Andy McCarthy: "Obama, Clinton and Biden ALL used secret, fake-name email accounts to hide their actions"

From McCarthy's piece at the New York Post:

. . . This is how the Obama administration rolled.

When high officials were involved in a dodgy activity they wanted to shield from public disclosure laws, they frequently used pseudonymous email accounts. . . . 

[Obama] knew that she was using a non-government communications channel because, numerous times, she used it to correspond with him.

You were never supposed to know that because they concealed it on both ends. 

Clinton used not only a non-government address but a non-secure, private domain that the FBI concluded could easily have been — and probably was — penetrated by hostile foreign intelligence services. 

For his part, Obama used a pseudonymous email address.

Obviously, Obama and Clinton were not talking about the weather. 

They were talking about sensitive matters that are presumptively classified. 

Indeed, Clinton was on an official trip to Russia (which boasts one of the world’s most capable spying apparatuses) during some of this email correspondence with Obama.

If Clinton had been charged in the case, the fact that she was communicating with Obama and that he was using a fake address would have become central to the case. 

That would have been profoundly embarrassing to Obama — and there was no way the Obama Justice Department was going to let that happen.

So the administration did three things.

First, the Obama White House argued that it was no big deal for high officials to use pseudonymous emails — in fact, it was standard practice.

Second, Obama made it publicly known in an April 2016 interview that he did not want Clinton to be indicted. . . .

What has Obama done to Democrats in state legislatures? Prior to 2008 to after 2014

With Obama as president Republicans have more than doubled the number of state legislatures that they control.  Interestingly, the 2012 election didn't slow this trend.

Prior to the 2008 election
Republicans in control of 14 legislatures (15 with Nebraska, which is technically non-partisan but is actually controlled by Republicans)
Obama's election in 2008 had impact on the number of legislatures controlled by Republicans, but Democrats did pick up four legislatures.

Prior to the 2010 midterm election (data from NCSL.org)
Republicans in control of 14 legislatures (15 with Nebraska, which is technically non-partisan but is actually controlled by Republicans)

After the 2010 midterm election
Republicans in control of 21 legislatures (22 with Nebraska).

Prior to the 2012 election
Republicans in control of 26 legislatures (27 with Nebraska)

After the 2014 election

Republicans in control of 30 legislature  (31 with Nebraska)

To put it differently, while Democrats controlled 23 legislatures prior to 2008, they now control 11.  Over that same time Republicans went from 14 to 30.

Taxpayers pay for this "nonpolitical" speech by Obama

Here is the transcript from Obama's talk at Northwestern Unversity:

Now, I am not on the ballot this fall.  Michelle is pretty happy about that.  (Laughter.)  But make no mistake:  These policies are on the ballot -- every single one of them.  This isn’t some official campaign speech, or political speech, and I’m not going to tell you who to vote for -- although I suppose it is kind of implied.  (Laughter and applause.) . . . 

There’s a reason fewer Republicans are preaching doom on deficits . . .  There’s a reason fewer Republicans you hear them running about Obamacare . . . Republicans in Congress actually had to take a stand on policies . . . at least one top Republican in Congress said . . . 

Of course, since this was a non-political talk to the students, Obama was able to get taxpayers to pay for his trip out to Chicago so that he could to this $50,000-a-head fundraiser for the Illinois Governor.  

Estimated Second Quarter GDP growth implies that Weather wasn't the reason for the drop in 1st quarter GDP

GDP fell at an annual rate of 2.96 percent in the 1st quarter.  To make that up, just to get back to where we were at during the end of December, would require a 3.1 percent increase in the 2nd quarter.  But that would leave us with zero growth over the first half year.  But if the shrinking GDP in the first quarter was just a temporary aberration from weather, we should easily make that up and be back up to at least the meager annual growth rate of 1.8 percent we have experienced during the Obama "recovery."  From The Hill:

Business economists have lowered their estimates for economic growth in the second quarter following news of a significant contraction during the first three months of the year. 

