trump: “They’re All Racist”

When asked to explain why "million and milions of people listen to what trump says and voted for him," infamously liberal director Rob Reiner replied "There are a lot of people who are racist…" … And scene.

 

Morning Joe co-anchor Willie Geist asked Reiner,

"There are millions and millions of people who do not watch this show that actually like what they hear from Donald Trump. And they aren't taking messages and orders from us in the media. But they listen to what he says for themselves and vote for him. How do you explain that?"

 

"There are a lot of people who are racist," Reiner quickly replied.

 

Joe Scarborough was shocked, remarking, "Oh my God, did you just say that?"

Enjoy the cringe-worthy moment…

 

Luckily Reiner has Honest Hillary to "save the world" from Trump and his racist hordes.

via http://ift.tt/1SSpgkw Tyler Durden

Remember That “Taxation Without Representation” Thing? It’s Happening Again

Submitted by Nick Bernabe via TheAntiMedia.org,

Everybody remembers learning about one of the central rallying cries of the American Revolution: “No taxation without representation!” Yes, the settlers in early America thought the idea of being forced to pay taxes without having a say in the decision-making of their overlords was very problematic.

In particular, the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back was a small tax on tea imports on the colonies, who did not have representation in the British parliament; this led to the infamous Boston Tea Party. Seems pretty minuscule compared to today’s 74,608-page tax code, right? Fortunately for modern-day Americans, the founding fathers fixed that problem after they kicked the crown to the curb… except they didn’t.

Oops.

What I’m telling you is that taxation without representation persists today, and that it’s even worse now than when it sparked a revolution.

So let’s start with this meme I stumbled upon while surfing the interwebz yesterday:

taxation without representation

I didn’t want to believe it, but it’s true. As the Independent Voter Network explains:

“The practice of subsidizing major parties’ primary elections was cemented into place when the Supreme Court ruled in Bullock v. Carter, also in 1972, that parties requiring candidates to pay excessive fees to appear on a primary ballot imposed an unconstitutional burden on the candidates’ Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection. This ruling normalized the practice of having the public, not candidates or parties, pay for primary elections.

 

“This hybrid system leaves independents in states with closed primaries dissatisfied, since they are, in some cases, forced to pay for the elections of private organizations in which they cannot, as independents, participate.”

As I covered in-depth in a recent article, this election cycle has exposed major flaws in the U.S. voting system that have led roughly half of Americans to believe the voting system is rigged against certain candidates.

The two mainstream political parties — Republican and Democrat — are pretty much private clubs. They make their own rules, and some of those rules include “closed primaries,” where independent voters (now the single largest voting block in the U.S.) have the privilege of paying for the elections but not participating in them.

This is where we start getting a little hint of what taxation without representation means. It’s where you pay taxes that are used for something you have no say over — or representation — in. It’s happening right here in 2016 America. But this is just the tip of the taxation without representation iceberg.

Oligarchy

Independent voters paying for the Republicans and Democrats to have arguably rigged elections is child’s play when it comes to understanding America’s oligarchy. The rabbit hole is deep, but I’ll keep it simple for attention span’s sake — and to spare you of many of the boring details.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, an oligarchy is defined as “A small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution.” And for added (accurate) commentary, Urban Dictionary describes it as “The actual type of government that most countries have. Run by the few.” According to a highly-cited 2014 study of thousands of U.S. policy decisions conducted by Princeton University, America now falls under the oligarchy category.

“[W]e believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened,” Princeton researchers summarized. “Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all.”

However, there are a handful of citizens who do have their opinions implemented by the U.S. government: the extremely wealthy. As the researchers noted, rich Americans “have a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy.” Special interest groups also “have a large, positive, highly significant impact…”

To break it down into simple terms: people and organizations that are rich and well-connected call the shots in U.S. politics, and your votes are basically thrown into the abyss once election season is over. This may explain Congress’ record low approval rating.