The April to June forecast fell to 3 percent from a 3.5 annual rate in June, according to a special survey released Friday by the National Association for Business Economics (NABE). 

The forecast change is due mostly to a late June report showing that the economy shrank at a 2.9 percent pace in the first quarter. . . .

Obama makes "ideological declaration of war" against private schools

It is surprising that private schools are only realizing it now Obama doesn't like private institutions.  I thought that originally the Obama administration was only to originally go after professional schools, but "programs like a bachelor's degree in journalism from Northwestern University, a law degree from George Washington University Law School, and a bachelor's degree in social work from Virginia Commonwealth University would all be penalized."  From the Hill newspaper:

A group of private colleges and universities is blasting the Obama administration's effort to tackle burdensome student loan debt, because they say it would force them to turn away low-income students, and in particular, minorities. 

They also charge the proposed law unfairly targets private institutions while leaving their public counterparts unscathed. 

Steve Gunderson, president and CEO of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities (APSCU), said the move was an "ideological declaration of war" against private schools by the Obama administration.   

"Millions of prospective students — particularly working adults, minorities and people with scarce financial resources — will see their access to higher education and prospects for better employment dramatically reduced," Gunderson added. . . . .

The Obama administration says this is part of an effort to push back against schools that saddle students with unreasonably high debt only to graduate and find a low-paying job, or no job at all. . . . 

But Gunderson said the new rule would provide a "perverse incentive" for private colleges and universities affected by the rule to restrict access to educational opportunities for low-income and minority students, who often depend on loans to go to college. 

The private schools also say it could create divisions within a single college or university among students who will graduate into high-paying jobs and those who will not. These schools might even be forced to scrap programs that train students for initially low-paying jobs. 

"Individuals interested in careers with lower starting salaries, such as communications, psychology, visual and performing arts, and social work will be barred from receiving the same federal aid as their classmates choosing more lucrative fields," Gunderson said. . . . 

Video of Obama spelling "RSPECT," he had no idea that he misspelled the word

The entire talk is available here.

(see 3:25 into the video for the misspelling)
I have seen news stories saying that Obama appears to have recognized his spelling mistake, but after reviewing these videos it is very clear that he had no idea that he had misspelled the word.

Fox News has the story available here:

In a throwback to the latter's infamous misspelling of the word "potato," Obama accidentally misspelled "respect" while introducing singer Aretha Franklin during a tribute to "Women of Soul" at the White House Thursday.  

“When Aretha first told us what … R-S-P-E-C-T meant to her,” Obama said, pausing briefly before the audience began laughing, apparently realizing his mistake. “She had no idea it would become a rallying cry for African Americans and women and anyone else who felt marginalized because of what they looked like, who they loved. They wanted some respect.” . . . .

Information on how CBS and NBC covered Obama's flub in their humorous lighthearted way is available here.  ABC News decided to ignore the story.

New York Times' Jill Abramson says that Obama administration "the most secretive White House that, at least as a journalist, I have ever dealt with"

From AL Jazeera:

Let me move on to another topic in the Obama administration. How would you grade this administration, compared to others, when it comes to its relationship with the media?Well, I would slightly like to interpret the question as "How secretive is this White House?" which I think is the most important question. I would say it is the most secretive White House that I have ever been involved in covering, and that includes — I spent 22 years of my career in Washington and covered presidents from President Reagan on up through now, and I was Washington bureau chief of the Times during George W. Bush's first term.
I dealt directly with the Bush White House when they had concerns that stories we were about to run put the national security under threat. But, you know, they were not pursuing criminal leak investigations. The Obama administration has had seven criminal leak investigations. That is more than twice the number of any previous administration in our history. It's on a scale never seen before. This is the most secretive White House that, at least as a journalist, I have ever dealt with. . . .

Priceless series of pictures on President Obama's Selfie at Mandel's funeral

Michelle Obama steps in to separate Barack Obama and Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt. And there is a question about why Obama has been "restricting access to the sort of events formerly covered by press photographers"?