And, unfortunately, all of this oligarchy stuff is getting exponentially worse as I write this. It’s “legal” for unlimited amounts of money to enter the election system through super PACs  — and influence the outcome. The 2016 presidential election alone will wind up costing (political) investors more than $4 billion — and that investment is one of the most profitable around. For those “few” billion dollars spent on political campaigns, trillions are made in returns after the elections are over.

taxation without representation

Click image to enlarge. Image credit: unitedrepublic.org

Though because of these realities many Americans refuse to vote, when it comes down to taxation, we all pay into the system. We pay Congress’ salary, we pay the president’s salary, we pay for their lifetime pensions, their healthcare, and their Secret Service protection. Kids pay taxes when they buy candy at the convenience store, people who work under the table for cash still pay sales taxes on everything they buy, anyone who lives with a roof over their head pays some sort of property taxes either directly or indirectly, and the poor pay a higher percentage of their income to taxes than any other income group. Nobody escapes the wrath of Uncle Sam.

There are 537 elected federal politicians who are supposed to be in Washington representing the 320,000,000 person-strong public interest. However, they choose to represent 500 or so billionaires instead of everyday taxpayers. We outnumber these oligarchs 300,000 to 1; maybe it’s time we started acting like it.

via http://ift.tt/1XbbVcC Tyler Durden

Trump Says If Economy Crashes “Can Make A Deal”, “Will Renegotiate Debt”

Calling himself 'the king of debt' in his business dealings, Donald Trump warned correctly this morning that the national debt would be troublesome if the cost of borrowing increases, asking rhetorically, "we're paying a very low interest rate. What happens if that interest rate goes up 2, 3, 4 points? …We don't have a country." The U.S. should "renegotiate longer-term debt," he added rather shockingly to the CNBC anchors, and with the recent surge in US Treasury default risk (now at 3-month highs), it appears the market is growing more nervous also.

"I am for low interest rates…"

 

As Bloomberg detailed, Donald Trump says one point of higher interest rates would be devastating:

"I could see renegotiations where we borrow at long term at very low rates."

 

“I have borrowed knowing you can pay back with discounts”

 

“I was swashbuckling, and it went well for me.”

Country now in different situation, presumptive Republican nominee for president said:

“We have to be very, very careful, and I am the king of debt, I do love debt. I love debt. I love playing with it. Of course, now you are talking about, you know, you’re talking about something that’s very fragile”

Says if economy crashes, “can make a deal”

*  *  *

Finally, we leave it to Euo Pacific Capital's Peter Schiff who notes that The King of Debt Seeks Presidency…

 On a lengthy interview on CNBC this morning, Donald Trump, the now presumptive Republican nominee, looked back on his business history to lay the groundwork to what he would do as President. He came as close as any major presidential contender to saying that America's formula for economic recovery might involve repaying our creditors less than what we owe. This is a major development that should be rewriting the playbook on Wall Street and call into question the risk-free nature of U.S. Treasuries.

 

Despite his public image as a premiere pitchman, marketeer, and builder of some of the world's most heavily gilded residential properties, Donald Trump owes his business success to his ability to walk into a roomful of people to whom he owes money and, through the use of threats, promises, bluster, and hardball negotiations, convince them to accept less than what he owes. Time and again he has used competitors' prior lending mistakes as a lever to get what he wants. That's why he has said repeatedly that he is "the king of debt."

 

Now that he has dispensed with all Republican rivals, the Donald is free to stake out economic positions that are in fact to the left of his likely opponent, Hillary Clinton. He made it clear that his priorities would involve massive infrastructure spending on America's roads, bridges, and airports. He also proposes some vague replacement for Obamacare, which certainly would involve some government financing. Given that such moves could massively increase the Federal budget deficits, these are positions that the Republican Congress has refused to touch.

 

But Trump also acknowledged a hint of realism that other politicians can't. He said that the U.S. economy remains extremely dependent on ultra-low interest rates, and that even a 1% increase in rates could be devastating. As a serial borrower, Trump "loves low interest rates" and made it clear that he would replace Janet Yellen with a Republican Fed chairperson who feels the same (this is a bit like finding a vegetarian that loves cheeseburgers). But he also seems to understand that rates can't stay this low forever.