Click on photos to make them larger (complete set available here).

Gallup: Obama sees greatest drops in support among Hispanics, poor, and nonwhites

Click on figure to make larger.

Obama's approval rating has fallen 12 percentage points over the last year, but the drop in his support among some groups is larger than it is for others.  The original Gallup data is available here.

Democrats having problems with Obama's leadership

From the New York Times:

. . . In recent weeks, disgruntled Democrats, particularly liberals, have bolted from the White House on issues like National Security Agency surveillance policies, a planned military strike on Syria and the potential choice of Lawrence H. Summers to lead the Federal Reserve. In private, they often sound exasperated describing Mr. Obama’s operation; in public, they are sometimes only a little more restrained. 

They complain the White House has not consulted enough and failed to assert leadership. They say Mr. Obama has been too passive and ceded momentum to Republicans. Their grievances are sometimes contradictory; some grouse that he takes on causes he cannot win, while others say he does not fight hard enough for principled positions. The failure to enact tightened gun control laws and the Republican hold on immigration legislation have left liberals little to celebrate this year. . . .

Flood of Mexicans applying for "asylum" in the US, who can possibly make a deal with Obama on immigration?

Big surprise.  Obama tells Mexicans to simply ask for asylum and they are allowed to become a US resident.  How can anyone trust anything Obama will do on immigration after this?  Why would he do this while the immigration bill is being debated?  Is he trying to make sure that it doesn't pass so that he can use it as a campaign issue?  From My Fox Phoenix:

A loophole is allowing hundreds of immigrants across the Mexico border in to the United States.
Immigrants are being taught to use "key words and phrases" to be allowed to enter and stay in the country.
Just this past Monday, Border Patrol agents say about 200 people came through the Otay Crossing claiming a quote: "credible fear" of the drug cartels.
So many were doing this that they had to close down the processing center and move the overflow by vans to another station.
"They are being told if they come across the border, when they come up to the border and they say certain words, they  will be allowed into the country," said a person who did not want to be identified on camera.  "We are being overwhelmed."
Pete Nunez, former U.S. Attorney and immigration expert says, "This will swamp the system." . . .

How one Democratic pollster summarizes Obama's big economic speech yesterday, division and polarization

Doug Schoen, who was Bill Clinton's pollster when Clinton was president, has this at Forbes:

Obama doubled down on his approach in 2012: division, polarization and moving to the left. 

Much like in 2012, the President placed little emphasis on tax reform or growth. He spoke of bringing jobs back to America – specifically in manufacturing – but did not reveal many details of how he would achieve this. 

We heard some talk of balancing the budget and deficit reduction, cornerstone issues of the protracted battle in the House at the end of last year and beginning of 2013. But there was no talk of a long-term deficit reduction plan or plan for entitlement reform that will save crucial programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. 

The President emphasized redistribution above all else, but with, again, no long-term plan as to how he would finally make this approach an effective one. Indeed, he hid behind the terms “ineffective government” and “broken Washington,” giving himself leeway in not having solved the economic problems that he promised to fix in both 2008 and 2012. . . .

"Obama USDA met 30 times with Mexican gov’t to promote food-stamp use among Mexican immigrants"

Possibly Romney was on to something when he talked about people voting their interests in terms of whether they are getting transfers from the federal government.  From the Daily Caller:

Department of Agriculture personnel in the Obama administration have met with Mexican Government officials dozens of times since the president took office to promote nutrition assistance programs — notably food stamps — among Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals and migrant communities in America. 

Writing in response to Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions’ July request for information about the USDA’s little known partnership with the Mexican government to educate citizen and noncitizen immigrants from Mexico about the availability of food stamps and other nutrition assistance programs, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack defended the partnership as a way to curb hunger in America — and the continuation of a program formed under the Bush administration in 2004. . . . 

Roughly 30 of these meetings and activities occurred under the Obama administration, Vilsack’s letter revealed. 