 

But how can we borrow more, in an environment where rates are bound to rise, without making our debt service costs rise substantially? Simple, you renegotiate, and force your creditors to either take less than what they are owed, or to wait longer before we pay (i.e. extending maturities, turning 3-year notes into 30-year Treasuries bonds with the same coupon.) He seems to understand that such radical moves would convince international investors to seek greener pastures, which would then devastate the value of the dollar. But he seems to be just fine with that.

 

In the CNBC interview he said that a strong dollar sounds good "on paper" but that a weak currency offers much greater benefits in the real world. In fact, he credits weak currencies as the primary weapon used by China to engineer its own success. He wants to do the same for America. Will voters support a plan whereby we stiff the Chinese and use the money to build shiny new airports and to finance health care options? I think they will.

 

Of course the Achilles heel of such a plan is that a significantly weaker dollar is bound to usher in a wave of inflation that could rival that of the 1970s. If Trump and his new lackeys at the Fed are unwilling to raise rates to counter that trend, the poor especially will suffer as purchasing power evaporates and poverty rates could soar. Debt has been his friend his entire career. Why should the leopard change his spots now? Especially as he has been so successful in taking down all the prey in his path.

And it appears the market is beginning to sense that moment is getting closer as Treasury default risk (note that this is a combination of haircut and devaluation risk since it is priced in EUR) is rising…

via http://ift.tt/24vAVkc Tyler Durden

Stunning Images Of Ramadi Show The Devastating Impact Of War

The destruction in nearly every part of Ramadi, Iraq is overwhelming. As the Iraqi forces forces, backed by U.S. led warplanes drove ISIS militants out of the city late last year, the wake of destruction was stunning. 

These images show the devastating impact of war.

 

via http://ift.tt/1q2xazJ Tyler Durden

Is the Supreme Court About to Further Legalize Political Corruption?

Screen Shot 2016-05-05 at 3.58.59 PM

The Supreme Court, in its Citizens United decision, ruled that corporations have a First Amendment right to spend unlimited amounts in elections. Now politicians in Kentucky are claiming they have a Constitutional right to receive gifts from lobbyists.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Republican Kentucky state Sen. John Schickel, along with two Libertarian political candidates, are suing to overturn state ethics laws, claiming that the campaign contribution limit of $1,000 and a ban on gifts from lobbyists and their employers are a violation of their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

Kentucky’s ethics laws were passed in 1992 after an FBI investigation exposed a number of local politicians selling their votes.

Corporations have increasingly turned to new interpretations of the First Amendment as a legal strategy. Bond-rating agencies that gave high grades to toxic mortgage-backed securities claimed in court that doing so was their First Amendment right. Lobbyists have argued that food-labeling laws undermine the meat industry’s right to free speech. And similarly, AT&T recently argued that net neutrality violates the ISP industry’s First Amendment rights.

From last year’s post: Kentucky Politician Files Lawsuit Claiming a First Amendment Right to Accept Bribes

The above story related to Kentucky. Today’s story zeroes in on Virginia. The key theme here is obvious, that the U.S. court system seems intent on making it easier and easier for the already widespread corruption endemic to American politics to grow further.

Jeffrey Toobin noted the following yesterday in the New Yorker:

continue reading

from Liberty Blitzkrieg http://ift.tt/1q2xpuC
via IFTTT

Larry Lindsey Warns “Nothing Will Change Until The System Collapses Under Its Own Weight”

Via Larry Lindsey of The Lindsey Group…

Negative Rates and the Austrians' End Game

Our training and bias have always been toward policy activism — that tweaking this or changing the dial on that can always make things better.  [But] critics of activism, often lumped into the 'Austrian School,' argue that this will inevitably end badly.