The agriculture secretary added that the list might not be exhaustive as some of the meetings may not have been recorded. . . . 

"we are determined to help people in need make informed decisions about whether or not to seek assistance for which they may be eligible,” Vilsack claimed. . . .  

Vilsack’s letter indicate(s) that the number of legal non-citizens participating in SNAP increased approximately 190 percent from 2001 to 2010, from 425,000 to 1.23 million legal non-citizen participants. That number rose 77 percent since the program’s inception in 2004, when it served 693,000 non-citizen participants. . . .  

Sessions noted. “How can the administration justify trying to increase that number through outreach on the foreign soil of fifty consulates?” 

USDA uses Spanish soap operas to push food stamps among non-citizens, citizens

Each novela, comprising a 10-part series called “PARQUE ALEGRIA,” or “HAPPINESS PARK,” presents a semi-dramatic scenario involving characters convincing others to get on food stamps, or explaining how much healthier it is to be on food stamps. . . .

 USDA suggests food stamp parties, games to increase participation 

“Throw a Great Party. Host social events where people mix and mingle,” the agency advises. “Make it fun by having activities, games, food, and entertainment, and provide information about SNAP. Putting SNAP information in a game format like BINGO, crossword puzzles, or even a ‘true/false’ quiz is fun and helps get your message across in a memorable way.” . . .The agency’s most recent outreach effort targets California, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio and the New York metro area with radio ads.
The ads have been running since March and are scheduled to continue through the end of June — at a cost of $2.5 million — $3 million, CNN Money reported Monday. . . .

Op-ed at RealClearMarkets: Austerity Works: It's Time to Give It a Try

This piece is with my son Sherwin. The graphs are pretty powerful. The piece starts this way:

Austerity or growth, is that the choice facing Americans and others around the world?

The debate never seems to abate. European Union finance ministers last week gave Spain permission to delay cutting some government spending and reducing its deficit, though many such as The Economist magazine fear that even the cuts that will be made go too far. A similar decision may soon have to be made for Greece. Even though the pro-bailout parties won the June Parliamentary election, they too are asking for a two-year delay in cutting spending and reducing their budget deficit.

The Obama administration has put increasing pressure on German Chancellor Angela Merkel to ease up on Germany's austerity prescription. President Obama continually touts more government spending as the cure, and derided Republican "let's cut more" spending strategy as the cause of Europe's economic problems.

Last month, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble was having none of it, telling Obama to fix the U.S. deficit before giving Europe advice: "Herr Obama should above all deal with the reduction of the American deficit. That is higher than that in the euro zone." . . .

So who really wants a "top down" economy?

It is becoming a constant theme in Obama's talks that Republicans want to run the economy from the top down.  You would think that the press would realize that government mandates and central planning are the ultimate "top down" way to run things.  Obama obviously doesn't understand this, but companies don't dictate to consumers what they will buy.  


I heard another speech today that said virtually the same thing, but here is something that he said on Friday.

The Republicans who run Congress, the man at the top of their ticket, they don’t agree with any of the proposals I just talked about.  They believe the best way to grow the economy is from the top down. So they want to roll back regulations, and give insurance companies and credit card companies and mortgage lenders even more power to do as they please. They want to spend $5 trillion on new tax cuts -- including a 25-percent tax cut for every millionaire in the country.  And they want to pay for it by raising middle-class taxes and gutting middle-class priorities like education and training and health care and medical research. . . .

Here is a similar claim from his big economic address a couple of weeks ago in Cleveland.

Governor Romney and his allies in Congress believe deeply in the theory that we tried during the last decade -- the theory that the best way to grow the economy is from the top down.  So they maintain that if we eliminate most regulations, if we cut taxes by trillions of dollars, if we strip down government to national security and a few other basic functions, then the power of businesses to create jobs and prosperity will be unleashed, and that will automatically benefit us all.  . . . 

UPDATE: Here is what I heard from his speech today (June 25th) at the Oyster River High School in Durham, New Hampshire.