Tweaking and dialing are addictive, both to the policymaker and to the governing class. Inevitably, this will lead to an unsustainable amount of tweaking and dialing and an endgame in which policymakers become powerless as the state's monetary and fiscal dials are no longer functional and the state is, in effect, bankrupt. But as states never go bankrupt, they then must seize the assets under their dominion through either inflation, taxation and confiscation.

Our activist training tends to lead us away from these thoughts until [a] more-worldly individual — in this case, an Italian friend and client (and a history buff) — reminded us of this theme.

The Roman Empire tried all three. The medieval popes had their Jubilee Years in which all debts, particularly their own and those of other sovereigns, were forgiven. Debasement, grinding taxation, and confiscation from disfavored groups (often the Jews) were all part of the process.

So, there is nothing new under the sun that shines in the Policy Activists' Universe. Negative interest rates sound new and 'unconventional,' but they are nothing more than an extension of this nostrum. Undertaken in the name of promoting inflation, they are really nothing more than taxation of (and ultimately confiscation of) liquid wealth. They are 'unconventional' only in the context that as time goes on, the policies of state acquisition of wealth must become ever more creative.

A 40- or 50-basis point 'tax' on wealth doesn't sound like much, but in a world in which the 'normal' real return on capital might be 2%, this is a tax on income equivalent to 20 to 25%. Add to this a modest 'inflation tax' of 1% (below the target of 2%), and the new, effective rate on the normal return on capital becomes 70 to 75%.

Done in 'moderation,' inflation, taxation and confiscation can go on for a long time. They persist until the institutions that are the long-term-savings vehicles of a society and provide the investment capital collapse under the burden. How can one offer a pension — except through a Ponzi scheme — when the accumulation of assets is subject to such taxation? Long-term life insurance (as opposed to renewable term insurance) becomes impossible as well.

In the process, the growth of societies trying these schemes diminishes.  Long-term capital moves from growth-enhancing productive investment, which dries up as it increasingly gets channeled into the hands of the state.  The fibers of the economic morality that drive growth get frayed, particularly the bourgeois impulse to save for a better tomorrow for oneself and one's children.

None of this matters to the guardians of public policy who have finite terms of office, and who tend to see their wisdom as a safer repository for society's wealth than the people who earned and accumulated the wealth.

Our Italian friend is actually optimistic near term. He believes that this can go on in Europe for another five to ten years. The more historically knowledgeable of the bourgeoisie are doing what they have always done: placing increasing amounts of wealth in assets outside of the state's easy reach — art, real estate, gold. Cash and near-cash (government bonds) should be avoided. [But] growth decays, and resources devoted to security are eroded as the funds aren't there. And in his view, the real threat to Europe then becomes external.

We demur that surely in this more-modern democratic age, the knowledgeable bourgeoisie won't let the state do this. Cast your protest votes! But the electorate is getting 84-month low-rate car loans and government-benefit checks, while the haute bourgeoisie are seeing the price of the assets they own inflated. In his view, no one will really move to bring this down until it collapses of its own weight. Then, he says, we will start all over again.

Now, there's a cheery thought!

h/t Seabreeze Partners' Doug Kass

via http://ift.tt/1T1megc Tyler Durden

Nick Gillespie To Talk Trump, Hillary, Free Trade on Bill Maher’s Real Time on Friday

The last time I was on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, things got a little…heated between me and Rachel Maddow. Good times.

This Friday, I’m set to appear with anti-Mexican right-wing best-seller and over-the-top Trumpina Ann Coulter; progressive Hillarian and path-breaking sex-advice-columnist Dan Savage; and the great actor Bryan Cranston, best-known as Walter White in Breaking Bad and the father in Malcolm in the Middle, but forever beloved by me as Tim Whatley, the religiously promiscuous dentist on Seinfeld.

Though the final topics are subject to change, we’ll be talking about Donald Trump’s big win, why Hillary Clinton is also terrible (well, at least I will), and how the hell both Dems and Reps are now officially against free trade.