I believe they’re wrong.  I believe their policies were tested, and they failed.  (Applause.)  And that -- my belief is not just based on some knee-jerk partisan reaction.  It’s based on the fact that we tried it.  And you look at our economic history.  In this country, prosperity has never come from the top down.  It comes from a strong and growing middle class.  (Applause.)  It comes from successful, thriving small businesses. (Applause.) . . . 

The Obama administration doesn't believe in letting consentual adults live their sexual lives the way they want

Let me get this right.  The Obama administration does everything that they can to push gay marriage and gay rights, but somehow they want to go after polygamists and make their lives difficult.  What is the difference whether consenting adults are homosexuals or polygamists?  Over much more of human history polygamy was many, many, many more times the normal state for humans.  Would the Obama administration have ever brought such a suit against a town filled with a lot of homosexuals?  From the Associated Press:

The U.S. Justice Department has sued two polygamous towns along the Utah-Arizona border, claiming religious discrimination against non-sect members.
The federal civil rights lawsuit was filed Thursday against the towns of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz.
Most residents in both towns are members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, run by the group's jailed leader Warren Jeffs. . . .
The lawsuit comes after Legislatures in Utah and Arizona failed to pass bills to abolish the local police department for the communities. . . .

49% of Americans live in Households Receiving Government Benefits

From the WSJ:

. . . . The 49.1% of the population in a household that gets benefits is up from 30% in the early 1980s and 44.4% as recently as the third quarter of 2008.
The increase in recent years is likely due in large part to the lingering effects of the recession. As of early 2011, 15% of people lived in a household that received food stamps, 26% had someone enrolled in Medicaid and 2% had a member receiving unemployment benefits. Families doubling up to save money or pool expenses also is likely leading to more multigenerational households. But even without the effects of the recession, there would be a larger reliance on government.
The Census data show that 16% of the population lives in a household where at least one member receives Social Security and 15% receive or live with someone who gets Medicare. There is likely a lot of overlap, since Social Security and Medicare tend to go hand in hand, but those percentages also are likely to increase as the Baby Boom generation ages. . . .

Obama does poorly in Oklahoma Democratic Primary

This is pretty amazing. At about 11:30 PM on Tuesday, March 6th, the WSJ reports that in the Democratic primary, Obama has lost 15 out of the 77 counties in Oklahoma.

. . . But with 93% of the Democratic vote counted – and President Barack Obama ahead with 56.4% of the vote – AP hasn’t called it. Randall Terry, who has pushed an antiabortion message, has 18.2% of the vote, followed by Jim Rogers, who has run for other offices in Oklahoma, with 14.2% and a couple others in the single digits.

AP did report that it appears Mr. Obama will lose a delegate in Oklahoma to Mr. Terry, founder of Operation Rescue. It also noted that the president was bested in 15 counties.

A 64% total tax on corporate profits?: Obama sure knows how to encourage investment

Companies already face a 40% marginal income tax. If they pay out their profits as dividends, Obama wants up to a 40% tax on those dividends. Those two taxes together would imply a 64% total tax on the profits earned by American shareholders. Of course, the total tax won't be that high because firms would immediately stop paying dividends, though I am sure that the Obama administration is assuming that the tax will have no effect on the dividend payout rate. From TVNZ:

President Barack Obama's 2013 election-year budget took investors by surprise with a call for significantly higher taxes on dividends, a major change from his earlier tax proposals and one that will raise the ire of dividend-paying companies.

Households earning more than $250,000 a year would see the tax they owe on dividends rise to a maximum of almost 40% next year, equal to the higher maximum income tax rate set to take effect in 2013. The current top income rate is 35%.

Obama again proposed raising the current 15% long-term capital gains tax rate to 20% for the wealthy. He had earlier also sought to set a 20% tax on dividends. . . .

Obama's consolidation plans might actually save $3 billion total over 10 years

Wow, an average yearly cut of $300 million a year! Obama is really getting serious about reforming government waste. A video discussion is available here.