Prediction: Another episode as…heated as a Bikram Yoga studio, but with a lot more cursing.

The show airs at 10 P.M. ET on HBO and then several more times over the weekend. 

Go here details.

Matt Welch was on Real Time last fall, talking Obamacare, guns, and more. Check out this segment:

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/24vs6qI
via IFTTT

Caught On Tape: 100s Of M1 Abrams Tanks Roll Through Houston, TX

Just days after we exposed Texas police planning for riots and conducting mass arrest drills, the site of hundreds of M1 Abrams battle-tanks rolling on a train through Houston raised more than a few eyebrows…

Several locals reported seeing a train Tuesday, loaded full of tanks, painted in a desert tan color – the second time in a week.

As of now the rail-train’s destination is unknown.

h/t Intellihub.com and @Tabertronic

via http://ift.tt/21BnTfY Tyler Durden

Obama Announces New Round of Commutations

Obama commutationsThe White House announced a new round of presidential commutations, 58 of them, of people in federal prison for drug crimes.

The announcement came from President Barack Obama himself in a somewhat self-congratulatory post on Medium. (but then, aren’t self-congratulatory posts Medium’s stock in trade?) He notes that he has commuted the sentences of 306 individuals, more than the last six presidents combined. He writes:

While I will continue to review clemency applications, only Congress can bring about the lasting changes we need to federal sentencing. That is why I am encouraged by the bipartisan efforts in Congress to reform federal sentencing laws, particularly on overly harsh mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenses. Because it just doesn’t make sense to require a nonviolent drug offender to serve 20 years, or in some cases, life, in prison. An excessive punishment like that doesn’t fit the crime. It’s not serving taxpayers, and it’s not making us safer.

As a country, we have to make sure that those who take responsibility for their mistakes are able to transition back to their communities. It’s the right thing to do. It’s the smart thing to do. And it’s something I will keep working to do as long as I hold this office.

Also included over at Medium are links to three first-person accounts from those who have benefitted from previous commutation announcements.

Time is running out under this administration for federal prisoners to beg for mercy. The Department of Justice is begging the volunteer lawyers who are helping the thousands or prisoners who have applied for clemency to get the work done so it can be reviewed. Politico notes that the deadline is mid-May:

The announcement triggered a flood of clemency requests from more than 36,000 inmates—more than 15 percent of the federal prison population. The level of interest swamped the handful of lawyers in the office of the Justice Department’s Pardon Attorney and overwhelmed the newly-created Clemency Project.

While the group says nearly 4,000 attorneys were recruited to prepare applications, the process has been a tough slog, slowed by bureaucratic hurdles in obtaining paperwork and the reliance on lawyers who usually have no prior experience seeking clemency. Yates’ letter to the Clemency Project lawyers says they have submitted “more than 850 petitions” thus far. That’s a dramatic increase from the roughly 30 the group’s lawyers had handed in about a year ago, but still far short of the number likely to yield the thousands of commutations some Obama administration officials expected at the outset.

The applications are also backlogged at the Justice Department, which had more than 11,000 clemency requests of all types pending at the end of March, according to Justice’s website.

In January, the Justice Department official who’d overseen the effort since the spring of 2014 resigned, complaining of a lack of resources and that her recommendations were not always being relayed to the White House. “The Department has not fulfilled its commitment to provide the resources necessary for my office to make timely and thoughtful recommendations on clemency to the president,” Pardon Attorney Deborah Leff wrote in her resignation letter, obtained by USA Today through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Jacob Sullum detailed this problem in March and pointed out both the Justice Dept. instituting very picky rules for participating in the clemency program, which is slowing everything down, and the problem with expecting volunteers to do the Justice Dept.’s job for them. Also, he noted that while Obama’s flat numbers may look impressive, he actually doesn’t fare so well if you adjust for the number of total petitions the administration has received.

Below, ReasonTV documents the lives of three other people who have been sentenced to federal prison and eventually received commutations:

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/21BlX79
via IFTTT